130 Cremona Drive, Suite B Goleta, California 93117

OCTOBER 2020

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Table of Contents

SECTION PAGE NO.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... V LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...... VII 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Plan Purpose ...... 2 1.2 City Vision ...... 2 1.3 Plan Organization ...... 2 2 PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH ...... 5 3 POLICY AND REGULATORY BACKGROUND...... 7 3.1 Endangered Species Acts ...... 7 3.1.1 Federal Endangered Species Act ...... 7 3.1.2 State of California Endangered Species Act ...... 7 3.2 Migratory Bird Treaty Act ...... 8 3.3 Creeks and Other Jurisdictional Waters ...... 8 3.3.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ...... 8 3.3.2 California Regional Water Quality Control Board ...... 9 3.3.3 State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Rights ...... 9 3.3.4 California Department of Fish and Wildlife ...... 9 3.3.5 California Coastal Commission ...... 10 3.3.6 Regional Plans ...... 11 3.3.7 Other Agencies ...... 12 3.4 City Policies, Regulation, Management Plans, and Projects ...... 14 3.4.1 General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan ...... 14 3.4.2 Zoning Regulations – Title 17 of the Goleta Municipal Code ...... 19 3.4.3 Other Goleta Municipal Code Regulations ...... 20 3.4.4 Management Plans and Programs ...... 21 3.5 CEQA and Thresholds ...... 25 3.6 National Environmental Policy Act ...... 26 3.7 Public Trust Doctrine ...... 26 4 BASELINE WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION ...... 27 4.1 Scope of Analysis ...... 27 4.2 Overview of the Watershed Overview Area ...... 27 4.3 Overview of Creek Reaches in the City of Goleta ...... 29 4.3.1 History of City Creeks ...... 31 4.3.2 Current Status of City Creeks ...... 31 4.3.3 Hydrology and Water Quality ...... 32

Creek and Watershed Management Plan i October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

4.3.4 Channel Geomorphology ...... 40 4.3.5 Biological Resources ...... 55 4.3.6 Individual Creek Characteristics ...... 85 5 CREEK AND WATERSHED IMPAIRMENTS ...... 153 5.1 Creek Impairments Outside of the City ...... 153 5.1.1. Multi-jurisdictional Approach to Watershed Management and Agency Responsibilities ...... 154 5.2 Creek Impairments within the City ...... 156 5.2.1 Hydrology and Water Quality Impairments ...... 156 5.2.2 Channel Geomorphology ...... 162 5.2.3 Biological Resources ...... 169 5.2.4 Flood Control Activities ...... 181 5.2.5 Climate Change ...... 182 5.3 Crosswalk with Section 6 ...... 185 6 IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM ...... 207 6.1 Implementation Introduction ...... 207 6.2 Implementation Programs ...... 207 7 GLOSSARY OF TERMS ...... 233 8 REFERENCES ...... 241 FIGURES

1 Project Location ...... 247 2 Watershed Overview Area ...... 249 3 City of Goleta Creek Corridors ...... 251 4 Watershed Land Uses ...... 253 5 Flood Hazard Zones ...... 255 6 Hydrologic Resources ...... 257 7a Biological Resources: Maria Ygnacio ...... 259 7b Biological Resources: San Jose and Old San Jose ...... 261 7c Biological Resources: San Pedro and Las Vegas ...... 263 7d Biological Resources: Los Carneros ...... 265 7e Biological Resources: Glen Annie ...... 267 7f Biological Resources: El Encanto ...... 269 7g Biological Resources: Devereux ...... 271 7h Biological Resources: Bell Canyon (North), Winchester Canyon, and Ellwood Canyon ...... 273 7i Biological Resources: Tecolote and Bell Canyon (South) ...... 275 8 CNDDB and USFWS Critical Habitat ...... 277 9a Geomorphic Resources: East ...... 279

Creek and Watershed Management Plan ii October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

9b Geomorphic Resources: Central ...... 281 9c Geomorphic Resources: West ...... 283 EXHIBITS

1 Annual Water Year Rainfall ...... 35 2 Well Water Levels...... 36 TABLES

1 Land Use Classifications ...... 28 2 Summary of Sub-Watershed Area by Jurisdiction and Region ...... 30 3 Summary of Watershed Precipitation and Estimated Flow by Return Interval1 ...... 32 4 Summary of Geomorphic Conditions for Segments of Creeks Within City ...... 43 5 Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types (Acres) ...... 56 6 Special-Status Plant Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City ...... 68 7 Special-Status Wildlife Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City ...... 72 8 Maria Ygnacio Creek Land Use ...... 87 9 Maria Ygnacio Creek Water Quality Impairments ...... 88 10 San Jose and Old San Jose Creek Land Uses ...... 95 11 San Jose Creek Water Quality Impairments ...... 96 12 Las Vegas Creek Land Uses ...... 102 13 Las Vegas Creek Water Quality Impairments ...... 104 14 San Pedro Creek Land Uses ...... 109 15 San Pedro Creek Water Quality Impairments ...... 110 16 Los Carneros Creek Land Uses ...... 116 17 Los Carneros Creek Water Quality Impairments ...... 117 18 Glen Annie Creek Land Uses ...... 122 19 Glen Annie Creek Water Quality Impairments ...... 124 20 El Encanto Creek Land Uses ...... 129 21 Devereux Creek Land Uses ...... 134 22 Devereux Creek Water Quality Impairments ...... 135 23 Bell Canyon Creek Land Uses ...... 140 24 Bell Canyon Creek Water Quality Impairments ...... 141 25 Tecolote Creek Land Uses ...... 147 26 Tecolote Creek Water Quality Impairments ...... 148 27 Summary of Creek and Watershed Plans in the Goleta Slough and Goleta Watersheds ...... 154 28 Summary of In-Creek Water Quality Objectives Impairments by Creek within the City1 ...... 157 29 Summary of Geomorphic Impairments by Creek Within the City of Goleta1 ...... 163 30 Summary of Biological Impairments by Creek Within the City of Goleta1,2 ...... 170

Creek and Watershed Management Plan iii October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

31 Summary of Barriers and Impediments to Fish Passage Within the City of Goleta1 ...... 174 32 Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6) ...... 187 APPENDICES

A Public Outreach Responses B Plans and Projects Outside the City of Goleta C Conservation Element Policy CE 2.2: Policy History and Buffer Reductions D Beneficial Use, Water Quality, and Pollutants Definitions E Wildlife Corridor Study Report F Riparian Bird Study Report G Plant and Wildlife Species Documented H Potential Impairments Outside the City of Goleta I Project Description Sheets J Potential Funding Sources K Example of Public Outreach Material

Creek and Watershed Management Plan iv October 2020

Acknowledgments

This Creek and Watershed Management Plan (CWMP) was developed by the City of Goleta with the assistance of Dudek, Balance Hydrologics, Inc., and RRM Design Group. In addition, throughout the development of the CWMP information and expert input was generously provided by members of a Technical Advisory Committee. Throughout the development of this CWMP, the City held public workshops and public surveys to better understand the public’s interest and concerns about the City creeks and watersheds. The City appreciates all the time and effort each individual has taken to taken to provide feedback on the contents of this CWMP. Individuals who were instrumental in the development of this CWMP are listed below.

Michelle Greene, City Manager Peter T. Imhof, Planning and Environmental Review Director Anne Wells, Advance Planning Manager Andy Newkirk, Senior Planner and Project Manager Charlie Ebeling, Public Works Director James Campero, Deputy Public Works Director George Thomson, Parks & Open Space Manager Melissa Nelson, Environmental Services Coordinator Teresa Lopes, Senior Project Manager Julie Jang, Assistant Engineer Michael Winnewisser, Assistant Engineer JoAnne Plummer, Parks and Recreation Manager

John Davis IV, Project Manager / Senior Ecologist Melissa Blundell, Biologist Jane Gray, Public Outreach Matt Naftaly, Hydrologist Jonathan Martin, Hydrologist Isabelle Radis, Associate Biologist Kristen Zecher, GIS Andrea Dransfield, Biologist / Stormwater Dave Compton, Biologist Randall McInvale, Biologist

Creek and Watershed Management Plan v October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Anne Senter, Geomorphologist/Hydrologist Scott Brown, Geomorphologist/Hydrologist

RRM Design Group

Pam Ricci, Principal Planner

Technical Advisory Committee

Rick Bush, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Scott Cooper, Santa Barbara Audubon Society Rachel Couch, California State Coastal Conservancy Steve Gibson and Kelly Schmoker, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Mauricio Gomez, South Coast Habitat Restoration Eddie Harris, Urban Creeks Council George Johnson, City of Santa Barbara Creeks Division Susan Shaw, Los Padres National Forest Maureen Spencer, Santa Barbara County Flood Control and Water Conservation Districts Lisa Stratton, University of California at Santa Barbara, Cheadle Center for Biodiversity and Ecological Restoration Brain Trautwein, Environmental Defense Center Molly Troup, Santa Barbara Channelkeeper

Creek and Watershed Management Plan vi October 2020

List of Abbreviations

Acronym/Abbreviation Definition AGR Agricultural Supply BMP Best Management Practices CCC California Coastal Commission CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQA California Environmental Quality Act cfs Cubic feet per second CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database COLD Cold Fresh Water Habitat COMM Commercial and Sport Fishing CRPR California Rare Plant Rank CWA Clean Water Act CWMP Creek and Watershed Management Plan DO Dissolved Oxygen EO Executive Order ESHA Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area EST Estuarine Habitat FESA Federal Endangered Species Act FCCC Flood Control Concrete Channel FRSH Fresh Water Replenishment General Plan City of Goleta General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan GMC Goleta Municipal Code GP/CP General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan GWD Goleta Water District GWR Groundwater Recharge LID Low Impact Development MAP Mean Annual Precipitation MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act mg/L Milligrams per Liter MIGR Migration of Aquatic Organisms MUN Municipal and Domestic Supply MS4 Municipal separate storm sewer system NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Unit PEIR Program Environmental Impact Report PROC Industrial Process Supply RARE Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species REC-1 Water Contact Recreation REC-2 Non-contact Water Recreation RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board

Creeks and Watershed Management Plan vii October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Acronym/Abbreviation Definition SBFCD Santa Barbara County Flood Control and Water Conservation District SBCK Santa Barbara Channelkeeper SPA Streamside Protection Area SPWN Spawning, Reproduction, and /or Early Development SWMP Storm Water Management Plan SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board TAC Technical Advisory Committee TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load UPRR Union Pacific Railroad USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service WARM Warm Fresh Water Habitat WILD Wildlife Habitat WQO Water Quality Objective

Creek and Watershed Management Plan viii October 2020

1 Introduction

The City of Goleta (City) is located on the south coast of Santa Barbara County, approximately 10 miles west of the city of Santa Barbara, along U.S. Highway 101 (Figure 1, Project Location). The City is situated in the western portion of the Goleta Valley, which is characterized as a broad, flat alluvial plain bordered on the south by the Pacific Ocean and on the north by the foothills and terraces of the Santa Ynez Mountains. Much of the Goleta Valley slopes gently into Goleta Slough. An essential aspect of Goleta’s community character and livability is derived from the diverse open space and natural resources within and surrounding the community. These assets include approximately two miles of Pacific shoreline, beaches, coastal bluffs and mesas, vibrant creeks, and riparian, wetland, and woodland habitats.

There are 12 creeks reaches that extend through the City of Goleta, originating either from the local Santa Ynez Mountains Tecolote Creek or from within the City. These creeks and their contributing sub- watersheds compose the Watershed Study Area considered for this Creek and Watershed Management Plan (CWMP) (Figure 2, Watershed Overview Area). A watershed is an area of land between ridges that typically drains most of the precipitation into creeks and rivers and out to a common outflow point, such as the Pacific Ocean. Watersheds are dynamic systems that contain biological, chemical, and physical resources which interact with surface flow, urban stormwater, and groundwater aquifers as rainfall and snowmelt which are directed to and captured in stream channels on its way to the natural and anthropogenic-created outflow point. The creeks that meander through watersheds carry rainfall runoff, groundwater inputs, and sediment. Creek corridors along them provide benefits to people and the environment such as water resources, riparian and upland habitat.

This CWMP focuses on the processes and functions of the twelve creeks traversing the City and City watersheds, but also provides a brief overview of the Watershed Study Area. In addition, the CWMP identifies priority areas within the City for management actions to protect or improve existing creeks. The overarching goal of this CWMP is to provide an overview of historical and existing conditions in the watersheds within the City and provide guidance and protocols to protect and restore watershed processes. The need for the CWMP was initially identified in the General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan (General Plan) as Conservation Element Implementation Action CE-IA- 3.

The initial step of the CWMP process included the characterization and inventory of each watershed within the City to evaluate the physical, chemical, and biological processes, surrounding land uses, and pollutants associated with each watershed.

An implementation program is also a key component of the CWMP; this includes specific actions to support each implementation program. Monitoring is intended to document the performance of

Creeks and Watershed Management Plan 1 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA specific implementation actions and successful completion of specific tasks. The CWMP is a “living document” in the sense that periodic reviews and updates to the CWMP are anticipated, which will allow the City to more effectively adapt to future conditions. 1.1 Plan Purpose CE-IA-3 identifies a CWMP as an implementation item for the General Plan. CE-IA-3 reads in its entirety:

Preparation of a Creek and Watershed Management Plan. A citywide Creek and Watershed Management Plan will be prepared to provide detailed standards of acceptable practices for protecting the ecological function, water quality, and drainage and flood control function of Goleta’s creeks and watersheds. Participate in multijurisdictional watershed management plans, where appropriate.

As specified in CE-IA-3, the purpose of the CWMP is developing acceptable practices and protections for creeks and their watersheds located within the jurisdiction of the City. Additionally, the City understands the multijurisdictional nature of local creeks and watersheds to the greater watershed area and the jurisdictions that are responsible those areas; therefore, the CWMP acknowledges the need to collaborate with all federal, state, and local agencies and other interested parties within the entire watersheds containing City creeks. 1.2 City Vision The General Plan provides clear context for protection of creeks and associated riparian habitats and watersheds. Borrowing from the General Plan, the vision for the City that the CWMP should support is as follows:

Goleta’s creeks and riparian areas should serve as important natural features of Goleta’s landscape. These areas should be protected to provide habitat for fish and wildlife, accommodate wildlife movement corridors, convey stormwater runoff and floodwaters, and furnish open space and passive recreational areas for City residents. The City should seek to enhance, maintain, and restore these areas and associated watersheds that impact them. 1.3 Plan Organization This CWMP is organized into the following sections and descriptions:

• Section 2 – Public and Stakeholder Outreach – summarizes City and consultant outreach efforts throughout the development of the CWMP to gather input and information from the public and stakeholders to inform the content of the CWMP and the feedback received. • Section 3 – Policy and Regulatory Background – provides brief summaries of federal and state policies and regulations relevant to the CWMP. In addition, this section highlights City General Plan policies, management plans, capital improvement projects, and other City regulations and programs relevant to the City’s creeks.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 2 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

• Section 4 – Baseline Watershed Characterization – describes the results of field and desktop analyses performed to establish a baseline characterization of the study watersheds and City creeks. This section describes the biological, hydrological, geomorphological, and water quality aspects of each creek. • Section 5 – Creek and Watershed Impairments – provides overviews of the impacts to the overall watershed area and individual creek corridors. • Section 6 – Implementation Program – describes implementation programs and associated actions to address the impacts identified in Section 5. • Section 7 – Glossary of Terms – provides a glossary of terms used in the CWMP. • Section 8 – References – provides a summary of references considered for the CWMP.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 3 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 4 October 2020

2 Public and Stakeholder Outreach

Throughout the development of the CWMP, the City of Goleta and consultants solicited input from the public and stakeholder groups for feedback on the City’s creeks and watersheds to help develop the contents of this CWMP. The project team developed an outreach plan early in the CWMP project to engage with the public and agencies and organizations with specific knowledge regarding creek issues that could support the development of the CWMP. To support these outreach efforts, a project page was created on the City website to post relevant information on the project. A CWMP specific email listserv was also created to inform interested parties about upcoming events related to the CWMP.

The City held a first public workshop on November 6, 2019. At this workshop, the project team introduced the project to the public, summarized early results from field work conducted earlier in the fall, and facilitated a group exercise to gather feedback on what individuals value most about City creeks and watersheds, what concerns they have regarding city creeks, what types of projects they would most like to see, and what type of information would be most beneficial to include in the CWMP. A summary of responses is provided in Appendix A, Public Outreach Responses.

A second public workshop occurred on February 26, 2020. At this workshop, the project team presented results from a public survey (see below), discussed policy and regulatory considerations, and more detailed summaries of baseline creek characteristics derived from research and field work. In addition, breakout groups were held to allow members of the public to discuss and provide feedback on the biology, geomorphology, and hydrology/water quality information. A summary of this feedback can also be found in Appendix A. A third public workshop occurred after the public release of the CWMP to review the contents of the CWMP.

The project team also established a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) comprised of representatives from federal, state, and local agencies and interested non-profit organizations. The TAC provided input at TAC meetings and through review of draft sections of the CWMP. The TAC convened for the first time on November 13, 2019, to introduce the CWMP project and receive feedback. A second TAC meeting occurred on March 11, 2020, where additional information was provided to the TAC and feedback was received on issues to focus on in the CWMP. A third TAC meeting occurred on September 30, 2020. During this meeting, revisions to previously reviewed sections of the CWMP were summarized and a discussion of draft Sections 5 and 6 of the CWMP occurred.

In addition to the public workshops and TAC, the project team also tabled at the Lemon Festival on September 28–29, 2019 to interact with members of the public and inform them of the CWMP project. Tabling also occurred at the ribbon cutting for the new field at the Boys and Girls Club in Old Town on October 2, 2019. Additional outreach was planned for the Goleta Farmers’ Market but did not occur due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Creeks and Watershed Management Plan 5 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Below is a list of public outreach efforts, public workshops, and TAC meetings and dates associated with the development of the CWMP:

• Public Survey: Circulated September 28, 2019 to February 20, 2020 • Lemon Festival Tabling Event: September 28 and 29, 2019 • Tabling at Goleta Boys and Girls Club Ribbon Cutting Ceremony: October 2, 2019 • Public Workshop #1: November 6, 2019 • Public Workshop #2: February 26, 2020 • Public Workshop #3: November 2, 2020 • TAC Meeting #1: November 13, 2019 • TAC Meeting #2: March 11, 2020 • TAC Meeting #3: September 30, 2020

The project team also conducted a paper and online survey in both English and Spanish to elicit input on City creeks. While not a statistically significant survey, the results did provide insights into the issues of concern for the public. The survey included five questions (four multiple choice and one open-ended), as listed below:

1. Why are creeks important to you? 2. Which Creek is the most important to you? 3. Why is the creek selected in Question 2 most important to you? 4. Out of the following categories of improvements or projects, what do you feel is most needed along the City’s creek corridors? 5. Any additional comments?

Respondents most valued creeks as habitat for plants and animals and for the flood control services they provide. Respondents often identified the creek closest to their home as the most important as well as those that provide important habitat. In terms of future improvements or projects, respondents most commonly supported cleaning up of trash and homeless encampments as well as restorative riparian planting and/or removal of invasive plants, Complete results of the survey are provided in Appendix A.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 6 October 2020

3 Policy and Regulatory Background

This section outlines the federal, state, and local policies, regulations, and plans pertinent to creek resources located within the City1 and the larger region. This section identifies and discusses the various programs and regulating resources located within and adjacent to creeks, including sensitive vegetation communities, state- and/or federally-listed threatened or endangered plants and wildlife, and jurisdictional aquatic/hydrological features, such as channels, streambeds, riparian habitat, and wetlands. Some of the resources that occur within or along City creeks are regulated by resource agencies, which often overlap in jurisdiction. It should be noted that this section focuses on the policy and regulatory actions that occur within the City of Goleta’s boundaries. Please refer to Appendix B, Plans and Projects Outside the City of Goleta, for those plans, policies, and regulations within the contributing watersheds outside of the City’s limits. 3.1 Endangered Species Acts 3.1.1 Federal Endangered Species Act

The federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) (16 USC 1531 et seq.) is administered by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service. The purpose of the FESA is to protect and recover imperiled species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. Under the FESA, species may be listed as either endangered or threatened. Endangered species are those in danger of extinction throughout all or significant portions of their ranges. Threatened species are those likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future. The FESA provides protection for these species by prohibiting “take” of listed animals and the interstate or international trade of listed plants and animals. The ultimate goal of the FESA is for species to recover so they no longer need protection under the FESA. 3.1.2 State of California Endangered Species Act

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) administers the California Endangered Species Act (codified in the California Fish and Game Code, or CFGC), which parallels some of the provisions and requirements of the FESA. The purpose of the California Endangered Species Act is to conserve and protect plants and animals at risk of extinction. Like the FESA, plant and animal species may be designated as threatened or endangered and prohibits “take,” interstate import or export, and possessing, purchasing, or selling these species without proper authorization.

Additionally, the Fish and Game Code designates specific species as “fully protected,” which may not be taken or possessed without a permit from the Fish and Game Commission (CFGC Sections 3511 and 4700). Similarly, it is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds of prey; or to take, possess, or destroy any nest or eggs of such birds (CFGC Section 3503.5). “Birds of prey” refer to species in the orders Falconiformes and Strigiformes. Active nests of all other birds (except the English sparrow and European starling) are similarly protected under Sections 3503 and 3513 of

1 Regulations described are current as of July 2020. Migratory Bird Treaty Act updated September 2020. Creeks and Watershed Management Plan 7 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA the Fish and Game Code. Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort is considered “take” by the CDFW. This statute does not provide for the issuance of an incidental take permit. 3.2 Migratory Bird Treaty Act

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 USC 703–712) prohibits the take of any migratory bird or any part, nest, or eggs of any such bird. Under the MBTA, “take” is defined as pursuing, hunting, shooting, capturing, collecting, or killing, or attempting to do so (16 USC 703 et seq.). Additionally, Executive Order (EO) 13186, Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds, requires that any project with federal involvement address impacts of federal actions on migratory birds with the purpose of promoting conservation of migratory bird populations (66 FR 3853– 3856). The EO requires federal agencies to work with USFWS to develop a memorandum of understanding to promote the conservation of migratory bird populations. USFWS reviews actions that might affect these species. 3.3 Creeks and Other Jurisdictional Waters

In addition to local jurisdictions regulatory authority over development within their jurisdictions, five primary state agencies regulate activities within coastal streams, wetlands, and riparian areas in California: the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Regulatory Program regulates activities pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA); the CDFW regulates activities under Sections 1600–1616 of the Fish and Game Code; the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulates activities under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act and Section 401 of the CWA; Division of Water Rights acts on the behalf of the State Water Resources Control Board on issues related to water rights; and the California Coastal Commission (CCC) regulates activities within the Coastal Zone (which generally extends 1,000 yards inland from the mean high tide line) under the California Coastal Act. 3.3.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Pursuant to CWA Section 404, the USACE regulates the discharge of dredged and/or fill material into waters of the United States, which includes tidal waters, interstate waters, and all other waters that are part of a tributary system to interstate waters or to navigable waters, the use, degradation, or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce or which are tributaries to waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide (33 CFR 328.3(a)). The USACE defines jurisdictional wetlands as areas supporting a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. However, past U.S. Supreme Court rulings have determined the scope of USACE jurisdiction based on the definition of waters of the United States in 33 CFR Section 328.3(a).

Section 401 of the CWA requires that any entity applying for a federal permit or license, which may result in a discharge to waters of the United States, must obtain water quality certification. In California, the responsibility for issuing a water quality certification falls to the State Water Resources Control Board or one of the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards to ensure that the activity complies with all applicable water quality standards, limitations, and restrictions. Under

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 8 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA the CWA, no permit may be issued by the USACE until water quality certification required by Section 401 has been granted. 3.3.2 California Regional Water Quality Control Board

Pursuant to Section 401 of the federal CWA, the RWQCB regulates discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, within any region that could affect a “water of the State” (Water Code, Section 13260(a)), pursuant to provisions of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Waters of the State are defined as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state” (Water Code, Section 13050(e)). Before the USACE will issue a CWA Section 404 permit, applicants must receive a CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB. If a CWA Section 404 permit is not required for the Project, the RWQCB may still require a permit (i.e., Waste Discharge Requirement) under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. 3.3.3 State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Rights

The California Water Code (Division 2) requires a water right issued by the state for the diversion of water from a lake, river, stream, creek, or underground supplies for beneficial use. Examples of beneficial uses include domestic use, irrigation, power production, municipal use, mining, industrial use, fish and wildlife preservation, aquaculture, recreation, and water quality protection. 3.3.4 California Department of Fish and Wildlife

Under California Fish and Game Code Sections 1600–1616, the CDFW has authority to regulate work that will substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow, or substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake. The CDFW also has authority to regulate work that will deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it may pass into any river, stream, or lake. This regulation takes the form of a requirement for a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement. The California Code of Regulations (CCR) is the official compilation and publication of the regulations adopted, amended or repealed by state agencies, including the CDFW. Per 14 CCR 1.72, a “stream” (including creeks and rivers) is “a body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish or other aquatic life. This includes watercourses having surface or subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation.”

In addition, Fish and Game Code Section 5937 requires that owners of dams must allow sufficient water to pass underneath the dam, through a fishway or through other means based on the situation, at all times to keep in good condition any fish that may exist below the dam.

Section 3503 of the California Fish and Game Code states that it is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nests or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation made pursuant thereto. Section 3503.5 protects all birds of prey (raptors) and their eggs and nests. Section 3511 states that fully protected birds or parts thereof may not be taken or possessed at any time. Section 3513 states that it is unlawful to take or possess any migratory non- game bird as designated in the MBTA.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 9 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

California Fish and Game Code Section 4150 states a mammal occurring naturally in California that is not a game mammal, fully protected mammal, or fur-bearing mammal is a non-game mammal. A non-game mammal may not be taken or possessed under this code. All bat species occurring naturally in California are considered non-game mammals and are therefore prohibited from take as stated in California Fish and Game Code Section 4150. 3.3.5 California Coastal Commission

Under the California Coastal Act, the CCC, in partnership with local governments, regulates impacts to wetlands and other sensitive habitat in the Coastal Zone and requires a coastal development permit for almost all development within this zone. Until the City has a certified Local Coastal Program, the CCC is responsible for issuance of all development permits within the Coastal Zone in the City. Approximately 19% (1.507 square miles) of the City by area falls within the Coastal Zone. These areas fall mostly within the Ellwood neighborhood and the southern end of Old Town. Portions of San Jose, El Encanto, Devereux, Bell Canyon, and Tecolote Creeks within the City are in the Coastal Zone.

The California Coastal Act provides for protection of environmentally sensitive habitat areas pursuant to Section 30240 of the Act that reads:

Section 30240. (a) Environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be protected against any significant disruption of habitat values, and only uses dependent on those resources shall be allowed within those areas. (b) Development in areas adjacent to environmentally sensitive habitat areas and parks and recreation areas shall be sited and designed to prevent impacts which would significantly degrade those areas, and shall be compatible with the continuance of those habitat and recreation areas.

The California Coastal Act defines environmentally sensitive area and wetland. These definitions read:

Section 30107.5. "Environmentally sensitive area" means any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments.

Section 30121. "Wetland" means lands within the coastal zone which may be covered periodically or permanently with shallow water and include saltwater marshes, freshwater marshes, open or closed brackish water marshes, swamps, mudflats, and fens.

In contrast to the USACE, which uses a three-parameter definition to delineate wetlands, the CCC essentially uses the Cowardin method of wetlands classification, which defines wetland boundaries by a single parameter (i.e., hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, or hydrology)(Cowardin et al. 1979). Note that the City, County of Santa Barbara, CCC, CDFW, and USFWS all apply and use the most

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 10 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA protective definition of wetland to determine the boundary of a wetland (see General Plan Conservation Element subpolicy CE 3.1, Definition of Wetlands).

In addition to protection of environmentally sensitive areas, the California Coastal Act addresses expectations for protection of water quality, as detailed in Section 30231. Section 30231 reads:

Section 30231. The biological productivity and the quality of coastal waters, streams, wetlands, estuaries, and lakes appropriate to maintain optimum populations of marine organisms and for the protection of human health shall be maintained and, where feasible, restored through, among other means, minimizing adverse effects of waste water discharges and entrainment, controlling runoff, preventing depletion of ground water supplies and substantial interference with surface waterflow, encouraging waste water reclamation, maintaining natural vegetation buffer areas that protect riparian habitats, and minimizing alteration of natural streams.

The California Coastal Act also addresses waterway modifications in Section 30236, which reads:

Section 30236. Channelization, dams, or other substantial alterations of rivers and streams shall incorporate the best mitigation measures feasible, and be limited to (1) necessary water supply projects, (2) flood control projects where no other method for protecting existing structures in the flood plain is feasible and where such protection is necessary for public safety or to protect existing development, or (3) developments where the primary function is the improvement of fish and wildlife habitat. 3.3.6 Regional Plans

The City adopted the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan in 2012 (County of Santa Barbara 2017). An update to this plan was completed in 2017, approved by the State Office of Emergency Services and FEMA and adopted by the City via City Council Resolution Nos. 17-32 and 17-33. The plan identifies natural hazards throughout all of Santa Barbara County. The plan also includes each of the eight incorporated cities within the County and presents an assessment of critical facilities vulnerable to these hazards. The plan also lists potential actions needed to reduce risk and future damage. Among the hazards analyzed in the plan are floods and sea level rise and erosion.

The County-Wide Integrated Stormwater Resource Plan (SBCCE 2018) is a regional, watershed-based plan intended to improve the management of stormwater resources in Santa Barbara County through the identification and prioritization of multiple-benefit infrastructure projects that enhance reliability of local water supplies, improve surface water quality and flood management, and provide environmental, educational, and recreational benefits. Example project types include green infrastructure that is designed to capture, infiltrate, and/or treat stormwater (and dry weather) runoff. The plan includes two conceptual projects within the City, at San Pedro Creek Open Space (Stonebridge) and Evergreen Park that are classified as “high prioritization.” The City of Goleta is a cooperating agency for the plan.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 11 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

3.3.7 Other Agencies

3.3.7.1 Goleta Water District

The Goleta Water District (GWD) is the water purveyor within the City and manages groundwater extractions from the Goleta Groundwater Basin. The Goleta Groundwater Basin underlies almost all of the City. Basin groundwater rights were adjudicated in the Wright Judgment in 1989 (Martha H. Wright et al. v. Goleta Water District et al., 1989, Amended Judgment, Superior Court of Santa Barbara County Case No. SM57969.). GWD has a current adjudicated, appropriative right to extract and use up to 2,350 acre-feet per year of groundwater from the Goleta Groundwater Basin. The Wright Judgment provides GWD with the right to defer producing its annual groundwater entitlement and considers this water as GWD stored water, which can be used during dry years, droughts, and emergencies. The Wright Judgment also provides the District with the right to inject surface water supplies and claim the recharged water as the District's stored water, in addition to its annual entitlement.

The GWD maintains a Groundwater Management Plan (GWD 2016). The Groundwater Management Plan details adjudication and voter-passed components of groundwater management, addresses groundwater issues, revisits previously adopted Basin management objectives, outlines management strategies for the Basin, and recommends future tasks and timelines associated with those tasks, including recommendations regarding GWD implementation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.

The SAFE Ordinance, approved by GWD voters in 1991 and amended in 1994, directs how GWD manages groundwater and specifies under what conditions groundwater is either pumped or stored. In addition, the SAFE Ordinance establishes an Annual Storage Commitment, which is a groundwater recharge requirement when the Central subbasin of the Goleta Groundwater Basin drops below 1972 levels. However, even when groundwater elevations are below 1972 levels, the SAFE Ordinance allows groundwater pumping when there are reduced deliveries of Lake Cachuma water.

GWD groundwater extractions vary year-to-year. As recently as 2010, GWD pumped zero water from Goleta Groundwater Basin. Extractions recently peaked at 5,557 acre-feet in 2015. In 2019, GWD extracted 2,036 acre-feet.

The GWD currently maintains eight water wells in the Central subbasin to extract groundwater. Two of these wells, the Shirrell Well and the Berkeley Well are within the City. The Shirrell Well site is located at the intersection of Shirrell Way and North Fairview Road. The Berkeley Well site is located at the east end of Berkeley Drive intersection of Princeton Avenue on a City-owned parcel. The site is adjacent to San Jose Creek. Both wells were inactive between the early 1990s and 2016. In 2016, GWD performance maintenance upgrades to both wells. The Shirrell Well produced 0 acre-feet in 2016, 14 acre-feet in 2017, and 8 acre-feet in 2018. The Berkeley well produced 8 acre-feet in 2016, 30 acre-feet in 2017, and 225 acre-feet in 2018. As of 2020, both the Shirrell and Berkeley Wells serve as backup wells for the GWD and were not being used to extract groundwater.

The GWD is also preparing an Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Project for the Goleta Groundwater Basin. The purpose of the project is to increase the efficiency of aquifer storage by increasing use of potable water injection into existing GWD injection and production wells during periods of sufficient

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 12 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA surface water availability. The GWD would use the stored water during droughts, emergencies, and peak summer demand periods. 3.3.7.2 Santa Barbara County Flood Control and Water Conservation District

The Santa Barbara County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (SBFCD) provides flood protection throughout the County through various means including channel maintenance, design and construction of capital projects, hydrologic data collection for a flood warning system and review of new developments. SBFCD was created in 1955 in response to several large flooding events in the early 1950s. SBFCD oversees annual maintenance to creeks throughout the county, including within the City of Goleta as described below, and conducts 5-year capital improvement projects.

SBFCD’s Operation and Maintenance program involves ensuring normal operation of channels, basins and other flood control protection facilities. During emergency storm events, district staff perform flood-fighting and support activities such as the monitoring of all flood facilities and operating dams and channel gates. After storm events, Flood Control works to rehabilitate flood control systems to the state of readiness that existed prior to the storm. Other Flood Control Programs include Debris Control, Major Storm Repair, Flood Plain Management, and Hydrologic Data Collection.

As mentioned above, the SBFCD conducts an Annual Routine Maintenance Program countywide that includes the City creeks. The objectives of the Annual Routine Maintenance Program are to maintain the capacity of key watercourses in the County, to preserve existing conveyance capacity, and prevent the accumulation of obstructing vegetation and sediments that could increase existing flood hazards.

Each year in March and April, SBFCD staff inspects all of the County’s maintained drainages, including those within the City. Once the field surveys are completed for each watershed, SBFCD staff determines which watersheds are in good-enough condition overall that no maintenance will be performed for the year and which will be included for maintenance that year.

An Annual Routine Maintenance Plan (Annual Plan) is prepared by SBFCD staff in May and June of each year for those creeks that are included for maintenance. Routine maintenance can include brushing vegetation, herbicide application, desilting, shaping, bank protection, repair or creation of check structures, and habitat restoration. At sites where impacts to riparian vegetation within the creek channel cannot be completely avoided, the District calculates the square footage of impacts to native vegetation and then identifies a location for habitat restoration. The priority for restoration is on the creek bank at or near the site where vegetation was removed. However, alternatives include other sites along the same creek and at nearby creeks. SBFCD also maintains the Los Carneros Mitigation Bank at the City’s Lake Carneros Natural and Historic Preserve. The bank has 28 acres that are slated for restoration with 10 acres of riparian vegetation and 18.41 acres of upland habitat.

Each year, the maintenance work occurs between August 1 and December 15. This timing allows for avoidance of the migratory bird breeding season and the wet season for some of the maintained creeks.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 13 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

3.3.7.3 Mosquito and Vector Management District of Santa Barbara County

The City maintains a Memorandum of Understanding with the Mosquito and Vector Management District of Santa Barbara County for mosquito services within the City. The agreement includes a Mosquito Management Plan for the City that outlines management techniques and identifies mosquito breeding sites within the City. The primary location is the Lake Los Carneros area. Also identified are Evergreen Park and Bella Vista Park. 3.3.7.4 Neighboring Jurisdictions

Other local jurisdictions regulate land use both upstream and downstream from creek segments within the City. These jurisdictions have authority over development in those areas but not within the City of Goleta. Information on neighboring jurisdictions plans, regulations, and projects that impact creeks that traverse the City is provided in Appendix B. 3.4 City Policies, Regulation, Management Plans, and Projects 3.4.1 General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan

The City of Goleta adopted the General Plan in 2006 (City of Goleta 2006). The General Plan aims to create a coherent vision for the City’s future that forms the foundation for the General Plan’s goals, objectives, and policies. The City’s Guiding Principles and Goals, Policies, and Objectives most relevant to the CWMP are described below. 3.4.1.1 Conservation Element

The General Plan Conservation Element includes a focus on protecting, preserving, and enhancing the City’s creeks and watershed as evidenced by the abundance of references to creeks and surface water resources in the Element’s Guiding Principles and Goals. Relevant Principles and Goals include to:

1. Protect, maintain, and enhance natural ecosystem processes and functions in Goleta and its environs in order to maintain their natural ecological diversity. 2. Preserve, restore, and enhance the physical and biological integrity of Goleta’s creeks and natural drainages and their associated riparian and creekside habitats. 3. Identify and protect wetlands, including vernal pools, as highly productive and complex ecosystems that provide special habitats for flora and fauna as well as for their role in cleansing surface waters and drainages. 4. Protect water quality and the biological diversity of Goleta Slough and Devereux Slough. 5. Protect and enhance other important aquatic and terrestrial habitats, including those associated with rare, threatened, or endangered species of plants or animals. 9. Manage water resources at the watershed level cooperatively with other agencies to maintain high groundwater and surface water quality and to protect marine aquatic habitats.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 14 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

10. Manage groundwater and surface water resources to promote water quality and quantity adequate to support natural ecosystem processes and functions.

Conservation Element Policy CE 1 (Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area Designations and Policy) provides a comprehensive overview of ESHA protection within the City. This policy includes subpolicies defining and designating ESHA types and outlining requirements for site-specific biological studies for new development, protections for illegally destroyed ESHA, procedures for corrections to mapped ESHA, protections that apply to all ESHA types, requirements for mitigation to impact ESHA associated with new development, requirements ESHA buffers, and standards that apply to development within and adjacent to ESHA. Subsequent policies in the Conservation Element include more detailed policies for specific ESHA types.

To further support these Principles and Goals, the Conservation Element includes specific policies and objectives related to creek and riparian areas, which are considered Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas in accordance with Conservation Element subpolicy CE 1.2(a). Conservation Element Policy CE 2 (Protection of Creeks and Riparian Areas) lists as its policy objective to “Enhance, maintain, and restore the biological integrity of creek courses and their associated wetlands and riparian habitats as important natural features of Goleta’s landscape.”

Below is a complete listing of subpolicies with CE 2. These subpolicies provide clear direction for the CWMP and all future actions by the City. Note: On January 21, 2020, the City Council initiated an amendment process to subpolicy CE 2.2. A history of amendments to subpolicy CE 2.2 and SPA buffer reductions granted pursuant to that subpolicy are provided in Appendix C, Conservation Element Policy CE 2.2: Policy History and Buffer Reductions.

Policy CE 2: Protection of Creeks and Riparian Areas [GP/CP]

Objective: Enhance, maintain, and restore the biological integrity of creek courses and their associated wetlands and riparian habitats as important natural features of Goleta’s landscape.

CE 2.1 Designation of Protected Creeks. [GP/CP] The provisions of this policy shall apply to creeks shown in Figure 4-1. These watercourses and their associated riparian areas are defined as ESHAs. They serve as habitat for fish and wildlife, provide wildlife movement corridors, provide for the flow of stormwater runoff and floodwaters, and furnish open space and passive recreational areas for city residents. CE 2.2 Streamside Protection Areas. [GP/CP] A streamside protection area (SPA) is hereby established along both sides of the creeks identified in Figure 4-1. The purpose of the designation shall be to preserve the SPA in a natural state in order to protect the associated riparian habitats and ecosystems. The SPA shall include the creek channel, wetlands and/or riparian vegetation related to the creek hydrology, and an adjacent upland buffer area. The width of the SPA upland buffer shall be as follows: a. The SPA upland buffer shall be 100 feet outward on both sides of the creek, measured from the top of the bank or the outer limit of wetlands and/or riparian vegetation, whichever is greater. The City may consider increasing or decreasing the width of the SPA upland buffer on a case-by-case basis at the time of environmental review. The City may allow portions of a SPA upland buffer to be less than 100 feet wide, but not

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 15 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

less than 25 feet wide, based on a site specific assessment if (1) there is no feasible alternative siting for development that will avoid the SPA upland buffer; and (2) the project’s impacts will not have significant adverse effects on streamside vegetation or the biotic quality of the stream. b. If the provisions above would result in any legal parcel created prior to the date of this plan being made unusable in its entirety for any purpose allowed by the land use plan, exceptions to the foregoing may be made to allow a reasonable economic use of the parcel, subject to approval of a conditional use permit. (Amended by Reso. 09-30, 5/19/09 and Reso. 09-59, 11/17/09)

CE 2.3 Allowable Uses and Activities in Streamside Protection Areas. [GP/CP] The following compatible land uses and activities may be allowed in SPAs, subject to all other policies of this plan, including those requiring avoidance or mitigation of impacts: a. Agricultural operations, provided they are compatible with preservation of riparian resources. b. Fencing and other access barriers along property boundaries and along SPA boundaries. c. Maintenance of existing roads, driveways, utilities, structures, and drainage improvements. d. Construction of public road crossings and utilities, provided that there is no feasible, less environmentally damaging alternative. e. Construction and maintenance of foot trails, bicycle paths, and similar low-impact facilities for public access. f. Resource restoration or enhancement projects. g. Nature education and research activities. h. Low-impact interpretive and public access signage. i. Other such Public Works projects as identified in the Capital Improvement Plan, only where there are no feasible, less environmentally damaging alternatives. (Amended by Reso. 09-59, 11/17/09)

CE 2.4 Dedication of Easements or Other Property Interests. [GP/CP] In new subdivisions of land, SPAs shall not be included in developable lots but shall be within a separate parcel or parcels, unless the subdivider demonstrates that it is not feasible to create a separate open space lot for the SPA. An easement or deed restriction limiting the uses allowed on the open space lot to those set forth in CE 2.3 shall be required. Dedication of the open space lot or easement area to the City or a nonprofit land trust is encouraged. CE 2.5 Maintenance of Creeks as Natural Drainage Systems. [GP/CP] Creek banks, creek channels, and associated riparian areas shall be maintained or restored to their natural condition wherever such conditions or opportunities exist. Creeks carry a significant amount of Goleta’s stormwater flows. The following standards shall apply: a. The capacity of natural drainage courses shall not be diminished by development or other activities. b. Drainage controls and improvements shall be accomplished with the minimum vegetation removal and disruption of the creek and riparian ecosystem that is necessary to accomplish the drainage objective. c. Measures to stabilize creek banks, improve flow capacity, and reduce flooding are allowed but shall not include installation of new concrete channels, culverts, or pipes

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 16 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

except at street crossings, unless it is demonstrated that there is no feasible alternative for improving capacity. d. Drainage controls in new development shall be required to minimize erosion, sedimentation, and flood impacts to creeks. On site treatment of stormwater through retention basins, infiltration, vegetated swales, and other best management practices (BMPs) shall be required in order to protect water quality and the biological functions of creek ecosystems. e. Alteration of creeks for the purpose of road or driveway crossings shall be prohibited except where the alteration is not substantial and there is no other feasible alternative to provide access to new development on an existing legal parcel. Creek crossings shall be accomplished by bridging and shall be designed to allow the passage of fish and wildlife. Bridge abutments or piers shall be located outside creek beds and banks, unless an environmentally superior alternative exists. (Amended by Reso. 09-59, 11/17/09)

CE 2.6 Restoration of Degraded Creeks. [GP/CP] Segments of several creeks in Goleta have been covered or channelized by concrete culverts, causing degradation of the creek ecosystem. Restoration activities for improving degraded creek resources shall include the following: a. Channelized creek segments and culverts shall be evaluated and removed to restore natural channel bed and bank, where feasible. b. Creek courses in public rights-of-way shall be uncovered as part of public works improvement projects. c. Barriers that prevent migration of fish such as anadromous salmonids from reaching their critical habitat shall be removed or modified. d. Restoration of native riparian vegetation and removal of exotic plant species shall be implemented, unless such plants provide critical habitat for monarch butterflies, raptors, or other protected animals. e. Creek rehabilitation projects shall be designed to maintain or improve flow capacity, trap sediments and other pollutants that decrease water quality, minimize channel erosion, prevent new sources of pollutants from entering the creek, and enhance in- creek and riparian habitat. f. The use of closed-pipe drainage systems for fish-bearing creeks shall be prohibited unless there is no feasible, less environmentally damaging alternative. When the use of culverts is necessary, the culverts shall be oversized and have gravel bottoms that maintain the channel's width and grade. The Conservation Element includes several other policies relevant to identifying and protecting ESHA, include areas potentially adjacent to City creeks.

Included among these policies is Policy CE 3 (Protection of Wetlands). As noted in the Conservation Element, wetland habitat includes vegetated aquatic habitats and unvegetated open creek channels (see General Plan Conservation Element Table 4-2: Examples of Environmentally Sensitive Habitat). Policy CE 3 includes details on the definition and designation of wetland and provides specific details on requirements for wetland delineations when development is proposed. In addition, CE 3 includes specific protections for wetlands in and outside the Coastal Zones and includes requirements for mitigation for wetland fill. Finally, CE 3 identifies the lagoons at the mouths of Bell Canyon and Tecolote Creeks and requires specific protection of these resources.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 17 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Policy CE 5 (Protection of Other Terrestrial Habitat Areas) includes protections for native grasslands, coastal bluff scrub, coastal sage-scrub, and chaparral. Subpolicy CE 5.3(b) specifically identifies the need to avoid impacts to coastal bluff scrub, coastal sage-scrub, and chaparral habitat where the habitat “is part of a wildlife movement corridor and the impact would preclude animal movement or isolate ESHAs previously connected by the corridor such as (1) disrupting associated bird and animal movement patterns and seed dispersal, and/or (2) increasing erosion and sedimentation impacts to nearby creeks or drainages.”

Policy CE 8 (Protection of Special-Status Species) includes polices to protect habitats for threatened, endangered, or other special-status species of plants and animals. The policy includes a requirement that all development avoid adverse impacts to these habitats and outlines requirements for biological studies. Additionally, subpolicy CE 8.4 provides specific buffer areas to protect raptor nest during all times and additional buffer protections during nesting and fledgling season.

Policy CE 9 (Protection of Native Woodlands) provides policies to maintain and protect existing native trees and woodlands. Subpolicies of CE 9 define the trees to be protected, outlines the requirements for a tree protection plan for new development where there are native trees on site, includes protections for native woodlands and savannas, and outlines protections for native trees and woodlands in the design of projects. CE 9 also identifies standards, including mitigation of impacts to native trees, that need to be included in a Tree Protection Ordinance (as detailed in Conservation Element Implementation Action CE-IA-4).

Policy CE 10 (Watershed Management and Water Quality) includes polices to prevent the degradation of the quality of groundwater basin and surface waters in and adjacent to Goleta. Subpolices of CE 10 include policies for the siting and design of new development to address water quality, including best management practices for stormwater management and requirements for stormwater plans for new development.

For more information on these policies, see the General Plan. 3.4.1.2 Safety Element

The General Plan also includes several policies relevant to creek and watershed management within the Safety Element. These policies aim to address issues related to flooding and mitigating flood impacts rather than protection of ESHA. However, these policies also provide clear direction related to development and active management activities and are critical to guiding the future vision of capital projects related to the creeks. Below are highlighted policies from the Safety Element relevant to this Plan.

SE 5.6 Streambed Stabilization Projects. [GP/CP] In stream areas susceptible to slope failure, the City shall pursue and implement streambed stabilization projects. For these projects, stabilization by restoration with native plantings and natural-looking, “soft” stabilization methods shall be preferred over concrete channelization, gabions, riprap, and other “hard” stabilization methods.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 18 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

SE 6.4 Avoidance of Flood Hazard Areas. [GP/CP] The City shall discourage any new intensive development in any flood hazard area. Similarly, the City shall require appropriate flood mitigation for intensification of existing development in any floodprone area. The City shall not approve development within areas designated as the 100-year floodplain that would obstruct flood flow (such as construction in the designated floodway), displace floodwaters onto other property, or be subject to flood damage. The City shall not allow development that will create or worsen drainage problems.

SE 6.6 Enforcement of Watercourse Setback Ordinance. [GP/CP] A minimum 50-foot setback shall be required from streambanks and flood control channels for all new development (see related CE 2.2). For projects that would be rendered infeasible by the application of such minimum setbacks, the project applicant shall provide a site-specific engineering study with recommended mitigation measures to allow for a reduced setback that would not expose development to unacceptable risk. Furthermore, in these cases, the City shall consult with the Santa Barbara County Flood Control District to determine whether the proposed lesser setback would be appropriate, in that it would allow access for flood control maintenance and enable proper operation of the channels. The City shall maintain and enforce the policies and standards within a Water Course Setback Ordinance.

SE 6.8 Flood Control Projects. [GP/CP] The City shall seek funding for and implement capital improvement projects to mitigate hazards for low-lying flood-prone areas. The City shall require restoration of natural processes in drainage ways where appropriate and feasible. For these flood control projects, methods that employ native plantings and natural-looking, “soft” stabilization shall be preferred over methods that rely solely on concrete channelization and other “hard” stabilization methods.

SE 6.9 Restoration of Armored or Channelized Stream Beds. [GP/CP] The City shall pursue opportunities to eliminate or soften existing concrete channels and/or rock- or concrete- stabilized banks from streams. (See CE 2.5.) 3.4.2 Zoning Regulations – Title 17 of the Goleta Municipal Code

On March 3, 2020, City Council adopted Title 17 of the Goleta Municipal Code (GMC), commonly referred to as the New Zoning Ordinance (NZO). The regulations included in the newly adopted Title 17 went into effect on April 3, 2020.

Title 17 includes various regulations related to City creeks. Highlights of these regulations are provided below:

• Chapter 17.30, Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas, establishes standards for development that could impact Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHA) that are identified and mapped within the General Plan or meet the criteria for ESHA designation as specified in the General Plan and to describe the permit requirements and the review process for such proposed development. • Within Chapter 17.30, Section 17.30.070 outlines the protection of SPAs, consistent with General Plan subpolicy CE 2.2. These regulations establish a minimum 100-foot buffer outward on both sides of the creek, measured from the top of the bank or the outer limit of

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 19 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

the riparian vegetation, whichever feature is further from the creek. This section included four findings that are required for any reduction of a SPA buffer below the 100-foot standard but not less than 25 feet, with the approval of a Major Conditional Use Permit. To assist the Review Authority in making the required findings, the Director may direct preparation of any study or report that the Director deems necessary at the applicant’s expense. This section also included a list of allowed uses within a SPA buffer, consistent with General Plan subpolicy CE 2.3. • Chapter 17.31, Floodplain Management, regulates the location of new development that could negatively impact the City’s floodways and drainageways, consistent with General Plan subpolicy SE 6.6. This Chapter established a 50-foot setback from the top of streambanks and flood control channels and outlines the situations in which the setback may be reduced. This Chapter requires that any reduced setback adhere to the requirements of Section 17.30.070, when applicable. 3.4.3 Other Goleta Municipal Code Regulations

In addition to Title 17, the GMC includes other regulations relevant to creeks and watersheds. A brief summary of these provisions is provided below. 3.4.3.1 Chapter 12.13, Public Nuisances

Section 12.13.020, Public Nuisances Designated, includes a list of identified public nuisances. This list was amended in 2010 to include subsection (P) that reads: “Any condition caused or permitted to exist in violation of Chapter 13.04 [see below], including releases of pollutants or illegal discharges into the storm drain system and/or waters of the State.” 3.4.3.2 Chapter 13.04, Stormwater Management and Discharge Control

Chapter 13.04 of the GMC was adopted in 2010, via Ordinance No. 10-02, to serve as a Best Management Practice pursuant to the City’s Storm Water Management Plan (see below). Chapter 13.04 regulates non-storm water discharges to the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable as required by federal and state law. Acting under the Federal mandate and the California Water Code, California Water Boards issue National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits that require cities, towns, and counties to regulate activities which can result in pollutants entering their storm drains.

Chapter 13.04 requires all new development and redevelopment projects to comply with the post- construction stormwater requirements contained in the Stormwater Technical Guide, Compliance with Stormwater Post-Construction Requirements in Santa Barbara County. The post-construction requirements mandate that development projects use Low Impact Development (LID) to detain, retain, and treat runoff. LID incorporates and conserves on-site natural features, together with constructed hydrologic controls to more closely mimic pre-development hydrology and watershed processes.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 20 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

3.4.3.3 Chapter 15.10, Floodplain Management

The purpose of GMC Chapter 15.10 is to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas. This chapter includes methods and provisions for:

• Restricting or prohibiting uses which are dangerous due to water or erosion hazards, or which result in damaging increases in erosion or flood heights or velocities; • Requiring that uses vulnerable to floods be protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction; controlling the alteration of natural floodplains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers; • Controlling filling, grading, dredging, and other development which may increase flood damage; and • Preventing or regulating the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert floodwaters or which may increase flood hazards in other areas. 3.4.4 Management Plans and Programs

Additional management plans and programs relevant to City creeks currently exist within the City and are considered in the development of this CWMP. 3.4.4.1 Ellwood-Devereux Open Space and Habitat Management Plan

In March 2004, the City adopted the Ellwood-Devereux Coast Open Space and Habitat Management Plan (City of Goleta et al. 2004). This plan addresses land use needs of the Ellwood-Devereux Coast in order to reduce the amount of residential development, relocate development to inland locations, and establish an approximately 652-acre contiguous area, which includes open space and natural reserves managed for the public and natural resource protection. This plan describes management goals, policies, and actions to guide management of public access and habitat protection. The plan area within the City includes portions of Devereux Creek. 3.4.4.2 Stormwater Management Plan

The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) identified the City of Goleta as a small municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) requiring coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems, Water Quality Order No. 2003-0005-DWQ and CAS000004 (General Permit).

The Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) (City of Goleta 2010) was prepared by the City pursuant to the requirements of the City’s General Permit and serves as a framework for identifying, assigning, and implementing the Minimum Control Measures and BMPs intended to reduce the discharge of pollutants from the municipal separate storm sewer system and protect downstream water quality to the maximum extent practicable. In addition to these primary objectives, the SWMP is intended to:

• Serve as a planning and guidance document to be used by the City’s regulatory body, all City departments, contractors, and the general public; • Be dynamic and adaptively managed to address changes in General Permit requirements, organizational structure, responsibilities, and goals;

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 21 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

• Define techniques and measurable goals for measuring BMP effectiveness; and • Define a five-year schedule for the storm water management 3.4.4.3 Community Wildfire Protection Plan

The City’s Community Wildfire Protection Plan (City of Goleta 2012) was developed to enhance the community wildfire protection by identifying fire hazard treatments, which are in balance with sustainable ecological management and fiscal resources. This plan identities the community’s values and determines if those values are vulnerable to damage or loss from wildfire. In addition, this plan develops a course of action for protecting those values. The plan acknowledges that maintenance schedules will need to account for streamside corridors, where treatments must follow specific procedures and timelines. 3.4.4.4 Goleta Urban Forest Management Plan

The Goleta Urban Forest Management Plan (City of Goleta 2017) provides a five-year policy framework for how trees within public areas will be managed. The urban forest is defined as all public and private trees including the street tree system, trees in parks and other public lands, and trees on private properties throughout the City. The plan recommends several tree management strategies and identifies the ways in which the City’s policies can gradually shape a public urban forest to reflect Goleta’s urban forest goals. 3.4.4.5 Monarch Butterfly Habitat Management Plan

In March 2019, the City adopted a Final Ellwood Mesa/Sperling Preserve Open Space Monarch Butterfly Habitat Management Plan (City of Goleta 2019). The purpose of this plan is to outline the programmatic approach and methods for the City to manage and improve the Ellwood Mesa eucalyptus grove for the benefit of the overwintering monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus), other wildlife, and the public’s use. Twenty-two programs are detailed in this plan, which integrate the many diverse aspects of habitat management into a single plan. The Plan coverage area includes portions of Devereux Creek. 3.4.4.6 Goleta Parks, Facilities and Playgrounds Master Plan

The City’s Parks, Facilities and Playgrounds Master Plan (City of Goleta 2020a) was adopted by City Council on January 16, 2020. The Plan provides an assessment of Goleta’s parks and playgrounds system, considering future growth in the community. Many City-owned parks abut creeks and the plan includes several objectives to promote improved pedestrian and bicycle connectivity through these spaces. 3.4.4.7 Homelessness Strategic Plan

In November 2018, the City of Goleta initiated a process, which will culminate in a Homelessness Strategic Plan adoption by City Council. The process commenced with attending regional and local meetings on homelessness throughout the Central Coast and Santa Barbara County. According to the 2019 Point-in-Time Count (County of Santa Barbara 2019a), which is estimated to be lower than the actual numbers, there were 119 homeless people of whom 78 were living in vehicles and 41 in

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 22 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA tents or on the street. Those unsheltered individuals in tents are found either on the street or may be in more remote locations adjacent to or within the city creek corridors.

There are unassessed potential impacts to creeks that may lead to decreased water quality such as an increase in fecal coliform bacteria and sedimentation (turbidity and total suspected solids); decrease in select wildlife species; and a decrease or shift in vegetation and aquatic species. The homeless population utilizing creeks corridors for shelter may also contribute to an increase in creek bank erosion, trash on the banks and within the creek, and a reduction in flood control capacity. The health and human hazard risks extend to those living in or adjacent to creeks as well as the health of the watershed and downstream water users.

The Homelessness Strategic Plan will take a holistic approach to addressing homelessness within the City and elements of these approaches may provide co-benefits for creeks as listed above. 3.4.4.8 Storm Drain Master Plan

A City Storm Drain Master Plan is a pending Capital Improvement Program (see below) project. The City does not currently have a comprehensive storm drain master plan. This future project will study patterns of drainage and flooding that exist throughout the entire City, including a specific focus in Old Town. The work will include evaluating the capacity of existing storm drainpipes and channels and providing recommendations for improvements to area drainage, storm drain, and channel capacity. Lack of capacity in existing storm drains and overflow from adjacent flood control channels in larger storm events contributes to inundation patterns reflected on current Federal Emergency Management Agency flood maps. 3.4.4.9 Lake Los Carneros Management Plan

Prior to City incorporation, the County of Santa Barbara prepared the Lake Carneros County Park, Goleta, Santa Barbara County, California 1999 Updated Management Plan (County of Santa Barbara 2000) for the Lake Los Carneros Natural and Historic Preserve that is now located within the City. The Plan evaluates maintenance activities, details wildlife resources at the park, recognizes the biological and recreational value of the lake and its resources, and proposes several management recommendations to enhance those resources.

Because this area of the City has its own management plan, Lake Los Carneros is not further considered in the CWMP. Any changes to management at Lake Los Carneros would be implemented through changes to the Lake Los Carneros Management Plan. 3.4.4.10 Capital Improvement Program

The City of Goleta’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) forecasts the City’s capital needs over a 5- year period based on various long-range plans, goals, and policies, and includes a comprehensive listing of planned and projected capital projects, which have been identified by City staff for the five- year planning period. This document includes both funded projects and unfunded needs. Current CIP projects relevant to City creeks include:

• San Jose Creek Bike Path (Middle and Southern Extents). The San Jose Creek Multipurpose Path Project extends approximately three miles alongside San Jose Creek from the California

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 23 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Coast Route path in the south to Cathedral Oaks Road and the Goleta Crosstown Bicycle Route in the north. The limits of the San Jose Creek Bike Path Southern Extent are from Hollister Avenue (northern limit) to the Atascadero Creek Class I/Multipurpose path (Obern Trail), connecting to the existing path just north of the State Route 217 Bridge over San Jose Creek, which is the southern limit of the Project. • San Jose Creek Channel Repair. San Jose Creek Channel Emergency Repair Project is the repair (replacement in kind) of a small portion of the San Jose Creek Channel that was damaged in Winter Storms in 2017. The storm event of February 17, 2017 caused structural damage to an approx. 100-foot length of the channel that had previously (2015) been improved as part of the City’s San Jose Creek Capacity and Fish-Passage Improvement Project. • Hollister Avenue Bridge Replacement. The Hollister Avenue Bridge represents the completion phase of the City’s San Jose Creek Channel Capacity Improvement and Fish Passage Project. The overall project expands the San Jose Creek Channel to provide capacity for 100-year storm events and includes a fish-passable low-flow channel along the length of the San Jose Creek concrete channel allowing fish passage from the Goleta Slough to the natural portion of San Jose Creek, which terminates just upstream of Hollister Avenue. The project will also construct a transition basin immediately north of the new bridge to accommodate the transition from natural creek into the concrete channel from the perspective of containing flood waters as well as the passage of fish. • Ekwill Street and Fowler Road Extension Project. The Ekwill-Fowler Project will provide a new direct east-west route between Fairview Avenue and Kellogg Avenue across Old Town Goleta. Immediately west of Pine Avenue, Ekwill Street will cross Old San Jose Creek. The crossing will be with a natural bottom arch culvert structure with sufficient clearance to accommodate animal crossing. • Covington Drainage System Improvements. This project will address system capacity, peak flow attenuation, inlet efficiency and downstream conveyance between the inlet at Cathedral Oaks near Laguna Camino Vista, and the outlet at Covington Way and Lake Los Carneros. • Goleta Storm Drain Master Plan. See description above. • Ellwood Beach Drive Drainage Infrastructure Replacement. The project will replace the current drainage inlet on Ellwood Beach Drive and add a trash capture system to prevent trash from entering the stormwater system. • Phelps Ditch (El Encanto Creek) Flood Control Channel Trash Control Structure. The project will install a full trash capture system for the Phelps Ditch (El Encanto Creek), with intakes along Hollister Avenue and between Hollister Avenue and Phelps Road. • Old Town South Fairview Avenue, High Flow Full Trash Capture Devices. The project will install a full trash capture system in the storm drainpipe on South Fairview Ave. in Old Town to collect trash from multiple inlets prior to release to the outlet. • Storke Road Widening Phelps Road to City Limits. The project will add a vehicular lane in each direction, with sidewalks and bike lanes in both directions. Concepts for replacement of the two existing culverts passing beneath the roadway with a natural bottom culvert are also being considered.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 24 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

3.5 CEQA and Thresholds

In accordance with CEQA, the City utilizes environmental thresholds of significance for new development through the use of the County of Santa Barbara Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual (County of Santa Barbara 2002). As described in this manual, riparian habitats are defined as the “terrestrial or upland area adjacent to freshwater bodies, such as the banks of creeks and streams, the shores of lakes and ponds, and aquifers which emerge at the surface of such as springs and seeps.” The following types of project-related impacts to riparian habitats may be considered significant pursuant to CEQA:

a. Direct removal of riparian vegetation. b. Disruption of riparian wildlife habitat, particularly animal dispersal corridors and or understory vegetation. c. Intrusion within the upland edge of the riparian canopy (generally within 50 feet in urban areas, within 100 feet in rural areas, and within 200 feet of [Santa Ynez, Santa Maria, Cuyama, and Sisquoc rivers]), leading to potential disruption of animal migration, breeding, and other activities through increased noise, light and glare, and human or domestic animal intrusion. d. Disruption of a substantial amount of adjacent upland vegetation where such vegetation plays a critical role in supporting riparian-dependent wildlife species (e.g., amphibians), or where such vegetation aids in stabilizing steep slopes adjacent to the riparian corridor, which reduces erosion and sedimentation potential. e. Construction activity which disrupts critical time periods (nesting, breeding) for fish and other wildlife species.

The City’s Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual also consider impacts to surface and storm water quality. A significant water quality impact is presumed to occur if the project:

• Is located within an urbanized area of the City and project construction would disturb one or more acres of land. • Increases the amount of impervious surfaces by 25 percent or more. • Results in channelization or relocation of a natural drainage channel. • Results in the removal or reduction of riparian vegetation or other vegetation (excluding nonnative vegetation removed for restoration projects) from the buffer zone of any streams, creeks, or wetlands. • Discharges pollutants that exceed the water quality standards set forth in the applicable NPDES Permit, the RWQCB’s Basin Plan, or otherwise impair the beneficial uses of a receiving water body. • Result in a discharge of pollutants into an impaired waterbody that has been designated as such by the SWRCB or the RWQCB under Section 303(d) of the CWA. • Results in a discharge of pollutants of concern to a receiving water body, as identified by the RWCQB.

The Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual also includes a discussion of groundwater impacts (last updated in 1992) and identifies adverse effects which can be caused by overdraft of an alluvial groundwater basin. These are as follows:

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 25 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

• Degradation of water quality • Saltwater intrusion • Land subsistence • Loss of well yield • Well interference • Reduction of surface water available to support biological resources

With respect to effects on biological resource, the manual explains that groundwater pumping causes fluctuation over time in the elevation of the groundwater table. Lowering of the water table can impact biological resources by reducing access to water by deep-rooted native vegetation or by reducing discharge of groundwater into creeks. The manual notes that under certain conditions, a local pumping depression could adversely affect a specific habitat area and that in these cases, the effects need to be analyzed in the biological resources section of the project’s environmental document. 3.6 National Environmental Policy Act

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), enacted in 1970, is a federal environmental law which promotes the enhancement of the environment. NEPA requires federal agencies to assess the environmental effects of their proposed actions prior to making decisions. Federal actions are those that require federal funding, permits, policy decisions, facilities, equipment, or employees. The range of actions covered by NEPA are broad and generally include making decisions on permit applications; adopting federal land management actions; and constructing highways and other publicly owned facilities. Depending on the severity of impacts associated with an action, either a categorical exclusion, environmental assessment or environmental impact statement are prepared. The following federal agencies along City-wide creeks are subject to NEPA requirements: USACE, Federal Highway Administration, and Federal Emergency Management Agency. Additional projects supported in part by federal funding, such as projects or federal programs associated with Caltrans, is also subject to NEPA. 3.7 Public Trust Doctrine

The Public Trust Doctrine is the principle that certain natural and cultural resources are preserved for public use; and that the government owns and must protect and maintain these resources for the public’s use. The doctrine’s most common application relates to bodies of water (e.g., lakes, streams) and the following natural resources are subject to the Public Trust: inland navigable waterways, public access, water rights, water quality, fish and wildlife resources, and air resources (Frank 2012). The doctrine ensures the public’s right to use California’s waterways for navigation, fishing, boating, natural habitat protection, and other water-oriented activities.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 26 October 2020

4 Baseline Watershed Characterization

4.1 Scope of Analysis

Per CE-IA-3, the scope of analysis considered for this city-wide CWMP focuses on the portions of all lands, creeks, and resources within the City limits. However, because the creeks are part of larger dynamic watershed systems, and actions upstream affect those processes within the City limits, the following section provides an overview of both the contributing watershed area and analysis of the watershed area located within the City limits for each creek. The following terminology will be used throughout this CWMP:

• Watershed – The total area above a given point on a watercourse that contributes water to its flow; the entire region drained by a waterway or watercourse that drains into an outflow point, such as a lake, reservoir, or ocean. • Watershed Overview Area – The area that contributes precipitation to one or more of the City’s creeks. This area is shown in Figure 2. • Contributing Sub-watersheds – The portion of the Watershed Overview Area that is generally north of the City of Goleta (i.e., upstream). • City Sub-watershed – The portion of the Watershed Overview Area that is within the City’s jurisdictional boundary. • Creeks – Linear natural and adjoining human-made features that direct precipitation to downstream waterbodies (e.g., river, lake, lagoon, ocean); a minor tributary of a river.

The descriptions provided in this section provide the results of desktop analyses and reconnaissance surveys. Creek conditions are variable and processes are dynamic and interrelated. Therefore, where applicable, cyclic information is provided below (see Section 4.3.3, Hydrology and Water Quality) in addition to species occurrence information (see Section 4.3.5, Biological Resources). In addition to natural variation and disruptions associated with localized development and activity, the baselines conditions within each creek and watershed have likely already and will in the future change due to climate change. The potential impacts associated with such changes are briefly discussed in Section 4.3.3, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Section 5, Creek and Watershed Impairments. 4.2 Overview of the Watershed Overview Area

The City of Goleta is located between the Santa Ynez Mountains and the Pacific Ocean along the narrow Goleta Valley, a 2- to 3-mile wide alluvial plain. There are twelve creeks that flow through the City of Goleta, originating either from the local Santa Ynez Mountains or from within the City (Figure 3, City of Goleta Creek Corridors). Six of the creeks discharge into the Goleta Slough, including (from east to west): Maria Ygnacio, San Jose, Las Vegas, San Pedro, Los Carneros, and Glen Annie. Devereux Creek and El Encanto Creek discharge to the Devereux Slough, whereas Bell Canyon Creek

Creeks and Watershed Management Plan 27 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

(including tributaries Winchester Canyon and Ellwood Canyon Creeks) and Tecolote Creek discharge into coastal lagoons adjacent to the Pacific Ocean coastline at the western boundary of the City limits.

Approximately 16% of the entire CWMP overview area falls within the City limits, with the remaining 84% in the upstream Santa Ynez Mountains within the Los Padres National Forest and adjacent unincorporated Santa Barbara County communities (Figure 2). Base watershed boundaries were established for the CWMP using the County of Santa Barbara Planning and Development Department’s 2006 watershed layer, which was modified within the City of Goleta’s boundaries to match the City’s higher resolution 2019 watershed layer. General land use within the watersheds was also characterized using a combination of County and City land use datasets, including the General Plan and the County of Santa Barbara Office of the Assessor Digital Parcel Database Closed Roll 2019. Numerous discrepancies were identified in the datasets and required adjustments based upon a review of current aerial photography (ESRI World Imagery accessed February 2020).[1] Land use descriptions from the two datasets were further distilled into 24 categories that reflect major components of the watersheds and/or could be used to assess potential impacts to downstream hydrology and water quality. The 24 land use categories and their associated descriptions are provided in Table 1, Land Use Classifications, and shown in Figure 4, Watershed Land Uses.

Table 1. Land Use Classifications

Land Use Description General Agriculture Primarily avocado and citrus orchards within Santa Ynez foothills Airport Santa Barbara Airport Livestock/Equestrian Primarily horse stables Auto Shop/Retail Gas stations, auto repair shops and dealerships Cemetery & Golf Course Maintained/irrigated grass Coastline Undeveloped shoreline, beaches, and coastal bluffs Commercial Small to large retail (including parking lots), office space Education All educational facilities (daycare through university) Industrial Large warehouses/plants/facilities Mixed Agriculture/Commercial Nurseries/greenhouses Mixed Agriculture/Open-Space Primarily orchards interspersed throughout the Santa Ynez foothills Mixed Agriculture/Residential > 1-acre parcels with agriculture and private residences Mixed Commercial/Residential Mixed apartments/shopping and hotels/resorts Oil and Gas Processing Open-Space/Park Undeveloped vacant lots, parks, common areas Residential - Ranchette 1 Dwelling Unit (DU) for parcels > 1 acre Residential - Low Density 1 DU per acre Residential - Moderate Density 2 to 4 DU per acre

[1] Most of the issues were encountered with the County dataset, with numerous undeveloped parcels in the Santa Ynez Mountains designated as agriculture, residential, beaches/dunes, etc.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 28 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 1. Land Use Classifications

Land Use Description Residential - High Density 5+ DU per acre Santa Ynez Mountains - Undeveloped mountain chaparral (includes unimproved roads Undeveloped and trails) Santa Ynez Mountains - Low to moderate density residential located primarily off State Residential Road 154 Street Paved streets (asphalt) Utility Public utility stations (water/wastewater, electrical)

The total area for all the watershed overview area is approximately 50 square miles. Most of the contributing sub-watersheds consist primarily of natural chaparral (Santa Ynez Mountains – Undeveloped) and agriculture. Five recent fires are documented in a number of the contributing sub- watersheds, consisting of the 2008 Gap fire (9,550 acres); the 2009 Jesusita fire (9,630 acres – although only a small section of the fire entered the Maria Ygnacio Creek watershed);2017 Whittier Fire (18,431 acres), which only affected the northeast portion of Tecolote and a sliver of Ellwood Canyon watersheds; the 2018 Holiday fire (113 acres); and the 2019 Cave Fire (4,367 acres), which only affected the northern most portions of Maria Ygnacio and San Antonio Creek watersheds (USGS 2020a). Wildfires, which occur often in the Southern California landscape, drastically impact the natural hydrology within the watersheds by removing watershed moisture storage (e.g., development of hydrophobic soils, loss of vegetation ground cover capturing/retaining water), increasing runoff, and becoming a significant source of sediment to downstream waters. In addition, after heavy storm events, there can be dramatic impacts in fire-scarred areas in the form of mud and debris flows with boulders and other debris surging unabated, thereby temporarily impairing the proper ecological function, water quality, and drainage and flood control function of creek corridors. Impairments may last for years depending on the creek complexity and hydrology and the severity of the debris flow.

The Santa Ynez foothills provide a transition zone between the undeveloped uplands and the developed valley floor, with low-density urban uses intermixed with agriculture and open spaces. The Goleta Valley consists primarily of urban land uses (residential, commercial, streets), which extend down to the sloughs and coastline. Urban land uses are associated with an increase in impervious surfaces (asphalt, concrete, rooftops) which reduce local water storage and increase runoff. This change to the natural hydrologic regime is referred to as hydromodification, and can lead to increased flooding, scouring (deepening), and channel straightening. The total percentage of impermeable surfaces in the City sub-watersheds ranges from a low of 7% to a high of 49%, providing a broad spectrum of potential runoff responses to similar rainfall events across the City. 4.3 Overview of Creek Reaches in the City of Goleta

The City of Goleta boundaries extend from Maria Ygnacio in the east to Bacara Resort and Spa to the west. The City is approximately 6 miles wide and is intersected by twelve creek reaches. From west to east these include: Tecolote, Bell Canyon, Winchester and Ellwood Canyons (tributaries to Bell Canyon), Devereux, El Encanto, Glen Annie, Los Carneros, San Pedro, Las Vegas, Maria Ygnacio, and

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 29 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

San Jose (Figure 3). As shown in Table 2, Summary of Sub-Watershed Area by Jurisdiction and Region, approximately 85% (43 mi2) of the entire CWMP watershed area occurs outside of the City limits and is located primarily in the upstream Santa Ynez Mountains and adjacent unincorporated Santa Barbara communities (Figure 2).

Table 2. Summary of Sub-Watershed Area by Jurisdiction and Region

Jurisdiction and Regional Area - Sub-Watershed Square Miles (mi2) City of Santa County of Within City of Barbara - Santa USFS Total Creek/Area Goleta Airport Barbara UCSB LPNF (mi2) Maria Ygnacio Creek 0.16 -- 2.00 -- 4.67 6.83 San Jose Creek 0.83 0.01 2.02 -- 5.97 8.83 Las Vegas Creek 1.06 0.01 1.08 -- 0.43 2.58 San Pedro Creek 0.66 0.32 1.01 -- 2.62 4.61 Los Carneros Creek 0.84 0.36 1.27 -- 2.01 4.49 Glen Annie Creek 1.09 0.06 2.05 0.07 2.55 5.81 El Encanto Creek 0.74 -- 0.38 0.02 -- 1.13 Devereux Creek 1.81 -- 0.01 0.17 -- 1.98 Bell/Ellwood/ 0.32 -- 2.43 -- 3.47 6.21 Winchester Canyon Creek Tecolote 0.13 -- 1.54 -- 4.15 5.82 Devereux Slough1 -- -- 0.09 0.41 ---- 0.50 Goleta Slough1 -- 0.73 0.33 0.76 -- 1.82 Golf Course and Coastal 0.19 ------0.19 Beach Area2 Total (mi2) 7.82 1.49 14.21 1.42 25.87 50.81 Percent of Total 15% 3% 28% 3% 51% 100% 1 Devereux and Goleta Slough are located immediately south of the City of Goleta’s limits 2 Includes land within the Sandpiper Golf Course and a portion of Ellwood Mesa, including Ellwood Beach.

Creeks provide necessary physical (water/sediment transport), chemical (water quality), and biological (biodiversity, habitat, wildlife corridor) functions that link the City to the surrounding bioregions (e.g., the upper Santa Ynez watersheds and the coastal wetlands). Creek corridors are protected under the City’s ESHA designation and are host to several special-status species, aquatic and terrestrial, such as the tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi), southern California coast steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss), California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), and mountain lion (Puma concolor; state candidate species). The ESHA designation for creeks also includes nesting raptors and monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) overwintering aggregations, and southern tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. australis). The conditions of the creek corridors vary greatly from natural corridors to concrete-lined channels. Some of the creek systems provide the last remaining physical linkages between the coast and relatively undisturbed and unfragmented habitats to the north of the

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 30 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

City. However, these linkages are typically indirect as they are often interrupted by many intervening barriers, such as roadways and long underground culverts. As urbanization has encroached upon these creeks, numerous physical, chemical, and biological functions have been impacted, resulting in the loss of habitat, reduced water quality, and increased flooding. Understanding the existing conditions of the City’s creeks and their contributing sub-watersheds is a necessary starting point for improving their health and functionality and establishing long-term management objectives. 4.3.1 History of City Creeks

Historically, stream channels were relatively shallow and overbank flows were common during flood events. This allowed for sediment deposition to spread out from the mouths of canyons and build up wide alluvial fans that coalesced together to form the alluvial plain that Goleta sits on in the present day. This environment provided natural flow patterns and habitat for native aquatic, wildlife, and riparian corridor species to flourish. The Goleta Valley was predominantly lemon orchards and ranch land during the late 19th century and early 20th century. With major developments in Goleta in the 1900s, including the Santa Barbara Airport in the 1940s, the Goleta Valley started to become more urbanized. In the 1950’s, major flooding events which damaged structures and properties led the County to start working to maintain the creeks to lessen the impact of floods (County of Santa Barbara 2020). Channels were straightened, deepened, and stabilized to reduce flooding impacts. In 1955 SBFCD was created to help maintain creeks and provide flood control services, including portions of the City’s creeks. The channelization of creeks and development of the Goleta Valley diminished the capacity of creeks to transport floodwaters through the City today and require regular maintenance by the SBFCD. The SBFCD continues to oversee annual maintenance to creeks throughout the County and portions of the City (County of Santa Barbara 2020). 4.3.2 Current Status of City Creeks

The majority of City creeks are constrained and bordered by development. Historical floodplains have been developed and various channels are maintained for flood control purposes. Alteration of the City creeks along with urban and agricultural development has also accelerated sediment deposition. Through the construction of sediment basins upstream the sediment deposition has been reduced. Six of the creeks that travel through the City (Glen Annie, Los Carneros, San Pedro, Las Vegas, San Jose, and Maria Ygnacio) discharge into the Goleta Slough. The Goleta Slough has experienced high inputs of sediment and the SBFCD has performed desilting and dredging to remove sediment from the Goleta Slough in recent years.

Even though constrained, the creeks continue to provide a multitude of services for the residence of Goleta including, but not limited to, recreation and educational opportunities. Many parks and open spaces are located throughout the City and several of these border City creeks, such as Armitos Park and Johnny D. Wallis Park along San Jose Creek; La Goleta Neighborhood Open Space along Las Vegas Creek; Stow Tennis Courts along San Pedro Creek; Glen Annie del Norte Neighborhood Open Space along Glen Annie Creek; Evergreen Acres Community Park along El Encanto Creek; Ellwood Mesa along Devereux Creek; and more. A complete list of City parks and open spaces is available in the General Plan Conservation Element Figure 3-2, Table 3-1, and the interactive Neighborhood Parks Map (City of Goleta 2020b). Along several creeks, foot and bike paths are also present within or adjacent to riparian habitat.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 31 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

4.3.3 Hydrology and Water Quality 4.3.3.1 Stream Gauges

SBFCD operates and maintains 16 stream gauges and the USGS maintains 8 additional stream gauges at various locations within Santa Barbara County. The USGS stations are managed by the USGS Santa Maria Field Office. Two of these gauges are positioned in the City: one on San Pedro Creek at Stow Canyon Road (USGS 11120520) and the other is on Maria Ygnacio Creek at University Drive (USGS 11119940). The drainage area for San Pedro is 3.10 square miles and for Maria Ygnacio it is 6.40 square miles (USGS 2020b). There is one additional stream gauge north of the City on San Jose Creek (USGS 11120500) above North Patterson Avenue and another to the east of the City on Atascadero Creek (USGS 11120000), a tributary to Maria Ygnacio, whose confluence is south of the City at Shoreline Drive. The drainage area of San Jose Creek is 5.51 square miles and 18.19 square miles for Atascadero. These last two gauges are located within the County; however, only San Jose Creek traverses through the City boundaries. 4.3.3.2 Rainfall and Stream Flow

Physical, chemical, and biological conditions will vary between and within City creeks. Generally, within the City’s limits the current surface flow within the creeks is intermittent and seasonal, meaning they only flow with sufficient rainfall input. Total annual rainfall in the Watershed Overview Area (Figure 2) ranges between 16 inches near the coast, to over 30 inches along the Santa Ynez ridgeline approximately 3,000 feet above sea level. In Goleta, the average rainfall is 18.47 inches between 1942 and 2019 as measured at the Goleta Fire Station (gauge #440) (County of Santa Barbara 2019b). Most of the rainfall is distributed between November and April, which generally restricts surface flow in the lower reaches of creeks to the winter to spring rain season. However, annual precipitation is retrieved from data collected for the water-year, which begins on October 1 and ends the following September 30 of each year. In select years, rain in October and May can add significant rain amounts to the annual total.

Table 3 provides a summary of the water precipitation and estimated flow for creeks within the City and their watershed, which extend north of the City in Los Padres National Forest (StreamStats 2020). Calculations for Table 3 are based on National Hydrologic Dataset, Watershed Boundary Dataset, local stream gauge data, and topographical base map. Estimates obtained for un-gaged streams assume natural flow conditions at the site (StreamStats 2020).

Table 3. Summary of Watershed Precipitation and Estimated Flow by Return Interval1

Mean Annual 2-year flow 10-year 25-year Maximum Precipitation (cubic foot per flow flow 100-year Elevation Watershed (MAP, inches) second, cfs) (cfs) (cfs) flow (cfs) (ft) Tecolote Creek 24.1 129 782 1,360 2,470 1,363 Bell Canyon Creek2 21.9 125 744 1,260 2,260 3,079 Winchester Canyon 19.4 48 237 367 587 1,840 Creek3

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 32 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 3. Summary of Watershed Precipitation and Estimated Flow by Return Interval1

Mean Annual 2-year flow 10-year 25-year Maximum Precipitation (cubic foot per flow flow 100-year Elevation Watershed (MAP, inches) second, cfs) (cfs) (cfs) flow (cfs) (ft) Ellwood Canyon 23.8 96 554 939 1,660 -- Creek4 Devereux Creek 16.7 36 164 241 364 163 El Encanto Creek 17.0 38 177 262 400 561 Glen Annie Creek 20.5 109 622 1,030 1,800 3,078 Los Carneros 20.8 87 480 786 1,340 2,946 Creek San Pedro Creek 21.4 98 555 922 1,600 2,854 Las Vegas Creek 17.8 57 284 436 696 992 Old San Jose Creek 16.8 13 52 72 100 -- San Jose Creek 22.9 162 1,010 1,760 3,240 3,081 Maria Ygnacio 24.2 208 1,370 2,460 4,690 3,719 Creek 1 Calculations shown are based off of StreamStats: Streamflow Statistics and Spatial Analysis Tools for Water-Resources Applications (https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/). The flow data provided are generated by regional regression curves. 2 Bell Canyon Creek Mean Annual Precipitation (MAP) and flows include the areas of Winchester Canyon and Ellwood Canyon Creeks. 3 Winchester Canyon Creek is a tributary of Bell Canyon Creek. 4 Ellwood Canyon Creek is a tributary to Bell Canyon Creek.

SBCK reviewed available rainfall and stream flow data for City Creeks in 2006 following the historical 1997–1998 El Niño event. Typically, annual flows in the Goleta creeks, dependent on rainfall, mimic the local rainfall totals and both show the influence of these climate cycles. One effect on the Goleta creeks of above normal water-years in a row, one with exceptionally heavy rainfall and the other with an unusually wet spring, was enhanced groundwater inflows. High rainfall years, while noted for large amounts of runoff, also replenish groundwater reservoirs, elevating water tables and increasing dry- season seepage into rivers and creeks. This can be most directly seen in the unusually high flows that follow a wet winter, but there is also a carry-over of higher flows into subsequent years (Leydecker 2006). The opposite is expected to occur during a drought, such as displayed for the 2004 to 2006, and more recently the 2012 to 2016 drought, which also exhibited higher than normal temperatures and a significant El Niño event in 2015 to 2016, similar to the 1997 to 1998 El Niño event in regards to elevated ocean temperatures in the eastern Pacific Ocean, but did not produce nearly the same amount of rainfall (11.10 inches or 61% of normal).

The magnitude of surface flow through the twelve City creeks is controlled largely by rainfall duration, intensity, watershed conditions (e.g., dry or saturated, vegetated or barren, permeable or impermeable), creek/conveyance conditions (e.g., open or restricted channel/culvert, substrate composition, bank stability), and subsequent high rainfall years or the opposite, prolonged drought, and groundwater basin levels. Long, low-intensity rainfall events may produce substantial flow volumetrically, but the long temporal distribution of the flow minimizes the potential for flow overtopping the storage capacity of the creeks/conveyance systems. High-intensity rainfall events succeeding multiple smaller rainfall events are more likely to result in flooding, scouring, and

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 33 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA mobilization/transport of pollutants. Timing is also an important factor; the first rainfall after an extended dry period which generates surface flow (referred to as “first flush”) is associated with some of the highest concentrations of pollutants (e.g., sediment, metals, oil and grease, animal waste, trash).

A variety of watershed conditions drive magnitude and timing of runoff, including, but not limited to, size, storage, permeability, slopes, biotic and abiotic components, vegetation, and others. Rainfall captured in the upper watershed, whether in ponds, vegetation, soil moisture, or groundwater, is considered storage. Increased storage can be associated with reduced discharge and a longer runoff response time under certain conditions. In addition, a watershed’s permeability is a major indicator of its ability to capture and store water in its substrates and vegetation. Increased impermeable surfaces (e.g., streets, commercial, residential land use) reduce the water storage capacity of a watershed, increase total runoff volume in dry and wet seasons, and reduce the runoff response time. These conditions are associated with higher intensity flood events (Figure 5, Flood Hazard Zones).

Groundwater

One effect on the Goleta creeks of two good water-years in a row, one with exceptionally heavy rainfall and the other with an unusually wet spring, was enhanced groundwater inflows. Wet years, while noted for large amounts of runoff, also replenish groundwater reservoirs, elevating water tables and increasing dry-season seepage into rivers and creeks. This can be most directly seen in the unusually high flows that follow a wet winter, but there is also a carry-over of higher flows into subsequent years. Exhibit 1, Annual Water Year Rainfall, compares annual rainfall and runoff for each year from 1998 through 2006 for three Goleta sampling locations with gauging stations (USGS-NWIS) in the upper panel, but only April through September flows in the lower. Dry-season flows show little of the rough proportionality between runoff and rainfall visible in the annual totals and 2006 was characterized by markedly high summer flows.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 34 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

50 50 rainfall Atascadero 40 40 M.Ygnacio S. Jose 30 30

20 20

Runoff (inches) Rainfall Rainfall (inches)

10 10

0 0 mean 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

50 10 rainfall Atascadero 40 M.Ygnacio 8 S. Jose 30 6

20 4 rainfall rainfall (inches)

10 2 average Apr.-Sept. flow (cfs) average

0 0 mean 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Exhibit 1. Annual Water Year Rainfall. Annual water year rainfall (Santa Barbara/Goleta) is plotted for the 1997–1998 to 2005-2006 rain year. Annual runoff (in inches) for the three USGS gauging stations in the Goleta Slough watershed is shown on the right-hand axis in the upper panel, and the average April to September flow (in cubic feet per second, cfs) in the lower. The horizontal line represents the mean annual rainfall of 18 inches. Dry-season flows in 2006 were higher than in any year since 1998 (flow data from http://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/ca/nwis/monthly/)(Leydecker 2006).

Appreciable rainfall was directly responsible for some of the increased April and May runoff, but flows in the months that followed were also higher than might have been expected. Measurements of the depth to the water-table as recorded from wells provides some additional insight into groundwater variations and how they might influence seepage into local creeks. Data from two types of wells (USGS-NWIS), shallow wells that reflect annual variations in rainfall and the seasonal response that

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 35 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA follows, and deeper wells that record long-term trends, are shown in Exhibit 2, Well Water Levels. Only limited amounts of data for 2006 is as yet available but it clearly shows that shallow water-table levels remained high while deeper levels continued a long-term increase begun around 1991. These increases, aided by unusually heavy late-Spring rains, made 2006 a year with exceptional high dry- season flows.

0 HILLSIDE HOUSE - REAR (SHAL) FIGUEROA & CARRILLO (II)

623 SUTTON AVE. (II) 812 WEST VICTORIA (SHAL)

5

10

15 water level below surface (ft)

20 Jan-97 Jan-98 Jan-99 Jan-00 Jan-01 Jan-02 Jan-03 Jan-04 Jan-05 Jan-06

0

20

40

60

80

nr. Cathedral Oaks and Fairview 100

between Cathedral Oaks & University water level below surface (ft) north of Hollister at Fairview 120 Jan-71 Jan-76 Jan-81 Jan-86 Jan-91 Jan-96 Jan-01 Jan-06

Exhibit 2. Well Water Levels. Water levels in shallow Santa Barbara City wells (upper panel) and in deeper wells located in the upper Goleta area (lower panel) (USGS-NWIS). By early summer in 2006, shallow water-table levels, while not as high as in the spring of 2005, had reached levels last seen in 2001. Deeper wells, in contrast, do not reflect year to year variations in rainfall, but exhibit the overall trend of increased rainfall seen since 1991 (cf. Figure 3 in Leydecker 2006). These too show an increase in 2006 over previous groundwater levels.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 36 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

4.3.3.3 Climate Change

Climate change refers to any significant change in measures of climate—such as temperature, precipitation, or wind patterns—lasting for an extended period of time (decades or longer). Many factors, both natural and human, can cause these changes, including variations in the Sun’s energy reaching Earth, changes in the reflectivity of Earth’s atmosphere and surface, and changes in the greenhouse effect, which affects the amount of heat retained by Earth’s atmosphere (EPA 2017). The greenhouse effect is the trapping and build-up of heat in the atmosphere (troposphere) near the Earth’s surface. The greenhouse effect is a natural process that contributes to regulating the Earth’s temperature. Human activities that emit additional greenhouse gases increase the amount of infrared radiation that gets absorbed before escaping into space, thus enhancing the greenhouse effect and causing the Earth’s surface temperature to rise. A warming of about 0.2°C (0.36°F) per decade is projected, and there are identifiable signs that global warming could be taking place. Current and future climate change impacts to various resources areas is discussed in more detail in the Safeguarding California: Reducing Climate Risk (CNRA 2018).

As related to city-wide creeks and resources, climate change may result in the following effects: more drastic and unpredictable precipitation and weather patterns; altered timing, form, amount of precipitation, runoff patterns, and frequency and severity of precipitation events; extreme weather events that range from severe flooding to extreme drought, to destructive storm events; increased erosion; significant shifts in water availably and water quality; increased water temperatures, thereby affecting animal populations sensitive to changes in water temperature; changes in pollinator lifecycles; temperature fluctuations, including extreme heat stress and decreased chill hours; increased risks from invasive species and weeds; species migration range shift and novel combinations of species; pathogens, parasites and disease; extinction risks; changes in the timing of seasonal life-cycle events; food web disruptions; threshold effects (i.e., a change in the ecosystem that results in a “tipping point” beyond which irreversible damage or loss has occurs); and an overall increase in wildfire risks, which affect watershed and water quality impacts as well as loss of fish and wildlife habitat and decreased carbon absorption. 4.3.3.4 Sea-Level Rise

Sea level rise, changing ocean conditions and other climate change stressors are likely to exacerbate long-standing challenges related to ocean and coastal ecosystems in addition to threatening people and infrastructure located along the California coastline and in coastal communities. Sea level rise in addition to more frequent and severe coastal storms and erosion are threatening vital infrastructure such as roads, bridges, power plants, ports and airports, gasoline pipes, and emergency facilities as well as negatively impacting the coastal recreational assets such as beaches and tidal wetlands. Water quality and ocean acidification threaten the abundance of seafood and other plant and wildlife habitats throughout California and globally. The 2015 Goleta Slough Area Sea Level Rise and Management Plan (GSMC 2015), re-evaluates the Goleta Slough study area and assesses vulnerability and risk to environmental and human resources, and recommends policies and potential adaptation strategies.

Creeks and Watershed Management Plan 37 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

4.3.3.5 Water Quality

Beneficial Uses and Water Quality Objectives

In addition to impacts to runoff magnitude and timing, modifications through the watershed overview area have also impacted the beneficial uses and baseline water quality within the City’s creeks (Figure 6, Hydrologic Resources). The Central Coast RWQCB has established Beneficial Uses and Water Quality Objectives for the major water bodies in this region (RWQCB 2019). Eight of the twelve creeks in the City are assigned individual Beneficial Uses in the RWQCB’s Basin Plan, including: Tecolote, Devereux, Glen Annie, Los Carneros, San Pedro, Las Vegas, San Jose, and Maria Ygnacio. Surface water bodies without specific designations in the Basin Plan (Bell, Winchester, Ellwood, and El Encanto) are assigned Beneficial Uses for municipal and domestic water supply, and protection of both recreation and aquatic life.

The following Beneficial Uses, fully defined in Appendix D, Beneficial Use, Water Quality, and Pollutant Definitions, have been designated for some or all the eight creeks in the 2019 Basin Plan:

• Municipal and Domestic Supply (MUN) • Agricultural Supply (AGR) • Industrial Process Supply (PROC) • Industrial Service Supply (IND) • Groundwater Recharge (GWR) • Fresh Water Replenishment (FRSH) • Water Contact Recreation (REC-1) • Non-Contact Water Recreation (REC-2) • Commercial and Sport Fishing (COMM) • Warm Fresh Water Habitat (WARM) • Cold Fresh Water Habitat (COLD) • Estuarine Habitat (EST) • Wildlife Habitat (WILD) • Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species (RARE) • Migration of Aquatic Organisms (MIGR) • Spawning, Reproduction, and/or Early Development (SPWN)

Healthy riparian corridors are necessary for maintaining many of the Beneficial Uses, as well as for improving water quality within the creek. This includes regulation of temperature (shade), increasing dissolved oxygen, removal of biostimulatory substances (e.g., nitrogen, phosphorus), and reducing sediment loads and pollutants carried downstream (e.g., reduce channel/bank erosion, increase channel roughness which promotes deposition of suspended material). Baseline water quality objectives (WQOs) for all inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries (including lagoons) are also established in the Basin Plan. The WQOs are numeric and/or qualitative targets established by the Regional Board which are required to preserve the Beneficial Uses and prevent nuisances within the creeks. All inland waters are subjected to general WQOs Specific WQOs are associated with different Beneficial Uses (e.g., there are more stringent numeric thresholds for bacteria for Water Contact Recreation than there are for Non-Contact Water Recreation). The WQOs applicable to City creeks are fully defined in Appendix D. Individual WQOs that are not met in the City creeks are defined within each creek’s description in Section 4.3.6, Individual Creek Characteristics.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 38 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

To better understand the specific type of pollutants impacting water quality within City creeks, the City contracts with the Santa Barbara Channelkeeper’s (SBCK) Stream Team citizen science program (Stream Team) for monthly water monitoring. Data collected by the Stream Team is evaluated on an ongoing basis to inform important pollution prevention programs and water resource management decisions. SBCK data serves as an important resource for the City and other stakeholders to evaluate the need for local water pollution prevention and restoration efforts under Section E.13.b TMDL of the General Permit. There are 25 monitoring sites that are sampled by the Stream Team within City creeks on a monthly basis. The City receives water quality data from SBCK and this is included in the City’s annual MS4 report. Portable meters were used to record measurements for dissolved oxygen, conductivity, pH, turbidity, and temperature. Water samples are collected and submitted to the University of California Santa Barbara’s Long Term Ecological Research Project (LTER) for analysis to detect nitrate and phosphate. Samples are also analyzed for basic indicator bacteria (E. coli and total coliforms) by SBCK.

Samples from lagoon sites are also analyzed for enterococcus indicator bacteria by SBCK. Monitoring does not occur when a surface flows is not present a creek.

The City’s Dry Weather Sampling of outfalls in priority areas complement SBCK’s program by aiding in pinpointing sources of pollution from outfalls. This proactive sampling for required parameters verifies that action levels are not exceeded. In accordance with Section E.9c(i) of the General Permit, the City annually conducts dry weather sampling (72 hours after the last rain event) in areas of the City identified as priority areas for illicit discharges. In accordance with Section E.9.a(ii)(c). of the General Permit, these priority areas include:

1) Areas with older infrastructure that are more likely to have illegal connections and a history of sewer overflows or cross-connections 2) Industrial, commercial, or mixed-use areas 3) Areas with a history of past illicit discharges 4) Areas with a history of illegal dumping 5) Areas with onsite sewage disposal systems 6) Areas upstream of sensitive water bodies 7) Areas that drain to outfalls greater than 36 inches that directly discharge to the ocean 8) Other areas that are likely to have illicit discharges

The City of Goleta participates in a regional 303(d) monitoring program. The City has an agreement with the County of Santa Barbara and the partner cities of Carpinteria, Buellton and Solvang to share the cost of water quality monitoring required by the Central Coast RWQCB, pursuant to Section E.13(c) of the General Permit. The purpose of the cost-sharing agreement is to reduce the cost to each partner city for complying with the same permit requirement by combining efforts with a single sampling program. The data collected is used in the Load Prioritization and Reduction Model. The City of Goleta has two sampling sites, one industrial and one commercial that are sampled up to 8 times per year during qualifying storms during the rainy season. Existing Water Quality Impairments

Several creeks that flow through the City are identified as impaired for specific water quality parameters primarily related to non-point source pollutants. Non-point source pollutants are

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 39 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA pollutants generated over broad areas without a single identifiable discharge point to water, such as agricultural and urban land uses. Point-source pollutants are those with identifiable discharge points, such as wastewater treatment facilities or industrial waste discharges. Most of the known pollutants within the watershed overview area are identified on the State’s 303(d)2 list which is used to identify impaired water bodies and establish Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) thresholds for the known pollutants to reach WQOs. In addition to the State’s 303(d) list, several other pollutants have been identified in the creeks by SBCK. The following pollutants, fully described in Appendix D, have been identified within City creeks:

• Biostimulatory substances (SBCK) • Chloride / Sodium (State 303d) • Bacteria (State 303(d)) • Nitrate (State 303(d)) • Oxygen (State 303(d) & SBCK) • Specific Conductivity (State 303(d)) • Temperature (State 303(d)) • Toxicity (State 303(d)) • pH (State 303(d) & SBCK) • Trash (SBCK) 4.3.4 Channel Geomorphology

Most of the watersheds that flow through the City of Goleta have headwater areas within the Santa Ynez mountains north of the City (with the exception of Devereux creek and most of El Encanto creek, which drain mostly lower elevation marine terrace and alluvial fan areas, as described below). The Santa Ynez Mountains are composed primarily of sandstone, mudstone, and shale units that uplifted as part of the formation of the Transverse Range system of southern California (Minor et al. 2009). The highest elevations reach 3,000 feet above sea level. The creeks slope steeply to the Pacific Ocean within about 6 miles of straight-line distance.

The City itself sits almost entirely on alluvial fan material that has been deposited at the mouth of the various canyons that drain the mountains, composed of layered, poorly consolidated silt, sand, and gravel. Higher-elevation fan deposits were dissected and re-worked by more modern creeks, associated with varying rates of mountain uplift (and basin down-warping), and in response to changes in sea level over time.

Flow from Maria Ygnacio, San Jose, Las Vegas, San Pedro, Los Carneros, and Glen Annie creeks all ultimately converge on and drain into Goleta Slough. This coalescing drainage pattern is driven by the presence of uplifted marine terrace deposits present between the Goleta Valley and the Pacific Ocean. Devereux and El Encanto creeks both drain to Devereux Slough, which is similarly bounded by marine

2 A list of impaired water bodies maintained by the state and regional water quality control boards which characterizes reason for listing, source of impairment (if known), total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for associated pollutants, and target date for removal from 303(d) list (as authorized under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act). Creek and Watershed Management Plan 40 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA terrace deposits. Bell Canyon and Tecolote Creeks drain to separate, smaller lagoons bounded by marine terraces as well.

Near the face of the mountain range in the northern part of the City, the creeks have generally downcut into the surrounding terrace deposits by as much as 20 to 30 feet. This is, in part, a response to tectonic uplift and adjustments to changes in sea-level but was likely accentuated by increases in runoff from the upper watershed as land was converted to extensive ranching and agriculture with the arrival of European settlers.

Under pre-settlement conditions, the creeks likely would have transitioned from well-defined channels near the mountain face (inset between adjacent older terrace deposits) to poorly defined, shallow channels at lower elevations of the fan. These channels would have been free to spread, shift and change position over time, especially during large floods, and in response to landslides, and debris/mudflow events, such as after wildfires. As land in the area was converted to agricultural uses, the lower segments of the watersheds that run through Goleta (especially those with less well-defined channels) were increasingly confined and routed to constructed agricultural ditches. Ultimately, many of these agricultural drainages became the modern alignments of the creek channels seen within the City today (most notably near and south of the Highway 101 corridor). Table 4, Summary of Geomorphic Conditions for Segments of Creeks Within City, provides a summary of geomorphology observations in the respective creeks.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 41 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

INTENTIONALLY LET BLANK

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 42 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 4. Summary of Geomorphic Conditions for Segments of Creeks Within City

2

1

3 6

during during

7 5 10

12 4

50

8 9 11

3 15 ) height (ft, (ft, height

14 yes/no

Goleta Creeks present Water canvass geomorphic ( Notes Channel bedform Channel planform Channel composition Bed Geological environment D Estimated conditions Bank (stable/eroding) incision Bed (prior/ongoing) Bank estimated) (ft, width Corridor estimated) depth channel Active estimated) (ft, (ft, width channel Active estimated) (high, cover Riparian low) medium, wood Instream (yes/no)1 (HWM, mark water High ft) Maria Ygnacio Creek Maria Ygnacio Creek meandering single cobble, alluvial cobble stable prior 20 40 4 30-35 medium no 4 no Site visit 9/30/2019; downstream of Hwy 101 and pool-riffle threaded boulder concrete channel under Hwy railroad tracks 101 and UPRR; 7-8' scour hole at downstream end of concrete, sand/cobble/boulder deposition downstream of scour hole; at the Maria Ygnacio-San Antonio creek confluence: Maria Ygnacio has a sandy bed whereas San Antonio has a cobble bed Maria Ygnacio Creek at bike planebed single cobble, alluvial cobble stable prior 20 40-50 1 12-15 high -- -- no Site visit 11/6/2019; bike trail bridge off of Lassen threaded boulder path bridge, good riparian between San Simeon and corridor, cobble-bedded, Tehama fence revetment on right bank Maria Ygnacio Creek planebed single sand alluvial sand stable prior 20 40-50 1 12-15 high no -- no Site visit 11/6/2019; downstream of Hollister threaded concrete culvert and apron at Avenue bridge; boulders downstream of apron appear to prevent scour; sandy, well-shaded channel thereafter San Jose Creek San Jose Creek at bike trail planebed single cobble, alluvial large stable prior 10 30-35 1-2 8-10 medium no -- no Site visit 11/6/2019; bridge off of Merida near threaded boulder cobble channel bed materials large Agana Drive cobbles to small boulders; at bridge three large outfall pipes

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 43 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 4. Summary of Geomorphic Conditions for Segments of Creeks Within City

2

1

3 6

during during

7 5 10

12 4

50

8 9 11

3 15 ) height (ft, (ft, height

14 yes/no

Goleta Creeks present Water canvass geomorphic ( Notes Channel bedform Channel planform Channel composition Bed Geological environment D Estimated conditions Bank (stable/eroding) incision Bed (prior/ongoing) Bank estimated) (ft, width Corridor estimated) depth channel Active estimated) (ft, (ft, width channel Active estimated) (high, cover Riparian low) medium, wood Instream (yes/no)1 (HWM, mark water High ft) San Jose Creek at Berkeley planebed single cobble, alluvial large stable prior 15-20 60 2 10-15 high yes -- no Site visit 11/6/2019; fencing Road footpath bridge threaded boulder cobble on left bank, some bank protection at undercut bank as creek bends, constricted upstream 10-15 total width opens up downstream to twice the width; right bank terrace with sycamore near channel, no trees inside fencing on left bank San Jose Creek off of bike meandering single small alluvial small eroding ongoing 10 50 2-3 20-25 high yes -- no Site visit 11/6/2019; flow trail at south end of pool-riffle threaded cobble cobble against fence revetment, Merida/Hanna Drive to small fencing and tree roots are boulder slowing erosion along the outer bend channel right, cobble/small boulder bar on inner bend channel left; arundo on left bank San Jose Creek upstream of meandering multi- sand, alluvial cobble eroding ongoing 15 46 1.5 13 high no 7 no Site visit 9/30/2019; sandy, Calle Real pool-riffle threaded cobble cobbly mix with concrete chunks, cobble bar/floodplain bench on channel right; upstream fence revetment with 9' of lateral right bank erosion, 3-4 ft of downcutting at erosion face; minimum 250 feet of fence extending upstream; sycamore, eucalyptus

Creek and Watershed Management Plant 44 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 4. Summary of Geomorphic Conditions for Segments of Creeks Within City

2

1

3 6

during during

7 5 10

12 4

50

8 9 11

3 15 ) height (ft, (ft, height

14 yes/no

Goleta Creeks present Water canvass geomorphic ( Notes Channel bedform Channel planform Channel composition Bed Geological environment D Estimated conditions Bank (stable/eroding) incision Bed (prior/ongoing) Bank estimated) (ft, width Corridor estimated) depth channel Active estimated) (ft, (ft, width channel Active estimated) (high, cover Riparian low) medium, wood Instream (yes/no)1 (HWM, mark water High ft) San Jose Creek upstream of straight single sand, alluvial sand stable slight 10.5 40 1.75 20 high yes 6.5 no Site visit 9/30/2019; highly Hollister Avenue pool-riffle threaded gravel, ongoing incised but relatively stable cobble currently; 50+ year oak likely at channel edge when young, now 2.4 feet above channel bed; cut tree trunks likely inducing some localized scour; tree root structure at channel surface providing stability, channel bed moist, arundo present San Jose Creek downstream artificial artificial sand, artificial -- artificial artificial 15 50 -- 50 none no -- no Site visit 9/30/2019; of Hollister Avenue leaf transition from concrete litter trapezoid at bridge to articulated pavers and fish passage structures, standing water from culvert otherwise dry, fenced no access San Jose Creek flood control artificial artificial sand -- very artificial artificial 10 50 - - none no -- no Site visit 09/30/2019; sandy concrete channel near tidal fine deposition above concrete influence pavers on channel right, some sediment accumulation in wooden fish passage structure areas on channel left Old San Jose Creek Old San Jose Creek planebed single silt, alluvial very stable -- 4 15 0.5 3-4 medium no -- no Site visit 11/6/2019; mostly downstream of Hollister threaded sand fine buried 30" pipe at Hollister is upstream end of channel; evidence of homeless encampment; willow, oak, sycamore on terrace; earthen engineered channel, dry

Creek and Watershed Management Plant 45 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 4. Summary of Geomorphic Conditions for Segments of Creeks Within City

2

1

3 6

during during

7 5 10

12 4

50

8 9 11

3 15 ) height (ft, (ft, height

14 yes/no

Goleta Creeks present Water canvass geomorphic ( Notes Channel bedform Channel planform Channel composition Bed Geological environment D Estimated conditions Bank (stable/eroding) incision Bed (prior/ongoing) Bank estimated) (ft, width Corridor estimated) depth channel Active estimated) (ft, (ft, width channel Active estimated) (high, cover Riparian low) medium, wood Instream (yes/no)1 (HWM, mark water High ft) Old San Jose Creek, bridge at planebed single silt, alluvial very stable -- 6 25 1 10 medium yes -- no Site visit 11/6/2019; some north end of Kellogg Way threaded sand fine gravels under bridge, sycamore leaves cover bed, willow in channel ~10 years old; boulder bank protection on left bank; earthen engineered channel, dry Old San Jose east of Daley planebed single sandy alluvial fine stable -- 6 60 2 10-15 high yes -- no Site visit 11/6/2019; dry, and Matthews Street threaded mature sycamore and willows, lots of arundo; bed covered in leaves throughout; earthen engineered channel Las Vegas Creek Las Vegas Creek at Stow artificial artificial concrete artificial - stable -- 4 21 - 9 low no -- no Site visit 10/01/2019; Canyon Road concrete trapezoidal channel upstream of bridge, with concrete apron (embedded with small boulders for roughness) downstream; 3.5 ft scour hole at downstream end of apron, earthen engineered channel thereafter Las Vegas Creek at Berkeley planebed multi- sand, alluvial coarse stable slight 9 45 1.5 9 low -- 2 no Site visit 10/01/2019; Road footbridge threaded gravel sand ongoing boulder grade control 70' downstream of footbridge with slight erosion on left bank; incision of inset channel (up to 2') for about 40' upstream of boulders; fencing both sides, no trees inside fencing; earthen engineered channel

Creek and Watershed Management Plant 46 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 4. Summary of Geomorphic Conditions for Segments of Creeks Within City

2

1

3 6

during during

7 5 10

12 4

50

8 9 11

3 15 ) height (ft, (ft, height

14 yes/no

Goleta Creeks present Water canvass geomorphic ( Notes Channel bedform Channel planform Channel composition Bed Geological environment D Estimated conditions Bank (stable/eroding) incision Bed (prior/ongoing) Bank estimated) (ft, width Corridor estimated) depth channel Active estimated) (ft, (ft, width channel Active estimated) (high, cover Riparian low) medium, wood Instream (yes/no)1 (HWM, mark water High ft) Las Vegas Creek at Calle straight planebed sand alluvial sand stable -- 6 33 3 17 high yes -- no Site visit 10/01/2019; Real hardware store pool-riffle channel appears functional, roots in channel bed provide stability, wood and smaller organic materials create structure on channel bed, some gravel/cobbles no flow, right bank terrace San Pedro Creek San Pedro Creek planebed single sand alluvial sand stable prior 15-20 100 1 10 high yes -- no Site visit 7/29/2019; downstream of Cathedral threaded terrace upstream of bridge, left bank Oaks Road protection, natural right bank; downstream of bridge, left bank protection and under bridge, steep right bank, culvert weir, fencing both sides; downstream wetland plants and left bank gravel bar San Pedro Creek upstream straight single sand, alluvial sand stable prior 20 60 2 8 high no -- yes Site visit 10/01/2019; ~ of Stowe Canyon Road pool-riffle threaded gravel terrace 250 upstream of bridge, gravel/sand bed with some riffle-pool morphology, pools are shallow, 5-ft concrete grade control drop, fence revetment with no trees within channel and hanging culverts, steep natural banks; at bridge, USGS gage; similar conditions downstream of bridge as upstream

Creek and Watershed Management Plant 47 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 4. Summary of Geomorphic Conditions for Segments of Creeks Within City

2

1

3 6

during during

7 5 10

12 4

50

8 9 11

3 15 ) height (ft, (ft, height

14 yes/no

Goleta Creeks present Water canvass geomorphic ( Notes Channel bedform Channel planform Channel composition Bed Geological environment D Estimated conditions Bank (stable/eroding) incision Bed (prior/ongoing) Bank estimated) (ft, width Corridor estimated) depth channel Active estimated) (ft, (ft, width channel Active estimated) (high, cover Riparian low) medium, wood Instream (yes/no)1 (HWM, mark water High ft) San Pedro Creek at straight single sand, alluvial sand stable prior 20 60 1.5 8 high no -- no Site visit 10/01/2019; good Covington footpath bridge pool-riffle threaded gravel riparian cover, no fence revetment upstream or downstream of footbridge; steep earthen banks (likely engineered), dry channel San Pedro Creek upstream artificial artificial concrete artificial - stable prior 7 31 -- 31 low no -- no Site visit 10/01/2019; of Calle Real bridge trapezoidal channel with either fish passage or energy dissipation infrastructure, no upstream baffles if fish passage; concrete persists in upstream direction, pipe filled with concrete on right bank San Pedro Creek at FedEx at planebed single mud alluvial very stable prior 8 60 2 40 medium no 2 yes Site visit 10/01/2019; airport threaded fine muddy bottom, water downstream, cattails in- channel and willows along banks; potential tidal influence Los Carneros Creek Los Carneros Creek at straight single -- alluvium -- stable prior 25 70 1 8 high -- 2 yes Site visit 10/1/2019; no Cathedral Oaks pool-riffle threaded access to channel, all estimates from bridge; no excessive sedimentation in creek, baseflow very low ~0.05 cfs, annual veg in channel Los Carneros Creek straight single -- alluvium -- stable prior -- 12 1 6-12 high -- -- yes Site visit 10/1/2019; upstream of N. Los Carneros pool-riffle threaded excellent riparian cover; Road algae and veg growth in pools; low sediment deposition, tree roots stabilizing channel bars

Creek and Watershed Management Plant 48 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 4. Summary of Geomorphic Conditions for Segments of Creeks Within City

2

1

3 6

during during

7 5 10

12 4

50

8 9 11

3 15 ) height (ft, (ft, height

14 yes/no

Goleta Creeks present Water canvass geomorphic ( Notes Channel bedform Channel planform Channel composition Bed Geological environment D Estimated conditions Bank (stable/eroding) incision Bed (prior/ongoing) Bank estimated) (ft, width Corridor estimated) depth channel Active estimated) (ft, (ft, width channel Active estimated) (high, cover Riparian low) medium, wood Instream (yes/no)1 (HWM, mark water High ft) Los Carneros Creek concrete concrete concrete artificial -- stable -- 7 35 -- 22 low -- -- yes Site visit 10/1/2019; flow downstream of N. Los trickling through algae Carneros Road growth, very little sediment in channel, concrete trapezoidal channel between Los Carneros Rd and Highway 101 off ramp Glen Annie Creek Glen Annie Creek upstream meandering single fine alluvial fine stable prior -- 34 1 8-10 high no 4 yes Site visit 10/1/2019; similar of Los Carneros Drive pool-riffle threaded sand terrace conditions to Los Carneros channel upstream of Los Arenos, baseflow present (long pools, mostly less than 1'deep, occasionally deeper) with meander. Bars stabilized by vegetation and root mats; several concrete sills across channel upstream of bridge; fine sediment deposition behind fence revetment at bottom of banks; abundant willow cover even inside fencing Glen Annie Creek upstream pool single fine alluvial - mostly prior 40 200 2.5 9 high -- -- yes Site visit 10/1/2019; of Glen Annie Drive threaded sand, terrace stable cobbles/boulders further mud upstream; very wide shallow bank on left side of channel; thin understory, good shading; long pools; RB gets shallower further upstream then steeper upstream of bedrock outcrop; pool 2 ft deep, wetted channel 9 ft wide, very slow flow ~20 gpm

Creek and Watershed Management Plant 49 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 4. Summary of Geomorphic Conditions for Segments of Creeks Within City

2

1

3 6

during during

7 5 10

12 4

50

8 9 11

3 15 ) height (ft, (ft, height

14 yes/no

Goleta Creeks present Water canvass geomorphic ( Notes Channel bedform Channel planform Channel composition Bed Geological environment D Estimated conditions Bank (stable/eroding) incision Bed (prior/ongoing) Bank estimated) (ft, width Corridor estimated) depth channel Active estimated) (ft, (ft, width channel Active estimated) (high, cover Riparian low) medium, wood Instream (yes/no)1 (HWM, mark water High ft) Glen Annie Creek at pool single silty, alluvial fine stable prior 10 50 1-2 8-12 medium no -- yes no trees inside fence Raytheon Corp., Castilian threaded clayey because of flood scour; Drive potentially clayey banks; silt deposits behind fence on right bank; path on left bank Glen Annie Creek upstream planebed multi- sand, alluvial fine stable prior 20 40 1 30 high no -- yes Site visit 11/13/2019; two of Hollister Avenue threaded silt active channel components upstream of culvert with vegetated sandy island in middle; dry in right bank culvert, left bank culvert has water; short fence revetment on right bank; ~ 2 ft HWM of sand on bar near fence Glen Annie Creek at S. Los concrete single gravel artificial gravel stable -- 12 -- 0.2 4 -- no -- yes Site visit 11/13/2019; 3' Carneros Road culvert threaded fence revetment and stormwater outfalls on both sides concreted channel; left bank concrete apron for the outfall has collapsed, right bank apron still intact Glen Annie Creek 300' pool single silt, alluvial fine stable prior 15 40 1-3 5-10 medium no -- yes Site visit 11/13/2019; sandy upstream of Hollister Avenue threaded sand deposits on right bank downstream of S. Los Carneros road; hydrophilic sedge in channel on right bank next to active channel; fence revetment 3' tall on left bank Glen Annie Creek 150' meandering multi- silt alluvial fine stable prior 12-15 40 1 6 high yes -- yes Site visit 11/13/2019; single upstream of Hollister Avenue pool-riffle threaded threaded at lower flows but evidence of multi-threaded at higher flows; 2' fence looks short compared to other sites; high flow terrace on left bank; willows and oaks

Creek and Watershed Management Plant 50 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 4. Summary of Geomorphic Conditions for Segments of Creeks Within City

2

1

3 6

during during

7 5 10

12 4

50

8 9 11

3 15 ) height (ft, (ft, height

14 yes/no

Goleta Creeks present Water canvass geomorphic ( Notes Channel bedform Channel planform Channel composition Bed Geological environment D Estimated conditions Bank (stable/eroding) incision Bed (prior/ongoing) Bank estimated) (ft, width Corridor estimated) depth channel Active estimated) (ft, (ft, width channel Active estimated) (high, cover Riparian low) medium, wood Instream (yes/no)1 (HWM, mark water High ft) El Encanto Creek El Encanto Creek at meandering single silt alluvial very eroding ongoing 8 25 1 6 low Y -- no Site visit 11/13/2019; most Evergreen and Park, across pool-riffle threaded fine of creek has good riparian footbridge into park cover but at point of data collection no trees and incised, active erosion at outer extent of channel bend El Encanto Creek at bridge in meandering single -- alluvial -- stable prior 5 100 0.5 4-6 high yes -- yes Site visit 10/2/2019; thick disc golf course pool-riffle threaded terrace understory with willows, pooled water with no noticeable flow; concrete crossing at footpath with 3' culvert; single thread but poorly defined channel El Encanto Creek at planebed single -- alluvial -- stable prior 6 45 2 15 high yes -- yes Site visit 11/13/2019; good underground culvert behind threaded riparian cover, wood in houses on Alpine Drive channel, wetted channel and ponded at culvert; left bank terrace with houses, right bank open hillslope El Encanto Creek at artificial artificial concrete artificial - stable prior 6 21 6 9 none - -- yes Site visit 10/2/2019; open Davenport Road space on both sides of concreted creek but very few trees along left bank downstream of Davenport and none on right bank; trickle of baseflow through algae Devereux Creek Devereux Creek at Pebble straight single sand sand coarse stable prior 2-3 40 2 6 high no 2-3 no Site visit 10/2/2019; sandy Beach Drive and Hollister pool-riffle threaded dune sand channel bed with little Avenue terrace geomorphic structure; cohesive, silty banks up to 3 feet; 42" pipe outfall under Hollister

Creek and Watershed Management Plant 51 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 4. Summary of Geomorphic Conditions for Segments of Creeks Within City

2

1

3 6

during during

7 5 10

12 4

50

8 9 11

3 15 ) height (ft, (ft, height

14 yes/no

Goleta Creeks present Water canvass geomorphic ( Notes Channel bedform Channel planform Channel composition Bed Geological environment D Estimated conditions Bank (stable/eroding) incision Bed (prior/ongoing) Bank estimated) (ft, width Corridor estimated) depth channel Active estimated) (ft, (ft, width channel Active estimated) (high, cover Riparian low) medium, wood Instream (yes/no)1 (HWM, mark water High ft) Devereux Creek at Hollister straight single sand, sand coarse stable prior 4 6 1 1.5 high no 1.7 no Site visit 10/2/2019; 4x4 Avenue and Sandpiper Golf pool-riffle threaded clay dune sand single box culvert under Course terrace Hollister, eucalyptus then open at golf course edge Devereux Creek at Butterfly straight single sand sand coarse stable prior 2 6 1 2-3 high yes 2 no Site visit 10/2/2019; roots Preserve pool-riffle threaded dune sand in the channel bed create terrace riffles and small scour holes in sandy substrate; channel dissipates at confluence with Devereaux Creek; Devereaux Creek has an undefined/discontinuous channel form through open space between end of golf course and next downstream grove of eucalyptus Bell Canyon Creek (including tributary Ellwood Canyon and Winchester Canyon creeks) Ellwood Canyon Creek Ellwood Canyon Creek meandering single sand- alluvial pebble stable prior 20 45 2 13 medium yes 2 yes Site visit 10/2/2019; upstream of confluence with pool-riffle threaded gravel terrace/b siltstone/shale bedrock on Winchester Canyon Creek edrock right bank, sycamore on left bank about 6' above channel indicates prior bed incision, boulder bank protection in place downstream on left bank Winchester Canyon Creek Winchester Canyon Creek at meandering single sand alluvial gravel eroding localized 12 30 4.5 24 medium no 4.5 yes Site visit 10/2/2019; confluence with Ellwood pool-riffle threaded ongoing generally same conditions as Canyon Creek downstream, bar with cobble, gravels, roots in channel, aquatic vegetation in water Winchester Canyon Creek meandering single sand alluvial gravel eroding localized 12 40 4.5 24 medium no 4.5 yes Site visit 10/2/2019; sand downstream of confluence pool-riffle threaded ongoing terrace; aquatic watercress with Ellwood Canyon Creek vegetation, sandy bed with

Creek and Watershed Management Plant 52 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 4. Summary of Geomorphic Conditions for Segments of Creeks Within City

2

1

3 6

during during

7 5 10

12 4

50

8 9 11

3 15 ) height (ft, (ft, height

14 yes/no

Goleta Creeks present Water canvass geomorphic ( Notes Channel bedform Channel planform Channel composition Bed Geological environment D Estimated conditions Bank (stable/eroding) incision Bed (prior/ongoing) Bank estimated) (ft, width Corridor estimated) depth channel Active estimated) (ft, (ft, width channel Active estimated) (high, cover Riparian low) medium, wood Instream (yes/no)1 (HWM, mark water High ft) few gravels and cobbles; roots in channel bed, boulder bank protection on outer left bank bend Winchester Canyon Creek meandering single sand alluvial gravel eroding localized 12 30 4.5 24 medium no 4.5 yes Site visit 10/2/2019; footbridge between Rio Vista pool-riffle threaded ongoing upstream of bridge generally Drive and San Miguel open same conditions as WC 1&2; space downstream of bridge concrete sill and grade control drops channel down ~4' into culvert with 90- degree angle, runs along Winchester Canyon Road and take another 90 degree turn under the road Bell Canyon Creek Bell Canyon Creek upstream meandering single sand, alluvial sand stable prior 6 50 3 15 high yes -- yes Site visit 10/2/2019; UPRR of bridge on Hollister Avenue pool-riffle threaded gravel, embankment showed signs cobble of rilling erosion (bare, linear erosion patterns on steep embankment); good geomorphic structure, predominantly sand with a few cobbles/small boulders Bell Canyon Creek at lagoon- -- -- sand, alluvial- sand stable -- -- 50 2 -- none yes -- yes Site visit 10/2/2019; sand sand bar interface gravel, ocean bar barrier ~3' high, closed to cobble interface ocean; abundant wood and cobble on landward side of beach at lagoon; on left bank near beach sand bags and wooded wall at terrace slope; lagoon much larger than Tecolote lagoon

Creek and Watershed Management Plant 53 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 4. Summary of Geomorphic Conditions for Segments of Creeks Within City

2

1

3 6

during during

7 5 10

12 4

50

8 9 11

3 15 ) height (ft, (ft, height

14 yes/no

Goleta Creeks present Water canvass geomorphic ( Notes Channel bedform Channel planform Channel composition Bed Geological environment D Estimated conditions Bank (stable/eroding) incision Bed (prior/ongoing) Bank estimated) (ft, width Corridor estimated) depth channel Active estimated) (ft, (ft, width channel Active estimated) (high, cover Riparian low) medium, wood Instream (yes/no)1 (HWM, mark water High ft) Tecolote Creek Tecolote Canyon Creek straight single sand, alluvial sand stable prior 4-6 50-70 1 30 high yes -- yes Site visit 10/2/2019; UPRR downstream of Hollister pool-riffle threaded gravel, slope not eroding; living Avenue cobble sycamore leaning across channel, likely pushed over at high flows, great channel bed structure and riparian shade, broad flat plain on left bank, right bank steeper Tecolote Canyon Creek meandering single sand, alluvial sand stable prior 6 80 4 28 high no 5.5 yes Site visit 10/2/2019; sandy downstream of Bacara pool-riffle threaded gravel bed with sand-gravel bars, Resort footbridge good riparian cover Tecolote Canyon Creek at -- -- sand alluvial- sand stable ------0.5 14.5 none yes - yes Site visit 10/2/2019; lagoon lagoon-sand bar interface ocean ~100' long though curved interface out of sight, 25-30 feet wide, sand bar open to ocean, fresh water outflow, wood throughout estuary, reeds along edge of open lagoon water, kelp in lagoon near sand bar Notes: 1 Channel bedform: Straight pool-riffle (varying deeper-shallower sections of creek bed); meandering pool-riffle (curving channel with deeper-shallower sections); planebed (relatively flat with little to no bed structure); artificial (concrete) 2 Channel planeform: Single-threaded (one flowpath); multi-threaded (multiple flowpaths that may braid together, separate, and come back together); artificial (concrete) 3 Bed composition: Sediment classes in descending size order: boulder, cobble, gravel, sand, silt, clay; artificial (concrete); as listed: dominant size class on the bed, estimated at time of site visit 4 Geological environment: Alluvial (surrounding sediments have been transported by streamflow and deposited in the channel); alluvial terrace (same process as alluvial but channel has cut down substantially into the terrace); artificial (concrete) 5 Estimated D50: The approximate size class of the average (generally most prevalent) sediments 6 Bank conditions (stable/eroding): Stable (generally vegetated with no signs of slumping or disrupted soils, or concrete); eroding (soils slumping, lack of vegetation) 7 Bed incision (prior/ongoing): Prior incision (legacy bed downcutting likely due to past hydromodification actions such as development); ongoing incision (actively eroding under existing conditions) 8 Bank height (ft, estimated): distance from channel bed to top of highest terrace 9 Corridor width (ft, estimated): distance across from top of terrace to top of terrace 10 Active channel depth (ft, estimated): depth or height from the channel bed to where streamflow has carved out a defined break on the bank slope, generally just below the edge of permanent vegetation 11 Active channel width (ft, estimated): width from side to side of a channel where streamflow defines a break in the bank slope, generally just below the edge of permanent vegetation 12 Riparian cover (high, medium, low): relative amount of shade provided by bank vegetation 13 Instream wood (yes/no): yes (wood was observed in the active channel); no (no wood was observed in the active channel) 14 High water mark (HWM, ft): height above bottom of channel of indicators of recent (generally within the last year) peak flow; includes trimlines (erosion or clearing of sediment/organic debris along the channel bank ), organic or non-organic debris caught in trees or fencing or along the banks or adjacent to channel, patches of fine sediment deposited along the edges of the bank, or other indicators of maximum depth of flow 15 Presence of water in the channel (yes/no) that supported aquatic or terrestrial habitat at time of geomorphic canvass.

Creek and Watershed Management Plant 54 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

4.3.5 Biological Resources 4.3.5.1 Vegetation Communities and Land Covers

As shown in Table 5, Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types (Acres), and Figures 7a through 7i, a total of 20 vegetation communities and land cover types were mapped within a 400-foot assessment area centered along the 12 creeks within the City of Goleta. A 400-foot assessment area was used to capture the extent of riparian habitat associated with each creek. Vegetation communities were mapped based on A Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer et al. 2009). An overall description for each of these vegetation communities is provided below.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 55 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 5. Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types (Acres)

Vegetation

2 % of /City /City Community / 1 Total Grand Land Cover Type Acres3 Total3 Global & State State & Global Rank Status Ygnacio Maria / Jose San Jose San Old Vegas Las Pedro San Carneros Los Annie Glen Encanto El Devereux Ellwood/ Bell/ Winchester Canyon Tecolote Vegetative Communities Riparian Arroyo Willow G4 - 7.23 0.15 - 1.83 1.36 - 8.72 4.25 1.12 24.66 4% Thicket S4/ESHA Subtotal - - 7.23 0.15 - 1.83 1.36 - 8.72 4.25 1.12 24.66 4% Native Woodlands and Forests Black G5 S3/- - 3.27 ------3.27 < 1% Cottonwood Forests Coast Live Oak G5 1.09 - 1.32 - 0.11 12.84 2.45 - 1.46 1.25 20.52 3% Woodland S4/ESHA Coast Live Oak – G3 4.69 - 5.28 - - - 9.50 - - 19.47 3% Arroyo Willow S3/ESHA Western G3 - 8.09 0.50 ------0.91 9.50 1% Sycamore S3/ESHA Woodlands Western G3 - 0.11 - 0.16 ------0.28 < 1% Sycamore – S3/ESHA Coast Live Oak Woodland Western G3 - 8.34 - 6.95 10.21 5.22 - - 6.48 - 37.20 6% Sycamore – S3/ESHA Coast Live Oak – Arroyo Willow Subtotal - 5.78 19.82 7.11 7.11 10.31 18.06 11.95 - 7.94 2.16 90.25 14%

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 56 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 5. Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types (Acres)

Vegetation

2 % of /City /City Community / 1 Total Grand Land Cover Type Acres3 Total3 Global & State State & Global Rank Status Ygnacio Maria / Jose San Jose San Old Vegas Las Pedro San Carneros Los Annie Glen Encanto El Devereux Ellwood/ Bell/ Winchester Canyon Tecolote Non-Native Woodlands Eucalyptus -/ESHA ------51.31 2.92 2.06 56.29 8% Woodland Subtotal ------51.31 2.92 2.06 56.29 8% Upland Coastal Sage -/ESHA ------0.49 0.77 3.67 4.93 1% Scrub Coyote Brush G5 S5/------4.16 - - - 4.16 1% Scrub Subtotal ------4.16 0.49 0.77 3.67 9.09 1% Wetland G5 ------1.10 - 1.10 < 1% Cattail Marsh S5/ESHA Emergent -/ESHA ------0.17 - 0.17 < 1% Wetland Subtotal ------1.27 - 1.27 < 1% Grassland Non-Native ------21.28 - - 21.28 3% Grassland (Annual) Non-Native - - - - - 6.62 - - - - - 6.62 1% Grasslands (Maintained) Subtotal - - - - - 6.62 - - 21.28 - - 27.90 4% Other Land Cover Types Agriculture - - - - 3.17 5.40 - - - 2.32 - 10.89 2%

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 57 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 5. Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types (Acres)

Vegetation

2 % of /City /City Community / 1 Total Grand Land Cover Type Acres3 Total3 Global & State State & Global Rank Status Ygnacio Maria / Jose San Jose San Old Vegas Las Pedro San Carneros Los Annie Glen Encanto El Devereux Ellwood/ Bell/ Winchester Canyon Tecolote Beach ------2.81 3.26 6.08 1% Developed - 16.33 104.76 49.00 36.76 28.91 50.81 50.29 65.69 20.27 2.91 425.73 64% Flood Control - - 4.88 0.65 1.25 - 0.40 0.85 - - - 8.03 1% Concrete Channel Open Water - - 1.10 ------0.75 - 1.85 < 1% Unvegetated - - - - 0.40 1.86 - - - - - 2.27 < 1% Subtotal - 16.33 110.74 49.66 41.58 36.17 51.21 51.13 65.69 26.15 6.18 454.84 68% Grand Total - 22.11 137.78 56.92 48.70 54.93 70.62 67.24 147.49 43.31 15.19 664.29 100% 1 For alliances with state ranks of S1-S3, all associations within them are considered highly imperiled, Sensitive. A question mark (?) denotes an inexact numeric rank due to insufficient samples over the full expected range of the type, but existing information points to this rank (CDFW 2019a). 2 City status refers to if the vegetation communities is designated as Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHA) as described in Genera Plan Conservation Element subpolicy CE 1.2. 3 Totals may not add exactly due to rounding

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 58 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Vegetative Communities

Riparian

Arroyo Willow Thickets. The arroyo willow thickets most closely correspond with the Central Coast Arroyo Willow Riparian Forest plant community described by Holland (1986) and the arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) thicket alliance described by Sawyer et al. (2009). This community is a dense, broad-leafed, winter- deciduous riparian forest dominated by arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis). Arroyo willow thickets occur along channels and on banks and benches. Within the City creeks, some species associated with arroyo willow thickets include mule-fat (Baccharis salicifolia), coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), blackberry (Rubus sp.), nasturtium (Tropaeolum majus), emergent cottonwood (Populus sp.), and California sycamore (Platanus racemosa). This community is considered seral (an intermediate stage) due to repeated disturbance/flooding and is therefore unable to develop into the much taller willow riparian forest. Arroyo willow thickets comprise approximately 24.66 acres, or 4%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this community is mapped along the following creeks: San Jose, Las Vegas, Los Carneros, Glen Annie, Devereux, Bell/Ellwood/Winchester Canyon, and Tecolote.

Arroyo willow thickets provide habitat for foraging, breeding, and/or cover for a variety of common wildlife species, including amphibians, such as the Pacific chorus frog (Pseudacris regilla); reptiles, such as the western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis); and mammals, such as raccoon (Procyon lotor), opossum (Didelphis virginiana), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), woodrat (Neotoma sp.), rabbits (Sylvilagus sp.), and shrews (Sorex spp.). Some of the more visible species present in this community includes migratory and resident bird species, such as Bewick’s wren (Troglodytes bewickii), warbling vireo (Vireo gilvus), Wilson’s warbler (Wilsonia pusilla), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), goldfinches (Spinus sp.), hummingbirds, and black-headed grosbeak (Pheucticus melanocephalus). In addition, this vegetation community has been known to provide suitable breeding habitat for the state- and federally-endangered least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) and southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus); and the yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia), a California Department of Fish and Wildlife Species of Special Concern.

Native Woodlands and Forests

Black Cottonwood Forest. Black cottonwood forests most closely correspond with the North Coast Black Cottonwood Riparian Forest plant community described by Holland (1986) and the black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) forest and woodland alliance described by Sawyer et al. (2009). This community is a dense, broad-leafed, winter-deciduous riparian forest dominated by black cottonwoods (Populus trichocarpa), which requires moist, bare, and freshly deposited sands or silts. Black cottonwood forests occur in bottomlands, floodplains, gravel bars, and banks of perennial streams. Within the City creeks, some species associated with black cottonwood forests

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 59 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA include California sycamore, blackberry, emergent coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), and non-native cape ivy (Delairea odorata). This community is often characterized by even-aged stands, reflecting episodic recruitment comprise approximately 3.27 acres, or < 1%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this community is mapped along San Jose Creek.

Due to the relatively open understory associated with black cottonwood forests, these forests provide some minimal foraging and cover opportunities in the understory leaf litter for reptiles and mammals. However, migratory and resident bird species, including raptors, utilize these forests for foraging, breeding, and cover. Some common bird species observed in these forests are similar to those noted above for arroyo willow thickets along with woodpeckers, such as downy woodpecker (Dryobates pubescens), Nuttall’s woodpecker (Dryobates nuttallii), northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), and raptors.

Coast Live Oak Woodlands. Coast live oak woodlands most closely correspond with the Southern Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest plant community described by Holland (1986) and the coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) forest and woodland alliance described by Sawyer et al. (2009). This community is an open, evergreen riparian woodland dominated by coast live oak that has an understory rich with herbaceous cover and poorly developed shrubs, compared to other riparian communities. Coast live oak woodlands occur in bottomlands and outer floodplains usually along larger streams. Within the City creeks, some species associated with coast live oak woodlands include elderberry (Sambucus nigra), arroyo willow, nasturtium, and cape ivy. Coast live oak woodlands comprise approximately 20.52 acres, or 3%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this community is mapped along the following creeks: Maria Ygnacio, Las Vegas, Los Carneros, Glen Annie, El Encanto, Bell/Ellwood/Winchester, and Tecolote. One vegetation community associated with coast live oak woodlands was mapped separately from coast live oak woodlands and is described below.

Coast Live Oak – Arroyo Willow. Coast live oak – arroyo willow most closely corresponds with the Southern Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest plant community described by Holland (1986) and the coast live oak – arroyo willow (Quercus agrifolia / Salix lasiolepis) alliance described by Sawyer et al. (2009). This community is riparian woodland dominated by coast live oak and arroyo willow that has a well- developed understory rich with herbaceous cover and shrubs. Coast live oak – arroyo willow comprises approximately 19.47 acres, or 3%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this community is mapped along the following creeks: Maria Ygnacio, Las Vegas, and El Encanto.

Oak woodlands, including riparian oak woodlands, are well known to provide suitable food, shading, and nesting sources for both common and special-status species. Oak acorn production provides food for a variety of native wildlife such as acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), California scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), western gray squirrel (Sciurus griseus), and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus). The attraction of herbivores to the oak woodlands in turn attracts predators, such as Cooper’s hawks (Accipiter cooperii) and white-tailed kites (Elanus leucurus), to these habitats as well. Dead and decaying oak trees and/or their downed limbs provide areas for small mammals, amphibians, and reptiles to seek cover and food, such as insects or fungi. In addition, dead tree snags provide perching opportunities for raptors. The wide spreading and sturdy branches of the oaks provide plenty of shading opportunities for wildlife traversing across the terrain. The branches also provide important nesting opportunities for many bird species, including cavity nesting birds such as

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 60 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA acorn woodpecker, oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus), ash-throated flycatcher (Myiarchus cinerascens), Nuttall’s woodpecker (Dryobates nuttallii), Downy woodpecker (Dryobates pubescens), and house wren (Troglodytes aedon).

Western Sycamore Woodlands. Western sycamore woodlands most closely correspond with the Sycamore Alluvial Woodland plant community described by Holland (1986) and the California sycamore woodland alliance described by Sawyer et al. (2009). This community is an open to moderately closed riparian woodland dominated by well-spaced California sycamore. This community is typically located along braided channels of intermittent streams, often with cobble or boulder substrates. Within the City creeks, some species associated with western sycamore woodlands includes arroyo willow, coast live oak, white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), California bay (Umbellularia californica), ash (Fraxinus sp.), and non- native grasses. Western sycamore woodlands comprise approximately 9.50 acres, or 1%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this community is mapped along the following creeks: San Jose, Las Vegas, and Tecolote. Two vegetation communities associated with western sycamore woodlands were also mapped within or along the creeks and are described below.

Western Sycamore – Coast Live Oak Woodlands. Western sycamore – coast live oak woodlands most closely correspond with the Sycamore Alluvial Woodland plant community described by Holland (1986) and the California sycamore – coast live oak (Platanus racemosa – Quercus agrifolia) association described by Sawyer et al. (2009). This community is dominated by western sycamore and coast live oak with similar characteristics described above for western sycamore woodlands. Western sycamore – coast live oak woodlands comprise approximately 0.28 acre, or < 1%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this community is mapped along the following creeks: San Jose and San Pedro.

Western Sycamore – Coast Live Oak – Arroyo Willow. Western sycamore – coast live oak – arroyo willow most closely corresponds with the Sycamore Alluvial Woodland plant community described by Holland (1986) and the California sycamore – coast live oak – arroyo willow (Platanus racemosa – Quercus agrifolia – Salix lasiolepis) association described by Sawyer et al. (2009). This community is dominated by western sycamore, coast live oak, and arroyo willow with similar characteristics described above for western sycamore woodlands. Western sycamore – coast live oak – arroyo willow comprises approximately 37.20 acres, or 6%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this community is mapped along the following creeks: San Jose, San Pedro, Los Carneros, Glen Annie, and Bell/Ellwood/Winchester Canyon.

Due to the relatively open understory associated with western sycamore riparian woodlands, these areas provide some foraging and cover opportunities in the understory leaf litter for reptiles and mammals. In addition, migratory and resident bird species, including raptors, utilize these forests for foraging, breeding, and cover. Some common bird species observed in these forests are similar to those noted above for black cottonwood forests, such as woodpeckers, raptors, and wrens.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 61 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Non-Native Woodlands

Eucalyptus woodlands most closely correspond with the Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus [globulus, camaldulensis]) semi-natural association described by Sawyer et al. (2009). This community is dominated by Eucalyptus species and typically consists of monotypic stands of introduced Australian eucalyptus trees (Eucalyptus spp.). The understory of this community is generally poorly developed or composed of low-growing forbs and non-native grasses due to the excessive shade and possibly toxic properties produced by the eucalyptus leaf litter. Within the City creeks, some species associated with eucalyptus woodlands include non-native grasses, wood sorrel (Oxalis sp.), ash, and occasional shrubs. Eucalyptus woodlands comprise approximately 56.29 acres, or 8%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this community is mapped along the following creeks: Devereux, Bell/Ellwood/Winchester Canyon, and Tecolote.

Within the City of Goleta, eucalyptus woodlands are most prevalent within Ellwood Mesa, where they are known to provide overwintering habitat for the monarch butterfly. Monarch butterfly aggregation sites, including autumnal and winter roost sites, and related habitats, are designated as ESHA in the City of Goleta’s General Plan (City of Goleta 2006). As described in Section 3.4.4, Management Plans and Programs, in March 2019 the City adopted a Final Ellwood Mesa/Sperling Preserve Open Space Monarch Butterfly Habitat Management Plan (City of Goleta 2019), to outline the programmatic approach and methods for the City to manage and improve the Ellwood Mesa eucalyptus grove for the benefit of the overwintering monarch butterfly, other wildlife, and the public’s use. Twenty-two programs are detailed in this plan, which integrate the many diverse aspects of habitat management into a single plan. The Plan coverage area includes portions of Devereux Creek.

Aside from monarch butterflies, in general eucalyptus woodlands are of limited value to most native plants and animals. However, depending on the health of the stands, they do provide nesting opportunities for migratory and resident birds as well as nesting and perching sites for raptors. The leaf litter and some recently decaying and fallen trees may provide some cover for smaller vertebrates such as mice, voles, and western fence lizards.

Upland

Coastal Sage Scrub. Coastal sage scrub most closely corresponds with the Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub described by Holland (1986) and the California sagebrush alliance described by Sawyer et al. (2009). This community is dominated by California sagebrush (Artemisia californica). This community is composed of a variety of soft, low shrubs, characteristically dominated by drought-tolerant species and often occurs on dry and somewhat rocky areas. Within the City this community is comprised of several native shrub species including California sagebrush, bush sunflower (Encelia californica), black sage (Salvia mellifera), Menzies’ goldenbush (Isocoma menziesii), and coyote brush. Coastal sage scrub comprises approximately 4.93 acres, or < 1%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5,

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 62 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA this community is mapped along the following creeks: Devereux, Bell/Ellwood/Winchester Canyon, and Tecolote.

This community provides plenty of cover for small-sized wildlife seeking refuge from the adjacent open habitats. Small-sized wildlife that may utilize this habitat include California pocket mice (Chaetodipus californicus), deer mice (Peromyscus sp.), rabbits (Sylvilagus sp.), and lizards. In addition, this community provide plenty of nesting habitat and cover for a variety of bird species, such as California towhee (Melozone crissalis), California scrub jay, blue-gray gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea), spotted towhee (Pipilo maculatus), wrentit (Chamaea fasciata), and California thrasher (Toxostoma redivivum).

Coyote Brush Scrub. Coyote brush scrub most closely correspond with the Northern Coyote Brush Scrub described by Holland (1986) and the coyote brush scrub alliance described by Sawyer et al. (2009). This community is dominated by coyote brush. This community is composed of a variety of low shrubs and is usually dense but with scattered grassy openings. Typically, this community occurs on windy exposed sites with shallow, rocky soils. Within the City this community is dominated by coyote brush and interspersed with grasses and non-native species. Coyote brush scrub comprises approximately 4.16 acres, or 1%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this community is mapped along El Encanto Creek. This community often forms monocultures thereby lacking the diversity of similar habitats, such as coastal sage scrub. This community provides some cover for smaller wildlife traversing the habitat and seeking temporary cover from adjacent open habitats, such as mice, deer, rabbits, and lizards.

Non-Native Grasslands

Non-Native Grasslands. Non-native grasslands most closely correspond with the Non-Native Grassland described by Holland (1986). This community is dominated by annual grasses typically less than 3 feet (approximately 1 meter) in height, depending on precipitation, and often associated with species such as wild oats, bromes, fescue (Festuca spp.), and perennial ryegrass (F. perennis). This community has very few native species and occurs in uplands of all topographic orientations. Non-native grasslands (annuals) comprises approximately 21.28 acres, or 3% of, the vegetative cover/land use mapped. Non-native grasslands (maintained) with evidence of mowing or other maintenance comprises approximately 6.62 acres, or 1%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, non- native grasslands are mapped along the following creeks: Los Carneros and Devereux.

Non-native grasslands (annual) may provide habitat for burrowing species, such as California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi), California vole (Microtus californicus), and Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae). A variety of bird species hunt or forage in this community, including raptors such as the red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) and Cooper’s hawk. Depending on the height of the vegetation, some unmaintained non-native grasslands can provide suitable cover for small mammals and reptiles. Maintained (or mowed) non-native grasslands may provide some opportunities for burrowing species, but the height of the vegetation is anticipated to be too low to provide suitable cover and the regular disturbance of maintenance activity may dissuade the establishment of large populations of burrowing species.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 63 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Wetland

Cattail Marsh. Cattail Marsh most closely correspond with the Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh described by Holland (1986) and the cattail marsh (Typha domingensis) association described by Sawyer et al. (2009). This community is a wetland habitat that develops where the water table is at or just above the ground surface, such as around the margins of lakes, ponds, slow-moving streams, ditches, and seepages. An accumulation of deep, peaty soils occurs because this community is permanently flooded by fresh water. Within the City, this community is perennially dominated by cattails (Typha domingensis) interspersed with California bulrush (Schoenoplectus californicus) and an occasional clump of arundo (Arundo donax). Cattail marsh comprises approximately 1.10 acre, or < 1%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this community is mapped along Bell/Ellwood/Winchester Canyon Creek.

Cattail marshes, and the surrounding aquatic habitats, provide significant feeding, cover, and nesting opportunities for birds, including waterfowl, and amphibian species. Birds that may utilize the cattail marshes and surrounding waterways includes both migratory and local breeders, such as spotted sandpiper (Actitis macularius), American coot (Fulica americana), mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), snowy egret (Egretta thula), great egret (Ardea alba), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), marsh wren (Cistothorus palustris), red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas), sora (Porzana carolina), song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), and many more. Common amphibians that frequent these areas include species such as the Pacific chorus frog.

Emergent Wetland. Emergent wetland is similar to the description above for cattail marsh; however, this community is considered “emergent” because it consists of erect, rooted, herbaceous plants growing in water or on a substrate. This vegetation is present for most of the growing season in most years and is usually dominated by perennial plants. It occurs along the edge of open water and develops along a narrow stretch of land aside upland vegetation communities. Emergent wetland comprises 0.17 acre, or < 1%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this community is mapped along Bell/Ellwood/Winchester Canyon Creek. This community provides similar habitat resources as described above for cattail marsh.

Other Land Cover Types

Agriculture. Agricultural areas include those actively utilized for agricultural activities, such as row-crop agriculture, orchards, similar activities, or in land preparation for these activities. Agricultural activities comprise approximately 10.89 acres, or 2%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this land cover type is mapped along the following creeks: San Pedro, Los Carneros, and Bell/Ellwood/Winchester Canyon.

Orchards may provide marginally suitable cover (e.g., under the leaf litter) or nesting resources for wildlife species, such as small reptiles, amphibians, and common birds. Due to the active nature of

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 64 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA row-crop agriculture, row crops may provide occasional foraging opportunities for birds (after disking. However, since disking activities invert, break-up, and cut the soil, these lands are not anticipated to sustain significant numbers of burrowing mammal populations.

Beach. Beach areas include sandy and stony areas along the ocean that are partly or completely covered by water during high tide and exposed during low tide. Within the City, the sandy stretches of beach are mainly at the mouths of Tecolote and Bell Canyon Creeks. Beaches comprises approximately 6.08 acres, or 1%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this land cover type is mapped along the following creeks: Bell/Ellwood/Winchester Canyon and Tecolote. Beaches provide some feeding and nesting opportunities for waterbirds, including godwits, plovers, terns, and similar species.

Developed. Developed lands include areas supporting man-made structures including homes, yards, roadways, and other highly modified lands supporting structures associated with dwellings or other permanent structures. Developed lands do not support native vegetation and are typically composed of impervious services, but may include planted terrain and open environments, such as parks, ornamental plants, and planted eucalyptus windbreaks. Developed areas are not highly suitable for native wildlife use (except for highly urban-tolerant or urban-adapted species) or plant species. Vegetation in these areas, if present at all, is usually sparse, dominated by weedy herbaceous species, or part of the landscaping associated with development. Developed lands comprise approximately 425.73 acres, or 64%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this land cover type is mapped along all city-wide creeks.

Wildlife species occurring in developed areas are mainly those accustomed to urban environments, such as the California ground squirrel, western fence lizard, rabbits, and common bird species.

Flood Control Concrete Channel. Flood Control Concrete Channels (FCCC) are concrete lined channels that direct water downstream and are actively maintained. No vegetation originates from the concrete channel, and as a result, these areas do not provide suitable cover, feeding, or nesting opportunities for wildlife. It is possible that smaller wildlife would utilize these areas for traversing up- or down-stream. However, as these areas provide no cover wildlife would likely use these areas as a necessity for travel to suitable habitats. Mapped FCCC comprise approximately 8.03 acres, or 1%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this land cover type is mapped along the following creeks: San Jose, Las Vegas, San Pedro, Glen Annie, and El Encanto.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 65 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Open Water. Areas mapped as Open Water consists of areas that consist of standing water with no emergent vegetation. These areas are absent of vegetation and are entirely composed of perennial or intermittent areas of inundated water over natural substrates. Open water comprises approximately 1.85 acres, or < 1%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this land cover type is mapped along the following creeks: San Jose and Bell/Ellwood/Winchester Canyon. These areas would most likely be frequented by migratory and resident bird species, including waterfowl, seeking feeding or resting opportunities.

Unvegetated. These areas lack vegetation but support natural bottom substrates, such as dirt or rocks. Ruderal lands comprise approximately 2.27 acres, or < 1%, of the vegetative cover/land use mapped. As shown in Table 5, this land cover type is mapped along the following creeks: San Pedro and Los Carneros. Since these areas are composed entirely of exposed soils and do not support any vegetation, these areas do no provide suitable cover or foraging opportunities for wildlife. These areas may provide some opportunities for wildlife to travel up- or down-stream. However, as these areas provide no cover wildlife would likely use these areas as a necessity for travel to suitable habitats.

4.3.5.2 Special-Status Plant and Wildlife Species

The City supports habitat for a variety of plants and wildlife species, as described above. In addition to commonly occurring species, approximately 28 plant and 41 wildlife special-status species are known to occur in the greater region.3 The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) occurrences within and adjacent to the City limits are shown in Figure 8, CNDDB and USFWS Critical Habitat. As shown in Figure 8, according to the CNDDB4 approximately 36 species are known to occur within or adjacent to the City of Goleta, including 9 plants, 5 invertebrates, 2 fish, 2 amphibians, 1 reptile, 15 birds, and 2 mammals. Within the City, designated USFWS critical habitat occurs for tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi) in Bell Canyon Creek south of US 101 and in Old San Jose in open waters, south of S. Kellogg Avenue; western snowy plover (Charadrius nivosus nivosus) along Ellwood Beach; and southern California steelhead (Onorhynchus mykiss) along the following creeks: Maria Ygnacio, San Jose, San Pedro, Los Carneros, Glen Annie, and Tecolote. In addition, the Watershed Overview Area is located within the Southern California Coast Steelhead Recovery Planning Area in the Conception Coast

3 Region is considered as the areas that overlap with the U.S. Geological Survey maps for Goleta and Dos Pueblos quadrangles. The number of species listed is based off of a desktop analysis of the following databases: California Natural Diversity Database (CDFW 2020), Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (CNPS 2020), and the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (USFWS 2020). 4 It should be noted that the CNDDB is not an exhaustive and comprehensive inventory of all rare species statewide. The database is based on those occurrences reported to the CDFW. Therefore, additional local resources and databases should be checked for the most up to date local observations. These databases may include, but are not limited to: CNPS Rare Plant Inventory; Jepson eFlora Database; Consortium of California Herbaria; UCSB Cheadle Center for Biodiversity and Ecological Restoration (CCBER) Natural History Collections; Santa Barbara Botanic Garden resources; the City’s Planning and Environmental Review Department; Environmental Reports; and local experts.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 66 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Biogeographic Population Group (NMFS 2012). Table 6 and Table 7 provide summaries of special- status plant and wildlife species, respectively, documented or with a potential to occur in the City. Special-status wildlife are further discussed under the respective creek descriptions in Section 4.3.6, Individual Creek Characteristics.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 67 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 6. Special-Status Plant Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City

Primary Habitat Associations/ Life Common Status (Federal/State/ Form/ Blooming Period/ Elevation Scientific Name Name CRPR)1 Range (feet) Documentation of Occurrence2 Abronia maritima red sand- None/None/4.2 Coastal dunes/perennial herb/Feb– Documented at the mouth of verbena Nov/0–330 Tecolote Creek,4 however, beach erosion has greatly reduced or eliminated coastal dune habitat in the City. Amsinckia Douglas' None/None/4.2 Cismontane woodland, Valley and Not documented within the City.3- douglasiana fiddleneck foothill grassland; Monterey shale, 6 Habitat for this species is dry/annual herb/Mar–May/0–6,395 present within the City. Arctostaphylos Refugio None/None/1B.2 Chaparral (sandstone)/perennial Not documented within the City.3- refugioensis manzanita evergreen shrub/Dec–Mar 6 Habitat for this species is (May)/895–2,690 present within the City. Arenaria marsh FE/SE/1B.1 Marshes and swamps (freshwater or Not documented within the City.3- paludicola sandwort brackish); sandy, openings/perennial 6 Habitat for this species is stoloniferous herb/May–Aug/5–560 present within the City. Atriplex coulteri Coulter's None/None/1B.2 Coastal bluff scrub, Coastal dunes, Documented in close proximity to saltbush Coastal scrub, Valley and foothill San Jose Creek, Las Vegas grassland; alkaline or clay/perennial Creek, and San Pedro Creek.3 herb/Mar–Oct/5–1,505 This species was documented outside of the City at the University of California, Santa Barbara campus.3 Atriplex serenana Davidson's None/None/1B.2 Coastal bluff scrub, Coastal scrub; Not documented within the var. davidsonii saltscale alkaline/annual herb/Apr–Oct/30– City.4,5 This species was 655 documented outside of the City at the University of California, Santa Barbara Campus.3 Habitat for this species is present within the City.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 68 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 6. Special-Status Plant Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City

Primary Habitat Associations/ Life Common Status (Federal/State/ Form/ Blooming Period/ Elevation Scientific Name Name CRPR)1 Range (feet) Documentation of Occurrence2 Baccharis Plummer's None/None/4.3 Broadleafed upland forest, Not documented within the City.4- plummerae baccharis Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, 6 Habitat for this species is Coastal scrub; rocky/perennial present within the City. deciduous shrub/May, Aug–Oct/15– 1,390

Calandrinia Brewer's None/None/4.2 Chaparral, Coastal scrub; sandy or Not documented within the City.3- breweri calandrinia loamy, disturbed sites and 6 Habitat for this species is burns/annual herb/(Jan)Mar– present within the City. June/30–4,000 Calochortus Catalina None/None/4.2 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Not documented within the City.3- catalinae mariposa lily Coastal scrub, Valley and foothill 6 Habitat for this species is grassland/perennial bulbiferous present within the City. herb/(Feb)Mar–June/45–2,295 Calochortus late- None/None/1B.3 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Not documented within the City fimbriatus flowered Riparian woodland; often of Goleta.3-6 Habitat for this mariposa lily serpentinite/perennial bulbiferous species is present within the City. herb/June–Aug/900–6,250 Centromadia southern None/None/1B.1 Marshes and swamps (margins), Documented in close proximity to parryi ssp. tarplant Valley and foothill grassland (vernally San Jose Creek,4,6 Las Vegas australis mesic), Vernal pools/annual Creek,4,6 Glen Annie Creek,3,4,6 herb/May–Nov/0–1,570 and slightly north of Isla Vista.6 This species has been documented to occur outside of the City at the Goleta Slough, Santa Barbara Airport, the University of California, Santa Barbara campus, Isla vista, and the Devereux Slough.4

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 69 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 6. Special-Status Plant Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City

Primary Habitat Associations/ Life Common Status (Federal/State/ Form/ Blooming Period/ Elevation Scientific Name Name CRPR)1 Range (feet) Documentation of Occurrence2 Cordylanthus salt marsh FE/SE/1B.2 Coastal dunes, marshes and Not documented within the City,3- maritimus ssp. bird's-beak swamps/ annual herb /May- Oct/0- 6 Habitat for this species is maritimus 33 present within the City; however, beach erosion has greatly reduced or eliminated coastal dune habitat in the City. Lasthenia Contra FE/None/1B.1 Cismontane woodland, Playas This species has been conjugens Costa (alkaline), Valley and foothill documented to occur outside of goldfields grassland, Vernal pools; the City in Isla Vista.3,4 Habitat for mesic/annual herb/Mar–June/0– this species is present within the 1,540 City. Lasthenia Coulter's None/None/1B.1 Marshes and swamps (coastal salt), Documented within the City in glabrata ssp. goldfields Playas, Vernal pools/annual close proximity to Glen Annie coulteri herb/Feb–June/0–4,000 Creek.3 Lonicera Santa None/None/1B.2 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Documented near El Encanto subspicata var. Barbara Coastal scrub/perennial evergreen Creek3,4 and at Ellwood Mesa.6 subspicata honeysuckle shrub/May–Aug (Dec–Feb)/30– This species has been 3,280 documented outside of the City at the University of California, Santa Barbara Campus, slightly north of Isla Vista, at the Devereux slough, near Bell Canyon Creek, and near Tecolote Creek.3 Phacelia south coast None/None/3.2 Chaparral, Coastal dunes, Coastal Documented within the City near ramosissima var. branching scrub, Marshes and swamps (coastal Hollister Avenue and Ellwood austrolitoralis phacelia salt); sandy, sometimes Station Road.7 rocky/perennial herb/Mar–Aug/15– 985

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 70 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 6. Special-Status Plant Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City

Primary Habitat Associations/ Life Common Status (Federal/State/ Form/ Blooming Period/ Elevation Scientific Name Name CRPR)1 Range (feet) Documentation of Occurrence2 Scrophularia black- None/None/1B.2 Closed-cone coniferous forest, Document in close proximity to El atrata flowered Chaparral, Coastal dunes, Coastal Encanto Creek,3,4 Devereux figwort scrub, Riparian scrub/perennial Creek,3,4 and Tecolote Creek.6 herb/Mar–July/30–1,640 Suaeda esteroa estuary None/None/1B.2 Marshes and swamps (coastal Not documented within the City.3- seablite salt)/perennial herb/(May)July–Oct 6 This species has been (Jan)/0–15 documented outside of the City at the Goleta Slough.3

Horkelia cuneata mesa None/None/1B.1 Chaparral (maritime), Cismontane Not documented within the City.3- var. puberula horkelia woodland, Coastal scrub; sandy or 6 This species has been gravelly/perennial herb/Feb–July documented outside of the City (Sep)/225–2,655 near Tecolote Creek.3

1 Status Legend: FE: Federally listed as endangered SE: State listed as endangered ST: State listed as threatened California Native Plant Society – California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) 2 Habitat is present in various conditions for all species listed in Table 6 within the City. No floristic botanical surveys were performed as part of baseline surveys. 3 California Natural Diversity Database (CDFW 2020) 4 Jepson eFlora (2020) 5 Smith (1998) 6 City of Goleta General Plan (2006), Figure 4-1 (June 2016) 7 Calflora (2020)

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 71 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 7. Special-Status Wildlife Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City

Status Documentation of Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/State)1 General Habitat Associations Occurrence2 Invertebrates Bombus crotchii Crotch bumble None/PSE Open grassland and scrub Documented in Old Town bee communities supporting suitable Goleta,4,6 Lake Los floral resources. Carneros,6 Ellwood Mesa,4,6 and the mouth of Bell Canyon Creek.6 This species has been documented outside of the City at Isla Vista4 and the Devereux Slough.6 Branchinecta lynchi vernal pool fairy FT/None Vernal pools, seasonally ponded Not documented within the shrimp areas within vernal swales, and City.4-6 Habitat for this ephemeral freshwater habitats species is present within the City. Cicindela hirticollis sandy beach None/None Inhabits areas adjacent to non- Not documented within the gravida tiger beetle brackish water along the coast of City.4-6 This species was California from San Francisco Bay to documented outside the northern Mexico. Clean, dry, light- City near the University of colored sand in the upper zone. Santa Barbara, California Lagoon11. Coelus globosus globose dune None/None Inhabitant of coastal sand dune Documented in the City beetle habitat; erratically distributed from near Tecolote Creek (along Ten Mile Creek in Mendocino County dunes)4,5 and at south to Ensenada, Mexico Devereux.4,5 However, beach erosion has greatly reduced or eliminated coastal dune habitat in the City.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 72 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 7. Special-Status Wildlife Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City

Status Documentation of Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/State)1 General Habitat Associations Occurrence2 Danaus plexippus monarch None/None Wind-protected tree groves with Documented in close nectar sources and nearby water proximity to San Jose, Los sources Carneros, Glen Annie. El Encanto, Devereux, Tecolote,4-8 and Bell Canyon Creeks.4,5 Tryonia imitator mimic tryonia None/None Inhabits coastal lagoons, estuaries, Not documented within (=California and saltmarshes, from Sonoma the City.4,6 This species brackishwater County south to San Diego County was found outside of the snail) City at the UCSB Lagoon.4 Fishes Oncorhynchus mykiss Steelhead - FE/None Clean, clear, cool, well-oxygenated Documented along Maria Southern streams; needs relatively deep Ygnacio and San Pedro California coast pools for rearing and gravelly Creeks reaches11. This steelhead substrate to spawn species has been Distinct documented to occur Population outside of the City at Segment Atascadero Creek11. Critical habitat for steelhead occurs at Maria Ygnacio,3,4 San Jose,3,4 San Pedro,3,4 Los Carneros,3,4 Glen Annie,3,4 Ellwood Canyon3 Winchester Canyon,3 and Tecolote Creeks.3,4 Eucyclogobius newberryi tidewater goby FE/SSC Brackish water habitats along the Documented in the City at California coast from Agua Glen Annie,4 Winchester Hedionda Lagoon, San Diego Canyon,4 Bell Canyon,5 and Tecolote Creeks.5

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 73 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 7. Special-Status Wildlife Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City

Status Documentation of Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/State)1 General Habitat Associations Occurrence2 County, to the mouth of the Smith This species has been River documented outside of the City at Atascadero Creek, near the Santa Barbara Airport, and at the Devereux Slough.4 Amphibians Rana draytonii California red- FT/SSC Lowland streams, wetlands, riparian Documented within the legged frog woodlands, livestock ponds; dense, City at Los Carneros shrubby or emergent vegetation Creek,10 Sandpiper Golf associated with deep, still or slow- Course (Devereux),5 Bell moving water; uses adjacent Canyon Creek,4,5 and uplands Tecolote Creek.3,5 Taricha torosa (Monterey California newt None/SSC Wet forests, oak forests, chaparral, Occurred in the area Co. south only) and rolling grassland, perennial and historically, but no recent ephemeral streams documents exist.4 Habitat for this species is present within the City. Reptiles Actinemys pallida southwestern None/SSC Slow-moving permanent or Documented within the pond turtle intermittent streams, ponds, small City at Lake Los lakes, and reservoirs with emergent Carneros.4 This species basking sites; adjacent uplands has been documented used for nesting and during winter outside of the City at Atascadero Creek and the Devereux Slough.4

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 74 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 7. Special-Status Wildlife Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City

Status Documentation of Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/State)1 General Habitat Associations Occurrence2 Anniella pulchra northern None/SSC Coastal dunes, stabilized dunes, Not documented within California beaches, dry washes, valley– the City.4-6 Habitat for this legless lizard foothill, chaparral, and scrubs; pine, species is present within oak, and riparian woodlands; the City. associated with sparse vegetation and sandy or loose, loamy soils Phrynosoma Blainville's None/SSC Open areas of sandy soil in valleys, Not documented within blainvillii horned lizard foothills, and semi-arid mountains the City.4,5 This species including coastal scrub, chaparral, has been documented to valley–foothill hardwood, conifer, occur north of the City in riparian, pine–cypress, juniper, and the Santa Ynez annual grassland habitats Mountatins.6 Salvadora hexalepis coast patch- None/SSC Brushy or shrubby vegetation; Not documented within Vilgultea nosed snake requires small mammal burrows for the City.4-6 Habitat for this refuge and overwintering sites. This species is present within species prefers heavy brush the City. chaparral. Thamnophis hammondii two-striped None/SSC Streams, creeks, pools, streams Documented within the gartersnake with rocky beds, ponds, lakes, City near Calle Real and vernal pools Glen Annie.6 Birds Accipiter cooperii Cooper’s hawk None/WL Nests and forages in dense stands Documented within the (nesting) of live oak, riparian woodlands, or City at San Jose Creek,9 other woodland habitats often near Lake Los Carneros,9 and water Devereux.5 This species has been documented to occur outside of the City at the Devereux Slough4 and Atascadero Creek.9

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 75 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 7. Special-Status Wildlife Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City

Status Documentation of Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/State)1 General Habitat Associations Occurrence2 Agelaius tricolor (nesting tricolored BCC/SSC, ST Nests near freshwater, emergent Documented within the colony) blackbird wetland with cattails or tules, but City at Lake Los also in Himalayan blackberry; Carneros.4 This species forages in grasslands, woodland, has been documented to and agriculture occur outside of the City at Atascadero Creek,9 the University of California Santa Barbara campus,9 in the Goleta Slough,4,9 and upper Patterson Ave.4 Aimophila ruficeps Southern None/WL Nests and forages in open coastal Not documented within canescens California scrub and chaparral with low cover the City.4,9 Habitat for this rufous-crowned of scattered scrub interspersed with species is present within sparrow rocky and grassy patches the City. Ammodramus grasshopper None/SSC Nests and forages in moderately Probable nesting savannarum (nesting) sparrow open grassland with tall forbs or documented in Ellwood scattered shrubs used for perches Mesa.9 Habitat for this species is present within the City. Ardea alba (nesting great egret None/None Nests and roosts in large trees over Not documented within colony) water or on islands, both in the City.4,5 This species freshwater and marine estuarine was documented outside habitats; forages in wetlands, of the City at the Goleta including marshes, streams, Slough.4 ditches, and fish-rearing ponds, but also in irrigated pastures and croplands Ardea herodias (nesting great blue heron None/None Nests in large trees or snags; Not documented within colony) forages in wetlands, water bodies, the City.4,9 This species streams, rivers, creeks, and was documented outside

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 76 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 7. Special-Status Wildlife Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City

Status Documentation of Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/State)1 General Habitat Associations Occurrence2 opportunistically in uplands, of the City at the Goleta including pasture and croplands Slough and the University of California, Santa Barbara Campus.4

Artemisiospiza belli belli Bell's sage BCC/WL Nests and forages in coastal scrub Not documented within sparrow and dry chaparral; typically, in large, the City.4,9 Habitat for this unfragmented patches dominated species is present within by chamise; nests in more dense the City. patches but uses more open habitat in winter Athene cunicularia burrowing owl BCC/SSC Nests and forages in grassland, Not documented within (burrow sites & some open scrub, and agriculture, the City.4,9 Habitat for this wintering sites) particularly with ground squirrel species is present within burrows the City.

Brachyramphus marbled FT/SE Nests in old-growth coastal forests, Not documented within marmoratus (nesting) murrelet forages in subtidal and pelagic the City.4,9 Habitat for this habitats species is present within the City.

Buteo regalis (wintering) ferruginous BCC/WL Winters and forages in open, dry Not documented within hawk country, grasslands, open fields, the City.4,9 This species agriculture was documented outside of the City near Tecolote Creek.4 Charadrius alexandrinus western snowy FT, BCC/SSC On coasts nests on sandy marine Not documented within nivosus (nesting) plover and estuarine shores; in the interior the City.4,9 This species nests on sandy, barren or sparsely was documented outside vegetated flats near saline or of the City at the Goleta

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 77 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 7. Special-Status Wildlife Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City

Status Documentation of Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/State)1 General Habitat Associations Occurrence2 alkaline lakes, reservoirs, and Slough,4 and the ponds Devereux Slough.4,5 Elanus leucurus white-tailed kite None/FP Nests in woodland, riparian, and Documented within the (nesting) individual trees near open lands; City at Devereux, 4,5 Lake forages opportunistically in Los Carneros,9 and a grassland, meadows, scrubs, dead juvenile was found agriculture, emergent wetland, along Glen Annie Creek in savanna, and disturbed lands 1993.9

Empidonax traillii southwestern FE/SE Nests in dense riparian habitats Not documented within extimus (nesting) willow flycatcher along streams, reservoirs, or the City.4,9 Habitat for this wetlands; uses variety of riparian species is present within and shrubland habitats during the City. migration Eremophila alpestris California None/WL Nests and forages in grasslands, Not documented within actia horned lark disturbed lands, agriculture, and the City.4,9 This species beaches; nests in alpine fell fields was found outside of the of the Sierra Nevada City at the Devereux Slough.4

Passerculus Belding's None/SE Nests and forages in coastal Not documented within sandwichensis beldingi savannah saltmarsh dominated by pickleweed the City.4,9 This species sparrow (Salicornia spp.) was found outside of the City near the Santa Barbara Airport and at the Devereux Slough.4 Pelecanus occidentalis California brown FDL/FP, SDL Forages in warm coastal marine Documented within the californicus (nesting pelican and estuarine environments; in City at the Sand Piper Golf colonies & communal California, nests on dry, rocky Course4 and at the Goleta roosts) offshore islands Slough.4

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 78 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 7. Special-Status Wildlife Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City

Status Documentation of Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/State)1 General Habitat Associations Occurrence2 Phalacrocorax auritus double-crested None/WL Nests in riparian trees near ponds, Not documented within (nesting colony) cormorant lakes, artificial impoundments, the City.4 This species has slow-moving rivers, lagoons, been documented outside estuaries, and open coastlines; of the City at the Goleta winter habitat includes lakes, rivers, Slough.4 and coastal areas Rallus obsoletus Ridgway’s rail FE/SE, FP Coastal wetlands, brackish areas, Not documented within levipes coastal saline emergent wetlands the City.4,9 Historically this species has been found outside of the City limits at the Goleta Slough and Devereux Slough.9 Riparia riparia (nesting) bank swallow None/ST Nests in riparian, lacustrine, and Not documented within coastal areas with vertical banks, the City.4,9 Habitat for this bluffs, and cliffs with sandy soils; species is present within open country and water during the City. migration Sternula antillarum California least FE/FP, SE Forages in shallow estuaries and Not documented within browni (nesting colony) tern lagoons; nests on sandy beaches or the City.4,9 Habitat for this exposed tidal flats species is present within the City. Vireo bellii pusillus least Bell's vireo FE/SE Nests and forages in low, dense Not documented within (nesting) riparian thickets along water or the City.4 The species was along dry parts of intermittent found outside of the City streams; forages in riparian and at Atascadero Creek and adjacent shrubland late in nesting near the Santa Barbara season Airport.9

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 79 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 7. Special-Status Wildlife Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City

Status Documentation of Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/State)1 General Habitat Associations Occurrence2 Mammals Antrozous pallidus pallid bat None/SSC Grasslands, shrublands, woodlands, Not documented within forests; most common in open, dry the City of Goleta.4-6 habitats with rocky outcrops for Habitat for this species is roosting, but also roosts in man- present within the City. made structures and trees Bassariscus astutus ringtail None/FP Mixed forests and shrublands near Documented near rocky areas or riparian habitats; Hollister Avenue and forages near water and is seldom Fairview.6 found more than 1 kilometer (0.62 mile) from a water source

Corynorhinus Townsend's big- None/SSC Mesic habitats characterized by Not documented within townsendii eared bat coniferous and deciduous forests the City.4-6 Habitat for this and riparian habitat, but also xeric species is present within areas; roosts in limestone caves the City. and lava tubes, man-made structures, and tunnels Eumops perotis western mastiff None/SSC Chaparral, coastal and desert scrub, Not documented within californicus bat coniferous and deciduous forest the City.4-6 Habitat for this and woodland; roosts in crevices in species is present within rocky canyons and cliffs where the the City. canyon or cliff is vertical or nearly vertical, trees, and tunnels. Lasiurus blossevillii western red bat None/SSC Forest, woodland, riparian, Not documented within mesquite bosque, and orchards, the City of Goleta.4,5 including fig, apricot, peach, pear, Habitat for this species is almond, walnut, and orange; roosts present within the City. in tree canopy

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 80 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 7. Special-Status Wildlife Species Documented or with a Potential to Occur in the City

Status Documentation of Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/State)1 General Habitat Associations Occurrence2 Lasiurus cinereus hoary bat None/None Forest, woodland riparian, and Not documented within wetland habitats; also juniper scrub, the City of Goleta.4,6 riparian forest, and desert scrub in Habitat for this species is arid areas; roosts in tree foliage and present within the City. sometimes cavities, such as woodpecker holes Myotis yumanensis Yuma myotis None/None Riparian, arid scrublands and Not documented within deserts, and forests associated with the City of Goleta.4,6 water (streams, rivers, tinajas); Habitat for this species is roosts in bridges, buildings, cliff present within the City. crevices, caves, mines, and trees Neotoma lepida San Diego None/SSC Coastal scrub, desert scrub, Not documented within intermedia desert woodrat chaparral, cacti, rocky areas the City of Goleta.4,6 Habitat for this species is present within the City. Puma concolor Mountain lion None/CSC Scrubs, chaparral, riparian, Documented within the woodland, and forest; rests in rocky City at Los Carneros areas and on cliffs and ledges that Creek.10 provide cover; most abundant in riparian areas and brushy stages of most habitats throughout California, except deserts

1 Status Abbreviations FE: Federally Endangered FT: Federally Threatened FDL: Federally Delisted BCC: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bird of Conservation Concern CSC: California State Candidate for Listing SSC: California Species of Special Concern FP: California Fully Protected Species WL: California Watch List Species SE: State Endangered

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 81 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

ST: State Threatened PSE: Proposed State Endangered SDL: State Delisted 2 Habitat is present in various conditions for all species within the City. 3 Stoecker et al. (2002) 4 California Natural Diversity Database (CDFW 2020) 5 City of Goleta General Plan (2006) 6 Cheadle Center for Biodiversity and Ecological Restoration, Natural History Collection Specimen Data 7 Xerces (2020) 8 Meade et al. (2018) 9 Lehman (2020) 10 See Appendix E (Wildlife Corridor Study Report for the Creek and Watershed Management Plan) 11 Pacific Coast Steelhead Management (CDFW 2016); Dagit et al. (2020)

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 82 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

4.3.5.3 Invasive Species

Non-Native Invasive Plants

Several non-native invasive plant species were encountered during reconnaissance surveys. Once introduced to an environment, non-native invasive species establish and quickly reproduce and spread resulting in the displacement of native species, hybridization with native species, altering biological communities, and even altering ecosystem processes (Cal-IPC 2020). Those observed and listed on the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC 2020) list included but was not limited to, Arundo (Arundo donax), cape ivy (Delairea odorata), English ivy (Hedera helix), periwinkle (Vinca sp.), castor bean (Ricinus communis), pepper tree (Schinus sp.), pampasgrass (Cortaderia jubata), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), clover (Trifolium sp.), bottlebrush (Melaleuca sp.), and iceplant (Carpobrotus sp.). Additional non-native species observed included Shamel ash (Fraxinus uhdei), non- native grasses, and other ornamentals.

Those areas which were composed of a significant amount of non-native invasive during reconnaissance surveys and potential candidate areas for restoration were mapped and are shown in Figures 7a through 7i. These mapped areas are composed of four specific non-native invasive species, described below.

Arundo. Arundo, also known as giant reed, is one of the largest grasses which can grow from 6 to 30 feet tall. Arundo is thought to be native to eastern Asia and introduced in California in the early 1800s (USDA 2020). Arundo grows rapidly and can spread via underground rhizome extension or from plant fragments carried downstream.

Cape Ivy. Cape ivy is an invasive vine species which readily establishes in riparian areas and spreads to drier sites. This species grows rapidly and is capable of clonal reproduction. This species is highly tolerant of shade and disperses via wind, water, and animals (USDA 2020).

English Ivy. English ivy is an invasive vine species which is adaptable to a range of moisture and soil conditions, including rocky cliffs. This species is shade tolerant and avoids wet areas. This species spreads by bird-dispersed seeds and colonizes by trailing and climbing vines that root at nodes (USDA 2020).

Periwinkle. Periwinkle is an evergreen vine that can reach 6 to 8 inches in height. This non-native species is found in forests, woodland edges, roadsides, and moist rich soils. This species is often planted as ornamentals and can aggressively outcompete native ground-laying species (USDA 2020).

Non-Native Invasive Wildlife

During reconnaissance surveys, there were no non-native invasive wildlife species found. However, non-native invasive wildlife are still a concern for City creeks. Non-native invasive wildlife species that are of concern for the creeks in the City include green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus), bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana), crayfish (Astacoidea), mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis), and argentine ant (Linepithema humile). These species prey on or compete with native species which contributes to the decline of native species.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 83 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Mosquitofish. Mosquitofish are known for eating large quantities of mosquito larvae and reducing mosquito populations. The mosquitofish is aggressive and often competes with native species.

Green Sunfish. This species has been found in drainages throughout California. Green sunfish prey on and compete with native wildlife species including steelhead and California red-legged frogs. Green sunfish are known to occur in Glen Annie Creek near Highway 101.

Bullfrog. The bullfrog is an invasive species that is widespread throughout the world. Bullfrogs are aggressive and have a high birthrate which has contributed to their large distribution and their ability to impact native species.

Crayfish. Crayfish are freshwater crustaceans resembling small lobsters. Crayfish disturb the natural balance of ecosystems and harm native wildlife including red-legged frogs. 4.3.5.4 Ecological Services and Functions

Creeks and riparian communities are important for many plant and wildlife species because the abundance of moisture and associated vegetation provide structure, materials, and food sources for feeding, nesting, and cover opportunities. Within City creeks, many species are known to use the riparian habitat as cover and as a corridor for movement along the edges of open areas. Those species are described under their respective creek description section below.

In addition to collecting vegetation information biological reconnaissance site visits were conducted for the CWMP to assess a variety of creek characteristics that serve an important role in the ability of a creek to sustain healthy populations of plants and wildlife species. Key creek components examined and expanded upon in the individual creek sections below are as follows:

• Substrate embeddedness (%) • Algae presence • Substrate composition • Riffle presence and location (marked with a GPS unit) • Pool location and depth (marked with a GPS unit) • Locations of non-native invasive species • Canopy cover (%) • Abundances of instream habitat components (e.g., filamentous algae, emergent vegetation, woody materials, live tree roots, artificial structures) 4.3.5.5 Wildlife Movement Areas

Wildlife corridors and habitat linkages are important landscape features that provide avenues for dispersal or migration of animals and dispersal of plants (e.g., via wildlife vectors) that also contribute to population viability in several ways, including (1) ensuring continual exchange of genes between populations to aid in maintaining genetic diversity, (2) providing habitat for some species, (3) providing access to adjacent habitat areas representing additional territory for foraging and mating, (4) allowing for greater carrying capacity, and (5) providing routes for colonization of habitat lands following local population extinctions or habitat recovery from ecological catastrophes.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 84 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Some of the creek and riparian areas that traverse the City provide the last remaining physical linkages between the coast and relatively undisturbed and unfragmented habitats to the north of the City. However, these linkages are often interrupted by barriers such as roadways and long underground culverts, or constrained by the proximity of human activities. In order to understand the function and role the creeks serve as wildlife corridors a Wildlife Corridor Study was undertaken in spring and summer 2020 which examined the movement of mammal species through the creeks. The study involved camera and tracking studies. The full report is provided as Appendix E, Wildlife Corridor Study Report.

Overall, the study captured 2,363 independent observations.5 Of the 2,363 independent observations, 4 observations were of large size mammals (mountain lion, black bear, mule deer), 666 observations were of medium size mammals (coyote, bobcat, gray fox, and raccoon), and 1,403 observations were of resident species (Virginia opossum, striped skunk, rabbits, and rodents) that dwell within the creeks and do not range over large areas. Of the 2,363 observations the vast majority (2,139, 91%) were captured during the evening or night hours. Domestic species such as domestic cats and dogs were also observed on camera. Of the large and medium-sized mammals, all but 3 observations of medium-sized mammals were identified to species. Specific details on results for each creek are provided below in Section 4.3.6, Individual Creek Characteristics. 4.3.5.6 Riparian Bird Habitat

Riparian vegetation is considered to compose less than 0.5% of the total land area in California; and yet studies indicate riparian habitats are important features to the ecosystem integrity and functions of the landscape (RHJV 2004). Riparian habitats provide important breeding and overwintering areas for birds, including migration stopovers and corridors for dispersal. In spring and summer 2020, riparian bird surveys were performed along all city-wide creeks in order to record baseline riparian bird information and understand the suitability of creeks to provide habitat for riparian bird species. The full report is provided as Appendix F, Riparian Bird Study Report.

Overall, a total of 72 bird species were recorded. Of these 72 species, four are considered to be special-status and/or are typically associated with riparian habitats during the breeding season (“riparian bird” species). These species include yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia, CDFW SSC), warbling vireo (Vireo gilvus), willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii), and Wilson’s warbler (Cardellina pusilla). An additional special-status species, white-tailed kite was also observed during the surveys with one adult and two juveniles flying over Glen Annie Creek in May; and one adult flying over Bell/Winchester/Ellwood Canyon Creek in June. Specific details on results for each creek are provided below in Section 4.3.6, Individual Creek Characteristics. 4.3.6 Individual Creek Characteristics

The following sections will provide additional detail for each of the 12 creeks that intersect the City (Figure 3). These sections provide additional descriptions of characteristics for land use, hydrology, geomorphology, and biology.

5 When an individual triggered the motion sensor cameras, this was considered an independent observation; some individuals may have been caught on camera multiple times on the same day and were recorded as separate observations. Creek and Watershed Management Plan 85 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

4.3.6.1 Maria Ygnacio

Quick Facts Watershed Area 11.67 mi2 (contributing sub-watershed); 0.17 mi2 (City sub-watershed) Creek Length 6.7 miles (total); 0.8 miles (City sub-watershed) Creek Elevation (within 27 – 61 feet City boundaries)1 Land Use Adjacent ~90% of adjacent parcels (400-foot buffer) are designated commercial or Creek (City sub- residential watershed) 49% of the watershed is designated as impervious Channel Alignment Primarily naturally aligned2, with some engineered aspects to the channel downstream of Hollister Hydrology Primarily seasonal/intermittent; perennial reaches north of the City Beneficial Uses MUN, AGR, GWR, REC-1, REC-2, WILD, COLD, MIGR, SPWN, COMM Geomorphology Channel set approx. 4 – 30 feet below the adjacent land surface

Channel Sediments Mixture of sand, gravels, and cobbles Biology Well-shaded (generally 98% canopy cover),3 suitable habitat for both common and special-status species 1 Elevations estimated from Google Earth. 2 Naturally aligned = channels that appear to be in approximately the same alignment as historical topographic maps. 3 Based on an adjusted modified convex densiometer (OWEB 1999) at one representative sampling location.

Maria Ygnacio creek is the furthest east watershed in the Goleta CWMP Watershed Overview Area. The creek runs along the eastern border of the City on either side of Hollister Avenue prior to its confluence with Atascadero creek. Similar to the majority of the creeks running through Goleta Valley, Maria Ygnacio’s headwaters begin above 3,000 feet above mean sea level in the Santa Ynez Mountains. As for the larger watersheds in the CWMP Watershed Overview Area, Maria Ygnacio has been identified as one of the most dependable creeks for providing surface flow in the Goleta Valley.

Land Use

The watershed analysis was split between the City and the contributing sub-watersheds (Figure 2 and Figure 4). The contributing Maria Ygnacio Creek sub-watershed comprises more than 98% of the entire assessed watershed area for Maria Ygnacio. Approximately 72% of the contributing Maria Ygnacio Creek sub-watershed is located within undeveloped (35%) and sparse residential (39%) Santa Ynez Creek and Watershed Management Plan 86 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Mountains. The remaining 26% of the upper watershed is comprised mostly of agriculture and residential. The City sub-watershed is mostly comprised of commercial (32%), street (20%), high- density residential (17%), and industrial (16%) land uses. All land uses identified within the contributing and City sub-watersheds are provided in Table 8, Maria Ygnacio Creek Land Use.

Table 8. Maria Ygnacio Creek Land Use

Acres within City Sub- Acres within Contributing Sub- Land Uses Watershed Watershed General Agriculture -- 559.0 Livestock/Equestrian -- 31.3 Auto Shop/ Retail 1.3 -- Commercial 34.1 42.7 High Density Residential 17.8 504.6 Industrial 16.5 11.3 Landfill -- 15.2 Low Density Residential -- 5.9 Mixed Agricultural/commercial 4.8 -- Mixed agricultural/open space -- 27.7 Mixed Commercial/Residential 9.9 0.1 Moderate Density Residential -- 186.4 Residential Ranchette -- 95.5 Santa Ynez Mountains - -- 2,898.2 Residential Santa Ynez Mountains - -- 2,581.2 Undeveloped Park/Open space -- 253.9 Utility -- 42.6 Street 21.0 215.6 School/Education -- 9.6 Total 105.5 7,465.7 Sources: County of Santa Barbara Assessor Parcel Digital Database Closed Roll 2019; Adopted City of Goleta General Plan/Coastal Plan Land Use Designations.

Land use directly adjacent the creek was also assessed within a 200-foot buffer on either side of the channel. Along this 4,000-foot reach, 39% of the adjacent parcels are designated as commercial, 28% as high-density residential, and 21% as mixed commercial/residential. Within the City, there are 14 parcels and approximately six structures within 100 feet of the centerline of Maria Ygnacio Creek. Of those six structures, three are in residential districts and two are in office and industrial districts.

Beneficial Uses and Water Quality

The Beneficial Uses of Maria Ygnacio creek are as follows:

• Municipal and domestic water supply

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 87 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

• Agricultural supply • Groundwater recharge • Recreation water with body contact (swimming) • Recreation water (non-body contact like boating etc.) • Wildlife habitat • Cold freshwater habitat • Spawning, reproduction and/or early development • Commercial and sports fishing

A complete list of the WQOs associated with all inland waters and WQOs established for specific Beneficial Uses is provided in Appendix D. Maria Ygnacio Creek meets all but five of the WQOs established for it (Table 9). Sources of impairments for all creeks in the CWMP are listed as “unknown” in the State’s 303(d) database, as they are considered non-point source pollutants that are generated over large areas and do not have specific discharge points. Potential sources for each creek’s associated impairments are provided in Appendix D.

Table 9. Maria Ygnacio Creek Water Quality Impairments

Numeric/Qualitative Applicable Thresholds (based upon most Maria Ygnacio WQOs Beneficial Uses stringent WQO) Creek Status Floating Materials All Inland Avoid nuisance or adverse Not Meeting WQOs Waters impacts to beneficial uses (SBCK) for trash associated with floating solids, liquids, foams, and scum. Turbidity All Inland Where natural turbidity is <50 Not Meeting WQO Waters NTU (Nephelometric Turbidity (State 303(d) list) Units), increase not to exceed for exceeding 20% - Where natural turbidity is turbidity WQOs in 3 between 50 and 100 NTU, not out of 23 samples to exceed 10 NTU - Where natural turbidity is >100 NTU, not to exceed 10% pH All inland pH shall not be depressed Not Meeting WQO Waters / MUN below 7.0 (COLD), or raised (State 303(d) list) / AGR / REC-1 above 8.3 (MUN, AGR, REC-1, for not meeting / REC -2 / REC-2) COLD WQO COLD Inorganic Chemicals MUN Not exceed maximum Not Meeting WQO contaminant levels of inorganic (State 303(d) list) chemicals for primary drinking for Sodium water standards (CA Code of Regulations, Title 22)

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 88 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 9. Maria Ygnacio Creek Water Quality Impairments

Numeric/Qualitative Applicable Thresholds (based upon most Maria Ygnacio WQOs Beneficial Uses stringent WQO) Creek Status Bacteria REC-1 / REC-2 30-day 5-sample mean fecal Not Meeting WQOs coliform concentration not to (State 303(d) list) exceed 200/100 mL, nor more for Enterococcus, than 10% in that 30-day period E. coli, and fecal exceed 400/100 mL (REC - 1) coliform

Channel Geomorphology

Aerial photographs show that in 1928,6 Maria Ygnacio Creek was likely within a predominantly natural alignment within the City of Goleta as a tree-lined, single-thread channel, though well-established agricultural land was present on both sides at that time. Downstream of Hollister Avenue (approximately 0.2 miles), the channel was less prominent than in the upstream reach and lacked heavy tree cover, with evidence of distributary channel deposition on the floodplain that suggests that this portion of the creek may have naturally shifted as a result of flooding. The lower-most portion of the channel Photo MY-1 (downstream of the City limits), appears to have been ditched and straightened by this point in time. The channel has remained in the 1928 alignment, although by 1971 the lower portion of the channel appears to have been further confined and “smoothed” by urbanization, perhaps a result of building a levee along portions of the channel for flood control.

Locations along the creek within City limits, as well as downstream and upstream, were visited as shown on Figure 9a, Geomorphology Resources: East. Overall, the creek is mostly shaded by riparian trees on both sides, the channel is composed of sand-to-cobble sized sediment, and there are limited signs of active erosion. Historically, the channel has downcut into the alluvial plain, whether naturally as a function of watershed processes (such as tectonic uplift or changes in sea level), or perhaps more likely as a result of land use changes Photo MY-2 over the past century or more as the area has progressively developed into agriculture, ranching, and urban land uses. In the present-day, this means that the stream channel is set approximately 6 to 30 feet below the surrounding terrace surfaces, depending on location.

6 Historical aerial photographs from University of California, Santa Barbara were reviewed for each creek. Creek and Watershed Management Plan 89 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

In general, there appears to be more active geomorphic impacts in the reach upstream of Hollister Avenue than in the downstream reach. The downstream reach contains no knickpoints at the locations visited during field surveys. The downstream channel bed is not historically downcut as deeply as upstream, and as a result has less channel confinement within the City limits (Photo MY-1). The downstream extent of the grade control at Hollister Avenue is concrete with small boulders and large cobbles grouted into the concrete and riprap has been placed in the channel bed downstream of the concrete. Both elements provide energy dissipation meant to lessen erosion. No knickpoint is present here, so the infrastructure appears to be working currently. The reach downstream of Hollister Avenue contains well-shaded creek Photo MY-3 banks that are on the order of 4-8 feet in height. The channel bed contains a mix of sands, gravels, and cobbles with plane bed and shallow pool bedforms, which are indicative of active geomorphic processes that can support habitat for aquatic species. It is important to note that field surveys were conducted during dry conditions, so bedforms could become more apparent when the channel is wet and enough water is flowing to see bedforms more clearly.

Upstream of Hollister Avenue the channel is more deeply incised, with banks from approximately 10 to 20 feet in height on both sides. Impacts include fence revetment along the channel banks (Photo MY-2). Additionally, a concreted channel and grade control structure is present under and downstream of Highway 101 and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). A knickpoint approximately 7 to 8 feet deep at the downstream end of the concrete channel indicates the potential for scour in areas where hardened infrastructure transitions to natural channel materials (Photo MY-3). The left bank at and downstream of the knickpoint is concreted along the bike path and then transitions into fence revetment, which are also present at

Photo MY-4 various spot-check locations along City parks and at the bike path crossing near Lassen Drive and Tehama Drive, suggesting it is widespread above Hollister Avenue. The banks nevertheless appear stable in the areas canvassed, with no signs of bank erosion. The reach contains reasonably well-shaded creek banks. In general, the channel bed contains a mix of sands, gravels, and cobbles with plane bed and shallow pool bedforms (Photo MY-4), which are indicative of active geomorphic processes that can support habitat for aquatic species.

Extensive geomorphic impacts in one section of creek, downstream of Cathedral Oaks Road but upstream of the City limits were noted during field surveys. At this location, the channel appears to be undergoing active downcutting and considerable erosion of the banks (up to approximately 20 to 30 feet in height). These eroding banks may be contributing to a higher rate of sediment being deposited into the channel, although excessive sedimentation appears to only be a localized impact in Maria Ygnacio Creek (potentially associated with lower gradients upstream or downstream of grade control structures) rather than wide-spread throughout the City. For instance, portions of the channel near

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 90 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA the University Drive crossing7 appear to have experienced high rates of sedimentation, resulting in a relatively soft bed composed primarily of coarse sand with some gravel and little apparent bedform development. Sedimentation does not appear to be so prominent that it is contributing to active bank erosion or localized bank failure within the City.

Flooding

Based on review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 100-Year Flood Zone (Figure 5) (FEMA 2020), flooding within Maria Ygnacio Creek resultant from the 100-Year event is mostly contained within the riparian corridor. There is a small downstream section, outside the City boundary, northwest of the confluence with Atascadero Creek and outside of the riparian corridor that becomes inundated and this area is currently occupied by greenhouses.

Biological Resources

Vegetation Communities

Overall, Maria Ygnacio Creek is well-shaded (generally 98% canopy cover) with many opportunities to provide habitat for plants and wildlife. As shown on Figure 7a, Biological Resources: Maria Ygnacio, two vegetation communities were observed within the creek: (1) 4.69 acres of coast live oak-arroyo willow woodland located throughout the majority of the creek; and (2) 1.09 acres of coast live oak woodland located in two particular sections, approximately 160 feet north of Hollister Avenue and directly south of the UPRR. The significant change of composition and structure of the coast live oak woodland at these two locations is significant enough to consider them as separate vegetation communities. Overall, the coast live oak – arroyo willow woodland is characterized by a dense understory along both banks of the creek. Additional trees intersect the vegetation communities, such as white alder, black cottonwood, and California bay. Understory vegetation is composed of shrubs, such as poison oak, blackberry, mugwort, ash, wood sorrel, and non-native species described below. The center of this channel is relatively open and walkable with occasional occurrences of umbrella- sedge (Cyperus sp.), suggesting some regular patterns of water present along the creek.

As shown in Figure 7a, within the City’s limits, there are approximately 14 separate sections of riffles and 8 pools that characterize this approximately 0.80-mile stretch of creek. Riffles (Photo MY-5) and pools occur from the southern extent to the northern extent of the creek within the City boundaries. Along the riffles the substrate embeddedness (that is, the extent to which coarse sediment – such as gravel, cobbles, and boulders – are surrounded by fine sediment – such as silt, sand, or mud) generally ranges from 0 to 80%, with an Photo MY-5 estimated average of 40%. The instream characteristics include the presence of a few boulders, a moderate amount of woody materials, an abundance of overhanging vegetation, and a moderate amount of live tree roots.

7 This location is upstream of the City boundary, but close enough that conditions may locally extend into the upper portions of the City reach that were not canvassed during reconnaissance. Creek and Watershed Management Plan 91 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

These components provide some opportunities for habitat, food, or contribute to the organic components of the community, including the soil.

The topsoil in the center of the channel is a sandy substrate with medium loam under the topsoil and medium to very fine, sandy loam along the banks. As shown through the characteristics of this creek, this soil is an ideal plant-growing medium that supports the dense and complex vegetation communities, plants, and wildlife present along this creek. A notable characteristic along this creek is the presence of undercut banks in several places (Photo MY-6). Undercut banks suggest the regular presence of flowing water along this creek. The wetted width is estimated to be 3 to 4 feet wide.8 The presence of Photo MY-6 seasonal water flow, complex in-stream characteristics, and presence of an abundance of organic material suggest that Maria Ygnacio has the potential to provide suitable feeding, cover, and nesting opportunities for a variety of plant and wildlife species.

Invasive Plants

Arundo and cape ivy were present throughout the length of Maria Ygnacio Creek within the City limits, suggesting potential locations for one aspect of future restoration activities. The general locations of these observations are shown in Figure 7a.

Wildlife Species

Common Wildlife As described above, coast live oak woodlands, including coast live oak – arroyo willow, are well known to provide suitable food, shading, and nesting sources for both common and special-status species. The vegetated structure of Maria Ygnacio Creek provides many opportunities for a variety of wildlife to seek refuge, food, and/or nesting activities. During the biological reconnaissance surveys along Maria Ygnacio Creek, 30 species were observed including 26 bird species and 4 mammals, including tracks. Appendix G, Plant and Wildlife Species Documented, provides a cumulative list of wildlife species observed. It should be noted that reconnaissance surveys were brief and do not capture all species utilizing the habitat. It is also likely that amphibians, such as pacific chorus frog, frequent this creek, but were not noted during surveys.

Special-Status Wildlife Several special-status species have a potential to occur within the reaches of Maria Ygnacio Creek inside and outside the City limits. These include, but are not limited to, southwestern pond turtle, California red-legged frog, two-striped garter snake, California newt, and steelhead. Maria Ygnacio is also designated as US NMFS critical habitat for steelhead. The creek reach within the City limits is considered to provide low quality salmonid habitat. A contributor to this condition is two anthropogenic migratory barriers: 1) a concrete channelization/box culvert under Hollister Avenue (low severity barrier); and 2) a seven-foot high drop from the concrete footing of the UPRR crossing (high severity

8 As measured in December 2019. Creek and Watershed Management Plan 92 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA barrier) (Stoecker et al. 2002). Barrier severity refers to the degree of difficulty that a structure or feature would impose on upstream migration of healthy adult steelhead during ideal flow conditions (Stoecker et al. 2002). Steelhead have been documented in the pool downstream from the UPPR bridge (Stoecker et al. 2002) as well as upstream and downstream of the City’s limits. Therefore, although they have been documented within the City, existing barriers would pose some additional difficulty for their passage. In addition, special-status bats have a potential to occur underneath the Hollister Avenue bridge. As mentioned in Table 7, tricolored blackbird CNDDB database polygon occurrences overlap this creek (CDFW 2020). However, tricolored blackbirds were last recorded in this area in 1971, none were detected during the 2017 statewide survey (UC Davis 2017), and no suitable nesting habitat (wetlands, agricultural fields) occur within this creek.

Wildlife Movement and Riparian Birds

Wildlife corridor camera and tracking studies (Appendix E) documented the following mammal species of particular interest within Maria Ygnacio Creek: gray fox, coyote, and multiple resident species, including Virginia opossum, striped skunk, squirrels, racoons, mice, and domestic cats. Maria Ygnacio is a well shaded creek with many natural resources. The creek provides connectivity from the Santa Ynez Mountains to habitat areas south of the City, including Goleta Slough and More Mesa.

A total of 35 bird species were observed along Maria Ygnacio Creek during surveys (Appendix F). Riparian birds of interest observed during surveys includes yellow warbler, Wilson’s warbler (Cardellina pusilla), and warbling vireo in May. The diversity of tree species, understory vegetation, canopy heights, and presence of intermittent water flow would provide suitable nesting, feeding, and cover opportunities for a variety of species, particularly those associated with the following general habitats during the breeding season: riparian, open habitats, woodland, grassland, chaparral, scrub, and cosmopolitan areas.

4.3.6.2 San Jose and Old San Jose

Quick Facts Watershed Area 7.94 mi2 (contributing sub-watershed); 0.83 mi2 (City sub-watershed) Creek Length 9.9 miles (total); 1.7 miles (City sub-watershed) Creek Elevation (within 6 – 60 feet above mean sea level City boundaries)1 Land Use Adjacent ~70% of adjacent parcels (400-foot buffer) are designated commercial, Creek (City sub- residential, or street watershed) 49% of the watershed is designated as impervious within City Channel Alignment Primarily natural alignment to Hollister Avenue; realigned and concreted downstream of Hollister Avenue to Goleta Slough. Hydrology Primarily seasonal/intermittent – Approximate one-mile perennial reach that begins downstream from San Marcos Pass in the upper watershed (EDC, 2019) Beneficial Uses MUN, AGR, GWR, REC-1, REC-2, WILD, COLD, WARM, MIGR, SPWN, RARE, FRSH, COMM Geomorphology Channel set approx. 10 – 20 feet below the adjacent land surface

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 93 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Quick Facts

Channel Sediments Mixture of sand to large cobbles Biology Outside of concrete channels, habitats are well-shaded (generally 91% canopy cover),1 suitable habitat for both common and special-status species 1 Elevations estimated from Google Earth. 2 Based on an adjusted modified convex densiometer (OWEB 1999) at two representative sampling locations.

San Jose Creek and Old San Jose Creek are positioned near the eastern boundary of the City, between Maria Ygnacio Creek and Las Vegas Creek. The total watershed area is 8.8 square miles, with 9% of that area within the City limits. The watershed upstream of the City comprises 91% of total area. Downstream of Hollister Avenue, San Jose Creek flows to Goleta Slough through a concrete-lined flood control channel constructed in the early 1960s. The alignment of the flood control channel parallels Highway 217, routing flows away from the prior alignment of lower San Jose Creek. This abandoned portion of the creek, now known as Old San Jose Creek, still functions to provide local drainage of the surrounding developed area.

San Jose Creek is the second largest watershed in the Watershed Overview Area. Creek diversions and groundwater extraction for the orchards in the foothills have been identified by EDC as significant reasons for reduced perennial flows within these reaches (EDC 2019). San Jose Creek ultimately joins Atascadero Creek prior to its discharge into the Goleta Slough.

Land Use

The watershed analysis was split between the City and the contributing sub-watersheds (Figures 2 and 4). The contributing San Jose Creek sub-watershed comprises approximately 91% of the entire

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 94 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA assessed watershed area for San Jose Creek. Approximately 65% of the contributing San Jose Creek sub-watershed is located within undeveloped (27%) and sparse residential (38%) areas associated with the Santa Ynez Mountains and foothills. The remaining 35% of the contributing sub-watershed is comprised mostly of agriculture (21%) and streets/residential (9%). The City sub-watershed is mostly comprised of high-density residential (27%), streets (24%), industrial (19%), and commercial (18%) land uses. All land uses identified within the contributing and City sub-watersheds are provided in Table 10, San Jose and Old San Jose Creek Land Uses.

Table 10. San Jose and Old San Jose Creek Land Uses

Acres within City Sub- Acres within Contributing Sub- Land Uses Watershed Watershed Agriculture 2.3 1,068.4 Auto Shop/ Retail 15.1 -- Cemetery 2.0 -- Commercial 97.4 1.5 High Density Residential 141.0 253.2 Industrial 100.6 4.3 Landfill -- -- Low Density Residential -- -- Mixed agricultural/commercial 8.6 -- Mixed Commercial/Residential 7.4 -- Moderate Density Residential -- 127.1 Residential Ranchette -- 32.3 Santa Ynez Mountains - -- 1,919.7 Residential Santa Ynez Mountains - -- 1,370.7 Undeveloped Park/Open Space 17.9 60.9 Utility 5.8 Street 127.4 229.5 School/Education 9.8 9.0 TOTAL 529.5 5,082.2

Land use within the 200-foot buffer on either side of the channel within the City limits mainly consisted of: 25% streets, 23% commercial, 21% high-density residential, 12% industrial, and 12% open space/parks. Within the City, there are 167 parcels and approximately 88 structures within 100 feet of the centerline of San Jose and Old San Jose Creeks. Of those 89 structures, 51 are in residential zone districts, 10 are in commercial zone districts, 26 are in office and industrial zone districts, and two are in public and quasi-public zone districts.

Beneficial Uses and Water Quality

The beneficial uses of San Jose and Old San Jose Creeks are as follows:

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 95 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

• Municipal and domestic water supply • Agricultural supply • Groundwater recharge • Recreation water with body contact (swimming) • Recreation water (non-body contact like hiking, boating, etc.) • Wildlife habitat • Cold freshwater habitat • Warm freshwater habitat • Migration of aquatic organisms • Spawning, reproduction and/or early development • Rare, threatened, or endangered species • Freshwater replenishment+ • Commercial and sports fishing

A complete list of the WQOs associated with all inland waters and WQOs established for specific Beneficial Uses is provided in Appendix D. San Jose Creek meets all but four of the WQOs established for it (Table 11). Potential sources for each impairment are also discussed in Appendix D.

Table 11. San Jose Creek Water Quality Impairments

Numeric/Qualitative Thresholds Applicable (based upon most stringent San Jose Creek WQOs Beneficial Uses WQO) Status pH All inland Waters pH shall not be depressed Not Meeting WQO / MUN / AGR / below 7.0 (COLD / WARM), 6.5 (State 303(d) list) REC-1 / REC -2 / (REC 1, REC 2, MUN, AGR) or COLD / WARM raised above 8.3 (MUN, AGR, REC-1, REC-2) Inorganic Chemicals MUN Not exceed maximum Not Meeting WQO contaminant levels of inorganic (State 303(d) list) chemicals for primary drinking for Chloride and water standards (CA Code of Sodium Regulations, Title 22) Bacteria REC-1 / REC-2 30-day 5-sample mean fecal Not Meeting WQOs coliform concentration not to (State 303(d) list) exceed 200/100 mL, nor more for Enterococcus, than 10% in that 30-day period E. coli, and fecal exceed 400/100 mL (REC - 1) coliform Electrical Conductivity MUN Waters with electrical Not Meeting conductivity exceeding 5,000 Criteria for MUN microsiemens per centimeter Beneficial Use are not suitable for use as (State 303(d) list) municipal or domestic water for Electrical supply Conductivity

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 96 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Channel Geomorphology

Field surveys were conducted along the creek throughout the City (Figure 9a). Upstream of Hollister Avenue, the channel appears to be in its natural alignment. Bank protection riprap is located at most, if not all, road crossings. In some areas, both banks are lined with fence revetment, with segments extending for hundreds of feet along the channel. The creek is shaded by riparian trees on both sides, has sand-to-cobble sized sediment and geomorphic bedforms, and there are signs of local sedimentation and active erosion at channel Photo SJ-1 banks at several locations. Historically, the San Jose Creek channel has downcut into the alluvial plain upstream, whether naturally as a function of Photowatershed SJ-2 processes, including tectonic activity, or perhaps more likely as a result of land use changes over the past century or more as the area has progressively developed into agriculture, ranching, and urban land uses. In the present-day, this means that the stream channel is set approximately 10 to 20 feet below the surrounding terrace surfaces, depending on location.

Of all the creek locations canvassed within City limits, the reach of San Jose Creek upstream of Hollister Avenue appears to be experiencing the highest degree of geomorphic impact. Channel bed materials include a size range from sand to large cobbles. The bed sediments contain some bedforms such as riffles, pools, and bars, which are indicative of active geomorphic processes that support habitat for aquatic species. Field surveys noted a relatively high volume of poorly consolidated sediment Photo SJ-2 stored in sand/gravel bars, which may indicate excess sediment deposition within the City. Bars forming on the inside of bends could be diverting flow into banks, contributing to bank erosion.

Active bank erosion noted in the reach seems to suggest that the channel is in a state of dynamic geomorphic adjustment. For instance, active bank erosion is present on the right bank along the outer aspect of a channel bend above Calle Real near Somerset Drive. There, the location of fence revetment illustrates bank location and bed elevation when the fence was built, and just how much erosion has occurred since then (Photo SJ-1). Under current conditions, the fence is suspended above the creek bed by approximately 2 to 3 feet, indicating the degree of downcutting, whereas the right bank has been eroded approximately 6 to 10 feet behind the fence, illustrating the degree of bank retreat. Just upstream, the exclusion of trees from the channel and accumulation of materials behind the fence Photo SJ-3 is evident (Photo SJ-2). Another site with fence revetment and some minor

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 97 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA bed erosion is located near the end of Merida Drive. At this location, root structures of trees growing on the bank behind the fence revetment have become exposed as the channel downcuts though the roots have helped to slow erosion somewhat.

As with the other creeks in the City, channel confinement in Photo SJ-4 San Jose Creek occurs at road crossings in the form of natural Phot o SJ-3 bottom culverts (such as at the Calle Real bridge, Photo SJ- 3), box culverts with concrete bottoms, or piped flows. Additionally, changes in hydrology upstream of these areas, combined with the confined state of the historically incised channel, may be resulting in channel adjustments that include active bank erosion.

Downstream of Hollister Avenue on San Jose Creek, the flood control channel bed and banks are concrete-lined with little geomorphic bedform and no riparian trees. Concrete channels are generally maintained by removing sediment and other materials to maintain conveyance capacity, which serves to move flood flows quickly through an area but provides little natural geomorphic function. As part of the construction of a fish passage and channel capacity project in 2014, low flow fish-passage elements were installed along this segment of the creek. The fish passage structures provide some in- channel variability, which helps to modestly slow flows and Photo SJ-5 locally trap sediment (Photo SJ-4). These structures add some geomorphic value relative to more typical concrete reaches, but geomorphic value of this reach remains low overall.

Old San Jose Creek

South of Hollister Avenue between South Kellogg Avenue and Kinman Avenue, Old San Jose Creek abruptly begins at an approximate 30-inch diameter outfall pipe that is largely filled with sediment (Photo SJ-5). From here to Daley Street, Old San Jose Creek appears to flow along the historical alignment of lower San Jose Creek since at least 1927; an alignment that may have been accentuated when the area was converted to agriculture prior to 1927. Channel banks approximately 4 to 8 feet in height show characteristics of slope alteration and straightening, though remain earthen except at road crossings (Photo SJ-6). Bed sediments are sandy with no discernable channel bedforms.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 98 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Downstream of Daley Street, there was no well- defined channel form in aerial photographs from 1927, but it was ditched by 1944. In this reach, the channel banks are likewise sloped engineered banks, with the bed sediments being sandy with some gravels. This section of the creek is wide and well vegetated, with adjacent open fields to the east and west that provide floodplain area, and potentially, wildlife corridors. The downstream end of San Pedro Creek is a short distance away, as is Photo SJ-6 the Goleta Slough.

Flooding

Based on review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 100-Year Flood Zone (Figure 5) (FEMA 2020), flooding within San Jose Creek resultant from a 100-year event is mostly contained within the riparian corridor upstream from Highway 101. As the creek approaches Hollister Avenue, flood stage exceeds the elevation of the right (west) bank and floodwater travels through the commercial/industrial/residential sections of the City on either side of Hollister Avenue west of Highway 217. Floodwaters proceed west-southwest along Hollister Avenue until they reach San Pedro Creek near Fairview Avenue. Additional flooding is identified along both Old San Jose Creek and San Jose Creek downstream from Hollister Avenue, with most of it occurring near the confluence with San Pedro Creek and Atascadero Creek. Biological Resources

Vegetation Communities

Overall, San Jose and Old San Jose are well-shaded creeks (generally 91% canopy cover) with habitat for plants and wildlife. As shown in Figure 7b, Biological Resources: San Jose and Old San Jose, five vegetation communities were observed within the creek: (1) 7.23 acres of arroyo willow thickets; (2) 3.27 acres of black cottonwood; (3) 8.09 acres of western sycamore; (4) 0.11 acres of western sycamore – coast live oak; and (5) 8.34 acres of western sycamore – coast live oak – arroyo willow. The understory vegetation along Old San Jose is generally dense and interspersed with many invasive species, Photo SJ-7 particularly arundo and cape ivy. The black cottonwood understory is particularly dense with cape ivy (Photo SJ-7). As shown in Figure 7b, there are approximately eight general areas where invasive plant species were mapped along an approximately 0.80 mile stretch of the creek. No pools or riffles were noted in Old San Jose Creek.

North of Hollister Avenue, the San Jose Creek channel is open and walkable with both riffles and pools located throughout the creek. The riparian vegetation north of Hollister is western sycamore and western sycamore – coast live oak. Additional trees intersect the vegetation communities, such as California bay, ash, and arroyo willow. Understory vegetation is composed of shrubs, such as toyon,

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 99 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA mulefat, and coyote brush. The herbaceous cover includes species such as wood sorrel, blackberry, mugwort, nasturtium, and non-native grasses.

As shown on Figure 7b, within the City limits, the majority of the 1.06-mile channel north of Hollister Avenue is composed of riffles and over 14 pools. Along the riffles the substrate embeddedness generally ranges from 0 to 80%, with an estimated average of 30 to 40%. The instream characteristics include the presence of a few boulders, some woody materials, abundance of overhanging vegetation, and a moderate amount of live tree roots. These components provide some opportunities for habitat and food, or contribute to the organic components of the community, including the soil.

The topsoil in the center of the channel is a sandy substrate with coarse loamy sand and moderately fine sandy clay loam along the banks. As shown through the characteristics of this creek, this soil is ideal plant-growing medium that supports the dense and complex vegetation communities and wildlife present along this creek. The wetted width is estimated to be 3 to 5 feet. Overall, the presence of seasonal water flow, complex in-stream characteristics, and presence of an abundance of organic material suggest that San Jose, and portions of Old San Jose, have the potential to provide suitable feeding, cover, and nesting opportunities for a variety of plant and wildlife species.

Invasive Plants

Arundo and cape ivy were present throughout the length of San Jose and Old San Jose within the City limits, suggesting potential locations for any future restoration activities. The general locations of these observations are shown in Figure 7b. In addition, English ivy was present in lesser quantities north of Hollister Avenue.

Wildlife Species

Common Wildlife As described above, the vegetation communities present along Old San Jose and San Jose Creeks, are well known to provide suitable food, shading, and nesting sources for both common and special- status species. During the biological reconnaissance surveys 22 species were observed including 19 bird species, one amphibian, and two invertebrates. Appendix G, Plant and Wildlife Species Documented, provides a cumulative list of wildlife species observed. It should be noted that reconnaissance surveys were brief and do not capture all species utilizing the habitat.

Special-Status Wildlife Several special-status species have a potential to occur within the reaches of San Jose and Old San Jose Creeks within the City’s limit. These include, but are not limited to, southwestern pond turtle, California red-legged frog, California newt, and two-striped garter snake, and Cooper’s hawk. San Jose Creek is federally designated as critical habitat for steelhead and steelhead have been documented up and downstream of the City’s limits. The flood control channel within the City limits was considered impassible for steelhead (Stoecker et al. 2002) and redesigned and widened in 2014 as part of a flood control and steelhead trout restoration project (San Jose Creek Capacity Improvement and Fish Passage Project).

Wildlife Corridor and Linkages

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 100 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Wildlife corridor camera and tracking studies (Appendix E) documented the following mammal species of particular interest within San Jose Creek: bobcat, coyote, raccoon and multiple resident species, including Virginia opossum, striped skunk, squirrel, brush rabbit, rodents, and domestic cats. San Jose is a well shaded creek with many natural resources. The creek provides connectivity from the Santa Ynez Mountains to habitat areas south of the City, including Goleta Slough.

A total of 36 bird species were observed along San Jose Creek during surveys (Appendix F). Riparian birds of interest observed during surveys includes yellow warbler and warbling vireo north of Hollister Avenue in May; and warbling vireo north of US 101 in June. Similar to Maria Ygnacio, the diversity of trees and intermittent water flows would also support a variety of food resources such as invertebrates, including aquatic invertebrates, berries, seeds, and nuts. Particularly bird species likely to occur along this creek include those associated with the following general habitats during the breeding season: riparian, open habitats, woodland, grassland, chaparral, scrub, and cosmopolitan areas.

4.3.6.3 Las Vegas

Quick Facts Watershed Area 1.51 mi2 (contributing sub-watershed); 1.05 mi2 (City sub-watershed) Creek Length 2.8 miles (total); 1.2 miles (City sub-watershed) Creek Elevation (within 23 – 65 feet above mean sea level City boundaries)1 Land Use Adjacent 77% of adjacent parcels (400-foot buffer) are designated commercial, Creek (City sub- residential, or street; 12% is education, and 10% open space/parks watershed) 43% of the watershed in the City is designated as impervious Channel Alignment Las Vegas Creek has an altered channel alignment and is channelized (earthen or concrete) within the City limits. Hydrology Primarily seasonal/intermittent – Small perennial sections have been identified, including a reach just at the upstream section within the City limits that receives runoff from agriculture and residential land uses in the foothills. Beneficial Uses MUN, GWR, REC-1, REC-2, WILD, COLD, WARM, COMM Geomorphology Channel set approx. 6 – 15 feet below the adjacent land surface.

Channel Sediments Coarse sand with some gravel Biology Some areas well-shaded (generally 100% canopy cover),2 however narrow sandy channel constrains suitability for both common and special-status species 1 Elevations estimated from Google Earth. 2 Based on an adjusted modified convex densiometer (OWEB 1999) at two representative sampling locations.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 101 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Las Vegas Creek is positioned between San Jose/Old San Jose Creek to the east and San Pedro Creek to the west. The Las Vegas Creek watershed area within the City accounts for 41% of the 2.6 square miles of the total watershed area. The upper watershed comprises 59% of the total drainage area. Las Vegas Creek is a large tributary to San Pedro Creek with headwaters beginning around 1,000 feet above mean sea level in the Santa Ynez Mountains. Despite being one of the smaller watersheds contributing flow to the City, the Las Vegas Creek watershed area within the City limits collects runoff from the third largest area of the City (Figure 4). Las Vegas Creek joins San Pedro Creek just above Hollister Avenue prior to its confluence with Atascadero Creek upstream from the Goleta Slough.

Land Use

The watershed analysis was split between the City and the contributing sub-watersheds (Figure 2 and Figure 4). The contributing Las Vegas Creek sub-watershed comprises approximately 59% of the entire assessed watershed area for Las Vegas. Approximately 35% of the contributing San Jose Creek sub- watershed is located within undeveloped (7%) and sparse residential (28%) areas of the Santa Ynez Mountains and foothills. The remaining 65% of the contributing sub-watershed is comprised mostly of residential (34%), agriculture (15%), open space/park (6%) and livestock/equestrian (8%) uses. The City sub-watershed is mostly comprised of residential (50%), commercial (15%, including auto shops and auto retail), streets (20%), and open space/park (6%) areas. All land uses identified within the contributing and City sub-watersheds are provided in Table 12, Las Vegas Creek Land Uses.

Table 12. Las Vegas Creek Land Uses

Acres within City Sub- Acres within Contributing Sub- Land Uses Watershed Watershed Agriculture 2.8 142.8 Livestock/Equestrian -- 75.5 Auto Shop/ Retail 3.6 --

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 102 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 12. Las Vegas Creek Land Uses

Acres within City Sub- Acres within Contributing Sub- Land Uses Watershed Watershed Commercial 100.6 -- High Density Residential 331.1 7.4 Industrial 1.4 4.0 Low Density Residential 8.5 -- Mixed Commercial/Residential 9.4 -- Moderate Density Residential -- 65.3 Residential Ranchette -- 254.8 Santa Ynez Mountains - -- 269.4 Residential Santa Ynez Mountains - -- 64.4 Undeveloped Park/Open Space 40.7 56.7 Utility -- 0.9 Street 136.3 24.8 School/Education 39.8 -- TOTAL 674.4 965.9

Land use within the 200-foot buffer on either side of the channel within the City limits mainly consists of: 20% streets, 16% commercial, 41% high-density residential, 12% educational centers, and 10% open space/parks. Within the City, there are 60 parcels and approximately 64 structures within 100 feet of the centerline of Las Vegas Creek. Of those 64 structures, 53 are in residential zone districts, one is in a commercial zone district, and 10 are in public and quasi-public zone districts.

Beneficial Uses and Water Quality

The beneficial uses of Las Vegas Creek are as follows:

• Municipal and domestic water supply • Groundwater recharge • Recreation water with body contact (swimming) • Recreation water (non-body contact like hiking, boating etc.) • Wildlife habitat • Cold freshwater habitat • Warm freshwater habitat • Commercial and sports fishing

A complete list of the WQOs associated with all inland waters and WQOs established for specific Beneficial Uses is provided in Appendix D. Las Vegas Creek meets all but one of the WQOs established for it (Table 13). Potential sources for each impairment are also discussed in Appendix D.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 103 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 13. Las Vegas Creek Water Quality Impairments

Numeric/Qualitative Thresholds Applicable (based upon most stringent Las Vegas Creek WQOs Beneficial Uses WQO) Status Biostimulatory All Inland Avoid concentrations that Not Meeting WQOs Substances Waters promote aquatic growths (e.g., (SBCK) for algae) to the extent that it Biostimulatory causes nuisance or adversely Substances affects beneficial uses. SBCK recommended concentrations is <5 and >13 mg/L

Channel Geomorphology

Field surveys were conducted along the creek within and downstream of City limits (Figure 9a). In general, Las Vegas Creek is shaded-to-partially shaded by riparian trees, depending on location and potentially as a result of channel engineering and maintenance practices associated with urban development. There are abundant sand-to-gravel sized bed sediments with few geomorphic bedforms. Fence revetment is present along both sides of the creek in multiple locations and for long distances. The channel appears to have mostly engineered banks (either earthen or concrete) downstream of Cathedral Oaks Road.

Aerial photographs from 1927 indicate that Las Vegas Creek lacked a well-defined channel form prior to extensive agricultural activity and subsequent urban development, showing instead a distributed network of broad, low-lying swales draining the local alluvial terrace deposits. By 1958, the area had been ditched and channelized, establishing the current alignment of Las Vegas Creek. Additional alteration and enlargement of the channel occurred with subsequent urbanization, including construction of a concrete-lined section from Cathedral Oaks Road to Stow Canyon Road by 1972.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 104 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Upstream of Cathedral Oaks Road, the channel is downcut into the alluvial plain, whether naturally as a function of watershed processes (including tectonic activities or changes in sea level), or perhaps more likely as a result of land use changes over the past century or more as the area has progressively developed into agriculture, ranching, and urban land uses. Consequently, the stream channel is set approximately 6 to 15 feet below the surrounding terrace surfaces depending on location.

As with other watersheds in eastern Goleta, this reach of Las Vegas Creek appears to be experiencing elevated sedimentation, resulting in a relatively soft bed composed primarily of coarse sand with some gravel and little apparent bedform development and limited in-channel complexity. The reach from Photo LV-1 Calle Real to Stow Canyon Road contains fence revetment on both sides of the channel for long distances (Photo LV-1). In many of the segments surveyed, the portion of the channel with fencing is largely devoid of woody vegetation. This condition may be a relic of past manual or machine clearing, or increased flow velocities resulting from fence confinement inhibiting establishment of in-channel vegetation. Downstream of the Berkeley Road footbridge, an eroding left bank undercuts the fence revetment at a grade control structure (Photo LV-2). Despite this noted instance, wide-spread bank erosion does not appear to be prominent in the Las Vegas watershed within the Photo LV-2 City limits.

The concrete apron downstream of Stow Canyon Road, which is meant to dissipate flows through the concrete culvert under the road, ends in a 2- to 3-foot drop into a scour pool in the channel bed (Photo LV-3). Upstream of Stow Canyon Road, the channel bed and banks are concrete-lined (Photo LV-4) with sparse riparian trees mostly along the top of the right bank concrete wall to Cathedral Oaks Road. Concrete channels such as this one, with no structural elements to slow flows or locally trap sediment, do not provide geomorphic functionality to the creek.

The reach upstream of Cathedral Oaks Road to the City boundary is well- shaded, contains open space on both sides of the creek, and is connected to the upper watershed via a culvert under La Goleta Road. The channel is incised up to approximately 15 feet below the adjacent terrace surface, likely representing a functional geomorphic condition with a downcut channel condition similar to other eastern Goleta Photo LV-3 watersheds.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 105 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Flooding

Based on review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 100- Year Flood Zone (Figure 5) (FEMA 2020), flooding within Las Vegas Creek resultant from the 100-Year event is contained within the riparian corridor upstream from Cathedral Oaks Road. Downstream from this road, the channel has been straightened and flow is restricted enough to cause flooding within some of the adjacent residential, commercial, and educational land uses down to Highway 101. Flow under Highway 101 appears to be further constricted with floodwater backing up behind the highway and joining floodwater from San Pedro Creek to the west, ultimately overtopping Highway 101 and continuing into the City’s commercial/industrial/residential sector Photo LV-4 along Fairview Avenue (and the confluence with the two creeks). This culvert beneath Highway 101 was recently modified to improve flood conditions at this point; the 2017 FEMA map has not yet been modified to account for these changes.

Biological Resources

Vegetation Communities

Overall, Las Vegas provides significant shade (generally 100% canopy cover) south of Sherill Way with opportunities for some common wildlife species. As shown on Figure 7c, Biological Resources – Las Vegas, four vegetation communities were observed within the creek: (1) 0.15 acres of arroyo willow thickets; (2) 1.32 acres of coast live oak; (3) 5.28 acres of coast live oak – arroyo willow; and (4) 0.50 acres of western sycamore. South of Sherill Way the vegetation provides shading (Photo LV-5) and this canopy opens north of Sherill Way with vegetation further up on the banks of this creek Photo LV-5 (Photo LV-6). The understory is dominated by non-native grasses, wood sorrel, and similar forbs. Additional trees intersect the mapped communities, such as ash, which are interspersed with toyon, wood sorrel, and non-native grasses.

As shown in Figure 7c, there are no particular areas of invasive vegetation present along this creek. The width of this creek is extremely narrow and, where cobbles are present, they appear minimally embedded. The presence of any pools or steelhead spawning substrate is minimal. The instream characteristics include the presence of some woody materials, abundant overhanging vegetation, moderate undercut banks, and a moderate amount of live tree roots. These characteristics Photo LV-6 contribute to the instream complexity and suitability for plants and wildlife.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 106 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Although the topsoil is composed of sand in the southern assessment area (Figure 7c), fine clay was present approximately 5 inches below the surface. The wetted width was estimated to be 1 foot. The presence of seasonal water flow, complex in-stream characteristics, and presence of an abundance of organic material suggest that Las Vegas would provide suitable passage for small mammals, reptiles, and possibly amphibians. However, due to the narrow width and relatively few in-stream complexities present, wildlife most likely to utilize these habitats include bird species.

Invasive Plants

As noted above, no particular areas of invasive vegetation were noted along this creek.

Wildlife Species

Common Wildlife The vegetation communities present along Las Vegas Creek provide suitable food, shading, and nesting sources for both common and special-status species. The vegetated structure of Las Vegas provides many opportunities for birds and some opportunities for cover and feeding for small mammals, reptiles, and possibly amphibians. During the biological reconnaissance surveys, few species were noted along this creek. Appendix G provides a cumulative list of wildlife species observed. It should be noted that reconnaissance surveys were brief and do not capture all species utilizing the habitat.

Special-Status Wildlife There is some potential for special-status species to occur along the creek. These species would most likely be Cooper’s hawk and bats under bridge crossings. Although steelhead were documented in 2013 downstream of the reach within the City’s limits, this creek is not likely to support steelhead migration or spawning, possibly due to barriers downstream and outside of the City’s limits. In addition, this creek is not designated as federal critical habitat for this species.

Wildlife Corridor and Linkages

Wildlife corridor camera and tracking studies (Appendix E) documented the following mammal species of particular interest within Las Vegas Creek: raccoon and multiple resident species, including Virginia opossum, striped skunk, squirrel, brush rabbit, rodents, and domestic cats. Las Vegas Creek is a well shaded creek with many natural resources. The creek provides connectivity from the Santa Ynez Mountains to habitat areas south of the City, including Goleta Slough.

A total of 30 bird species were observed along Las Vegas Creek during surveys (Appendix F). Riparian birds of interest observed during surveys includes warbling vireo detected in May and June. The channel of this creek is open with an understory dominated by non-native grasses and other low-lying herbaceous vegetation. Although the grasses may provide some limited cover for ground nesting species, the absence of a dense understory may limit the presence of low or ground nesting species, such as orange-crowned warbler. However, the presence of oaks, willows, and in one particular place sycamores, along this creek would provide many nesting opportunities for a variety of nesting opportunities for species. Particularly bird species likely to occur along this creek include those associated with cosmopolitan areas. There may also be some opportunities for species that utilizing the following habitat during the breeding season: woodland, chaparral, riparian, woodland, and scrub.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 107 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

4.3.6.4 San Pedro

Quick Facts Watershed Area 3.55 mi2 (contributing sub-watershed); 0.66 mi2 (City sub-watershed) Creek Length 5.3 miles (total); 1.0 miles (City sub-watershed) Creek Elevation (within 27 – 68 feet above mean sea level City boundaries)1 Land Use Adjacent 70% of adjacent parcels (400-foot buffer) are designated commercial, Creek (City sub- residential, or street; 7% is agricultural, and 20% open space/parks watershed) 49% of the watershed within the City is designated as impervious Channel Alignment Mostly natural alignment until concreted in the 1,500 feet prior to Highway 101. Hydrology Primarily seasonal/intermittent – Perennial reaches have been identified at numerous sections upstream from the City limits during above average rainy seasons, in particular at the Fairview Falls located in the middle of the upper watershed (EDC, 2019) Beneficial Uses MUN, AGR, GWR, REC-1, REC-2, WILD, COLD, WARM, MIGR, FRSH, COMM Geomorphology Channel set approx. 5 – 20 feet below the adjacent land surface Channel Sediments Mixture of silt, sand, and gravel sediments Biology Well-shaded (generally 99% canopy cover),2 suitable habitat for both common and special-status species 1 Elevations estimated from Google Earth. 2 Based on an adjusted modified convex densiometer (OWEB 1999) at one representative sampling location.

San Pedro Creek is positioned between Las Vegas Creek to the east and Los Carneros Creek to the west within the City of Goleta. The total watershed area is 4.2 square miles, with 16% of that area within City limits. Review of aerial photographs shows that in 1927, San Pedro Creek was a tree-lined, single-thread channel with well-established agricultural land on either side. The current channel follows this historic alignment of the creek, at least for the

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 108 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA portion within the City limits. By 1944, San Pedro Creek had been diverted to the east downstream of Highway 101, routing the channel around the airport area. Between 1962 and 1964, a 0.3-mile section upstream of Calle Real was converted to a concrete-lined channel.

San Pedro Creek’s headwaters begin along the Santa Ynez Mountain ridgeline. The creek enters the City limits at Cathedral Oaks Road and serves as a main tributary to Atascadero Creek (confluence located just upstream of the Goleta Slough).

Land Use

The watershed analysis was split between the City and the contributing sub-watersheds (Figures 2 and 4). The contributing San Pedro Creek sub-watershed comprises approximately 84% of the entire assessed watershed area for San Pedro. Approximately 57% of the contributing San Pedro Creek sub- watershed is located within undeveloped (52%) and sparse residential (5%) Santa Ynez Mountains. The remaining 43% of the contributing sub-watershed is comprised mostly of agriculture (42%) with the remaining 1% being comprised of residential, open space park, and livestock/equestrian areas. The City sub-watershed is mostly comprised of high-density residential (50%), streets (28%), industrial (5%), and commercial (12%, including auto shops/retail) areas. All land uses identified within the contributing and City sub-watersheds are provided in Table 14, San Pedro Creek Land Uses.

Table 14. San Pedro Creek Land Uses

Acres within City Sub- Acres within Contributing Sub- Land Uses Watershed Watershed General Agriculture 5.6 969.3 Livestock/Equestrian -- 0.5 Auto Shop/Retail 6.8 -- Commercial 43.9 -- High Density Residential 209.6 -- Industrial 20.1 -- Landfill -- -- Low Density Residential 1.0 -- Mixed Commercial/Residential 1.1 -- Moderate Density Residential < 0.0 (0.01) 10.0 Residential Ranchette -- 0.6 Santa Ynez Mountains - -- 104.2 Residential Santa Ynez Mountains - -- 1176.0 Undeveloped Park/Open Space 17.0 5.1 Street 118.1 8.0 School/Education 0.2 -- TOTAL 423.3 2,273.7

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 109 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Land use within the 200-foot buffer on either side of the channel within the City limits mainly consisted of: 24% streets, 42% high-density residential, and 20% open space/parks. Within the City, there are 105 parcels and approximately 91 structures within 100 feet of the centerline of San Pedro Creek. Of those structures, 83 are in residential zone districts, one is in a commercial zone district, 3 are in office and industrial zone districts, 2 are in open space zone districts, and 2 are in public and quasi- public zone districts.

Beneficial Uses and Water Quality

The beneficial uses of San Pedro Creek are as follows:

• Municipal and domestic water supply • Agricultural • Groundwater recharge • Recreation water with body contact (swimming) • Recreation water (non-body contact like hiking, boating etc.) • Wildlife habitat • Cold freshwater habitat • Warm freshwater habitat • Migration of aquatic organisms • Freshwater replenishment • Commercial and sports fishing

A complete list of the WQOs associated with all inland waters and WQOs established for specific Beneficial Uses is provided in Appendix D. San Pedro Creek meets all but six of the WQOs established for it (Table 15). Potential sources for each impairment are also discussed in Appendix D.

Table 15. San Pedro Creek Water Quality Impairments

Numeric/Qualitative Applicable Thresholds (based upon most San Pedro Creek WQOs Beneficial Uses stringent WQO) Status Biostimulatory All Inland Avoid concentrations that Not Meeting WQOs Substances Waters promote aquatic growths (e.g., (SBCK) for algae) to the extent that it Biostimulatory causes nuisance or adversely Substances affects beneficial uses. SBCK recommended concentrations is <5 and >13 mg/L pH All inland pH shall not be depressed Not Meeting WQO Waters / MUN below 7.0 (COLD / WARM), or (State 303(d) list) / AGR / REC-1 raised above 8.3 (MUN, AGR, / REC -2 / REC-1, REC-2) COLD / WARM

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 110 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 15. San Pedro Creek Water Quality Impairments

Numeric/Qualitative Applicable Thresholds (based upon most San Pedro Creek WQOs Beneficial Uses stringent WQO) Status Dissolved Oxygen All Inland Dissolved Oxygen shall not be Not Meeting WQOs Waters / AGR / reduced below 7.0 mg/L at any (SBCK) for Oxygen COLD / SPWN time (COLD, SPWN). Temperature All Inland At no time shall the Not Meeting WQO Waters / COLD temperature be increased by (Stet 303(d) list) more than 5 degrees F above for exceeding natural receiving water COLD WQO in 10 temperature (COLD). out of 43 samples Inorganic Chemicals MUN Not exceed maximum Not Meeting WQO contaminant levels of inorganic (State 303(d) list) chemicals for primary drinking for Sodium water standards (CA Code of Regulations, Title 22) Bacteria REC-1 / REC-2 30-day 5-sample mean fecal Not Meeting WQOs coliform concentration not to (State 303(d) list) exceed 200/100 mL, nor more for Enterococcus, than 10% in that 30-day period E. coli, and fecal exceed 400/100 mL (REC - 1) coliform

Channel Geomorphology

Field surveys were conducted along the creek within City limits, as well as sections just upstream and downstream of the City boundary (Figure 9a). In general, the San Pedro Creek channel is mostly shaded by a relatively narrow band of riparian trees on both sides of the creek (most likely limited by development) upstream of the concrete-lined reach. In addition, there are few trees present along the top of the concrete reach (also most likely limited by development). The natural channel contains fence revetment along both banks and sand-to-gravel sized sediments. Active bank failure was present at some locations but not widespread. The channel is downcut into the alluvial plain, whether naturally as a function of watershed processes (including tectonic activities or changes in sea level), or perhaps more likely as a result of land use changes over the past century or more as the area has progressively Photo SP-1 developed into agriculture, ranching, and urban land uses. In the present-day, this means that the stream channel is set approximately 5 to 20 feet below the surrounding terrace surfaces, depending on location.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 111 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Photo SP-2 The natural channel bed in San Pedro Creek contains some slowly flowing water and is composed of a mix of silt, sand and gravel. There are a variety of bed forms present, including plane beds, bars, and shallow pool bedforms, which are indicative of active geomorphic processes that can support habitat for aquatic species. This reach supports some mature trees along the toe of the bank inside the revetment fencing further upstream, and in-channel vegetation throughout the reach (Photo SP-1), including at the Covington Way footbridge. Active bank failure is present upstream of Stow Canyon Road in an area with fence revetment, a rough concrete grade control, and some concrete along portions of the right bank. In addition to these elements, a series of outfall pipes of various sizes had been built into the left bank fence during its construction (Photo SP-2), and a building structure overhangs the creek on stilts on the right bank. A small knickpoint is present downstream of the grade control structure, evidence that the channel has downcut since it was installed (likely in the late 1950s or early 1960s, when the agricultural land to the east was converted to residential uses).

From Calle Real to approximately the end of Avenida Gorrion (a distance of about 0.3 miles), the channel bed and banks are concrete-lined with few riparian trees along the top of the bank. There is a structure to allow fish passage just upstream of Calle Real before creek flows enter a culvert under the arterial road and the adjacent Highway 101 (Photo SP-3). These structures contain some sediment during field reconnaissance, showing some limited sediment trapping. A small section of the creek between the freeway and City of Santa Barbara property is the start of an earthen-engineered channel that diverts flow around the airport, and eventually flows into the tidal section of lower San Jose Creek near Ward Memorial Boulevard.

Flooding

Based on review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 100-Year Flood Zone (Figure 5) (FEMA 2020), flooding within San Pedro Creek resultant from the 100-Year event is mostly contained within the riparian corridor until it reaches Momouth Avenue in the City. Floodwaters from Las Vegas Creek and Los Carneros Creek potentially merge with San Pedro floodwater just upstream of Highway 101 and overtop the road within the normal alignment of the channel. This culvert beneath Highway 101 was recently modified to improve flood conditions at this point; the 2017 FEMA map has not yet been modified to account for these changes.

Photo SP-3

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 112 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Biological Resources

Vegetation Communities

The vegetated portions of San Pedro Creek are well-shaded (generally 99% canopy cover) with many opportunities to provide habitat for plants and wildlife (Photo SP-4). As shown in Figure 7c, Biological Resources: Las Vegas and San Pedro, two vegetation communities were observed within the creek: (1) 0.16 acres of western sycamore – coast live oak; and (2) 6.95 acres of western sycamore – coast live oak – arroyo willow. It should be noted that a significant portion of this creek south of Avenida Gorrion (approximately 1,565 feet) is composed of Flood Control Concrete Channel, which provides no habitat value for plants and wildlife. As a result, the remainder of this section focuses on the vegetation portions of the creek north of Avenida Gorrion. Generally, this creek is characterized by a dense understory along both banks of the creek dominated by poison oak, blackberry, and bulrush species. In addition, cape ivy and English ivy are present in dense forms along this creek.

This creek is characterized by both pools and riffles along the vegetated extent of the creek. Along the riffles the substrate embeddedness generally ranges from 5 to 10%. Algae were present with cobbles generally from 4 to 6 inches large. The instream characteristics include the presence of filamentous algae, aquatic macrophytes, emergent vegetation, few boulders, some woody materials, a few undercut banks, moderate amounts of overhanging vegetation, and some live tree roots. These components provide some opportunities for habitat, food, or contribute to the organic components of the community, including the soil. During site visits, water was running in the vegetation reach of this creek. Sandy soils and cobble were present in the middle of the stream with moderate fine clay loam on the banks. As shown through the characteristics of this creek, this soil is ideal plant-growing medium that supports the dense and complex vegetation communities, and wildlife present along this creek. During a site visit, the wetted width was estimated to be 6.5 to 13 feet. The presence of seasonal water flow, complex in-stream characteristics, and presence of an abundance of organic material suggest that San Pedro Creek has the potential to provide suitable feeding, cover, and nesting opportunities for a variety of plant and wildlife species.

Invasive Plants

English and cape ivy are present in several sections of this creek within the City limits, suggesting potential locations for future restoration activities. The general locations of these observations are shown in Figure 7c.

Wildlife Species

Common Wildlife As described above, western sycamore – coast live oak and western sycamore – coast live oak – arroyo willows are well known to provide suitable food, shading, and nesting sources for both common and

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 113 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA special-status species. During the biological reconnaissance surveys several wildlife species, particularly birds, were observed. Appendix G provides a cumulative list of wildlife species observed. Reconnaissance surveys were brief and do not capture all species utilizing the habitat. Due to the instream complexities, this creek would provide suitable habitat for small mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles.

Special-Status Wildlife Several special-status species have a potential to occur within the reach of San Pedro Creek within the City limits. These include, but are not limited to, southern California steelhead, southwestern pond turtle, California red-legged frog, California newt, and two-striped garter snake. Special-status bats may also have a potential to roost under suitable bridge locations along this creek. Although this creek is designated as USFWS critical habitat for steelhead, barriers within the City may preclude any steelhead from utilizing this creek. Specifically, the concrete channelization in the southern portion of the City is considered an extremely high barrier to steelhead use (Stoecker et al. 2002). In addition, additional barriers along the vegetated section of the channel, such as check dams, would pose barriers to migrating steelhead (Stoecker et al. 2002). Recently, steelhead were observed downstream of the City’s limits at the confluence of San Pedro and Las Vegas Creeks and were documented there in 1984 and 1992. However, as mentioned above, it is unlikely steelhead would traverse the impediments currently located within this creek.

Wildlife Corridor and Linkages

Wildlife corridor camera and tracking studies (Appendix E) documented the following mammal species of particular interest within San Pedro Creek: mountain lion, coyote, raccoon and multiple resident species, including Virginia opossum, striped skunk, squirrel, brush rabbit, rodents, and domestic cats. San Pedro is a well shaded creek with many natural resources. The creek provides connectivity from the Santa Ynez Mountains to habitat areas south of the City, including Goleta Slough.

A total of 35 bird species were observed along San Pedro Creek during surveys (Appendix F). Riparian birds of interest observed during surveys includes yellow warbler, warbling vireo, and migrant willow flycatcher observed in May; and yellow warbler observed in June. Two countersigning willow flycatchers observed along this creek in May were migrants and the only obligate riparian birds detected across city-wide surveys in May and June 2020. This creek is well shaded and dominated by western sycamore, coast live oak, and arroyo willow, which provides a rich variety of feeding, cover, and nesting opportunities for a variety of bird species, particularly those associated with the following general habitats during the breeding season: riparian, open habitats, woodland, grassland, chaparral, scrub, cosmopolitan areas, and some possibility for those utilizing wetland, marsh, and waterbodies.

4.3.6.5 Los Carneros

Quick Facts Watershed Area 3.29 mi2 (contributing sub-watershed); 0.84 mi2 (City sub-watershed) Creek Length 5.6 miles (total); 1.2 miles (City sub-watershed) Creek Elevation (within 14 – 74 feet above mean sea level City boundaries)1

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 114 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Quick Facts Land Use Adjacent 98% of adjacent parcels (400-foot buffer) are designated commercial, Creek (City sub- agricultural, or street and 2% is industrial watershed) 45% of the watershed within the City is designated as impervious Channel Alignment Natural alignment upstream of N. Los Carneros Rd. The creek is concreted between Highway 101 and Hollister Avenue. Hydrology Primarily seasonal/intermittent – Several perennial reaches are located within the upper and middle watershed, including one reach in the upstream section within the City limits Beneficial Uses MUN, AGR, GWR, REC-1, REC-2, WILD, WARM, SPWN, RARE, FRSH, COMM Geomorphology Channel set approx. 10 – 20 feet below the adjacent land surface Channel Sediments Clay- to silt-sized sediment Biology Well-shaded (generally 94% canopy cover),2 suitable habitat for both common and special-status species 1 Elevations estimated from Google Earth. 2 Based on an adjusted modified convex densiometer (OWEB 1999) at one representative sampling location.

Los Carneros Creek is positioned between San Pedro Creek to the east and Glen Annie Creek to the west within the City of Goleta. The total watershed area is 4.1 square miles, with 20% of that area within City limits. Los Carneros Creek’s headwaters begin along the Santa Ynez Mountain ridgeline. The Creek enters the City limits at Cathedral Oaks Road and enters a series of concrete and earthen engineered channels just downstream from Highway 101, which convey flow around Santa Barbara Airport development prior to discharge into the Goleta Slough.

Aerial photographs show that by 1927, Los Carneros Creek was in its present-day alignment within the City of Goleta. Upstream of present-day North Los Carneros Road, the creek is a tree-lined, meandering single-thread channel with well-established agricultural land on either side. Near the current Highway 101 alignment, the channel appears to have been ditched by 1927, trending diagonal

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 115 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA toward and then parallel to the railroad tracks before turning 90 degrees to cross under the railroad. By 1948, State Route 1 had been built and the creek was culverted at that crossing as well. Between 1957 and 1967, the engineered channel south of UPRR was converted to a concrete-lined channel. The lower portion of the channel lacked significant riparian cover in the 1927 and 1956 aerial photos but did have some established trees in the 1948 photos at and downstream of the Highway 101 alignment.

Land Use

The watershed analysis was split between the City and the contributing sub-watersheds (Figure 2 and Figure 4). The contributing Los Carneros Creek sub-watershed comprises approximately 80% of the entire assessed watershed area for Los Carneros Creek. Approximately 48% of the contributing Los Carneros Creek sub-watershed is located within undeveloped Santa Ynez Mountains, 50% of the contributing sub- watershed is comprised of agriculture, and the remaining 1% of the upper watershed is comprised of residential, street, utility, and industrial uses. The City sub-watershed is mostly comprised of open space/park (30%), commercial (18%), street (17%), high-density residential (13%), and agriculture (13%) uses. All land uses identified within the contributing and City sub-watersheds are provided in Table 16, Los Carneros Creek Land Uses.

Table 16. Los Carneros Creek Land Uses

Acres within City Sub- Acres within Contributing Sub- Land Uses Watershed Watershed General Agriculture 71.6 1,062.9 Auto Shop/ Retail 1.9 -- Commercial 98.7 -- High Density Residential 68.1 -- Industrial 33.5 1.9 Mixed Commercial/Residential 6.2 -- Residential Ranchette -- 4.3 Santa Ynez Mountains - -- 8.1 Residential Santa Ynez Mountains - -- 1,013.5 Undeveloped Park/Open Space 160.6 -- Utility -- 8.9 Street 90.1 3.4 School/Education 9.3 -- TOTAL 540.0 2,103.1

Land use within the 200-foot buffer on either side of the channel within the City limits mainly consisted of: 40% agricultural, 19% streets, and 39% commercial areas. Within the City, there are 25 parcels and approximately 23 structures within 100 feet of the centerline of Los Carneros Creek. Of those 23 structures, one is in a commercial zone district and 22 are in office and industrial zone districts.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 116 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Beneficial Uses and Water Quality

The beneficial uses of Los Carneros Creek are as follows:

• Municipal and domestic water supply • Agricultural • Groundwater recharge • Recreation water with body contact (swimming) • Recreation water (non-body contact like hiking, boating etc.) • Wildlife habitat • Warm freshwater habitat • Freshwater replenishment • Useful for rare, threatened or endangered species • Spawning, reproduction and/or early development • Commercial and sports fishing

A complete list of the WQOs associated with all inland waters and WQOs established for specific Beneficial Uses is provided in Appendix D. Los Carneros Creek meets all but three of the WQOs established for it (Table 17). Potential sources for each impairment are also discussed in Appendix D.

Table 17. Los Carneros Creek Water Quality Impairments

Numeric/Qualitative Thresholds Applicable (based upon most stringent Los Carneros WQOs Beneficial Uses WQO) Creek Status pH All inland pH shall not be depressed Not Meeting WQO Waters / MUN / below 7.0 (COLD / WARM), or (State 303(d) list) AGR / REC-1 / raised above 8.3 (MUN, AGR, REC -2 / COLD REC-1, REC-2) / WARM Inorganic Chemicals MUN Not exceed maximum Not Meeting WQO contaminant levels of inorganic (State 303(d) list) chemicals for primary drinking for Nitrates water standards (CA Code of Regulations, Title 22) Bacteria REC-1 / REC-2 30-day 5-sample mean fecal Not Meeting coliform concentration not to WQOs (State exceed 200/100 mL, nor more 303(d) list) for than 10% in that 30-day period Enterococcus and exceed 400/100 mL (REC - 1) e. coli

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 117 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Channel Geomorphology

Field surveys were conducted along the creek within and just Photo LC-1 downstream of the City limits (Figure 9b, Geomorphic Resources: Central). In general, the natural channel in Los Carneros Creek is well-shaded by riparian trees with bed and banks composed primarily of clay- to silt-sized sediment, with less sand and gravel than the watersheds in the eastern part of the City. The channel is downcut into the alluvial plain, whether naturally as a function of watershed processes (including tectonic uplift or changes in sea level), or perhaps more likely as a result of land use changes over the past century or more as the area has progressively developed into agriculture, ranching, and urban land uses. In the present-day, this means that the stream channel is set approximately 10 to 20 feet below the surrounding terrace surfaces, depending on location.

During field surveys, the natural channel reach between North Los Carneros Road and Cathedral Oaks Road at the downstream and upstream ends were accessed. Orchards are present along the left side of this reach, and open fields border the right bank, although a fairly wide riparian corridor is maintained along the creek itself (approximately 150 feet of width from the centerline of the creek, providing approximately 75 feet of vegetation per channel bank, including the width of the creek). Lack of extensive development in this portion of the watershed has likely benefitted the creek. The channel bed just upstream of North Los Carneros Road contains flowing water, riparian growth and understory, and clayey-silty sediments that have formed a cohesive channel bed with 2- to 3-foot deep pools as the dominant bedform, indicative of active geomorphic processes that can support habitat for aquatic species (Photo LC-1). At Cathedral Oaks Road, the channel also contains water and supports aquatic vegetation in the bed and riparian growth and understory on the banks. In both locations canvassed, the channel lacks the extensive fence revetment that is prominent in other watersheds to Photo LC-2 the east.

The channel downstream of North Los Carneros Road is concrete-lined and buried under Highway 101. A remnant earthen-engineered channel emerges on the south side of the freeway and runs parallel to it for approximately 0.2 miles before turning south under the railroad into a concrete-lined reach with no riparian trees along the channel (Photo LC-2). Concrete channels such as this one, with no structural elements to slow flows or locally trap sediment, do not provide geomorphic functionality to the creek.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 118 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Flooding

Similar to San Pedro Creek, the 100-Year Floodplain for Los Carneros Creek does not exceed the riparian corridor until just upstream from Highway 101 (Figure 5) (FEMA 2020). Floodwater backs up behind the highway where it potentially converges with floodwater from San Pedro Creek and overtops the road due south of Lake Los Carneros into the industrial/commercial area south of Highway 101. Floodwaters spread throughout this area down past Hollister Avenue, the Santa Barbara Airport, and into the Goleta Slough. Recent upgrades to the culvert beneath Highway 101 have been implemented to address flooding at this location; the resultant reduction in flooding is not yet reflected in the FEMA designated floodplains.

Biological Resources

Vegetation Communities

Photo LC-3 The vegetated portion of Los Carneros Creek is well-shaded (generally 94% canopy cover), providing habitat for plants and wildlife (Photo LC-3). As shown in Figure 7d, Biological Resources: Los Carneros, three vegetation communities were observed along the creek: (1) 1.83 acres of arroyo willow thicket; (2) 0.11 acres of coast live oak woodland; and (3) 10.21 acres of western sycamore – coast live oak – arroyo willow. In addition, approximately 6.62 acres of maintained non-native grasslands are mapped adjacent to this creek. The understory in this creek includes species such as blackberry, cape ivy, and watercress (Nasturtium officinale). This creek is characterized by pools, riffles, and boulders along the vegetated extent of the creek. The instream characteristics include the presence of some filamentous algae, emergent vegetation, boulders, woody materials, moderate amounts of overhanging vegetation, and some live tree roots. These components provide some opportunities for habitat and food, or contribute to the organic components of the community, including the soil. The presence of seasonal water flow, complex in-stream characteristics, and presence of an abundance of organic material suggest that Los Carneros Creek has the potential to provide suitable feeding, cover, and nesting opportunities for a variety of plant and wildlife species.

Invasive Plants

Cape ivy is present in sections of this creek within the City limits, suggesting potential locations for any future restoration activities. The general locations of these observations are shown in Figure 7d.

Wildlife Species

Common Wildlife As described above, arroyo willow thickets, coast live oak woodlands, and sycamore – coast live oak – arroyo willow are well known to provide suitable food, shading, and nesting sources for both common and special-status species. The vegetated structure of Los Carneros Creek provides many opportunities for a variety of wildlife to seek refuge, food, and/or nesting activities. During the biological reconnaissance surveys several wildlife species, particularly birds, were observed. Appendix G provides a cumulative list

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 119 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA of wildlife species observed. Reconnaissance surveys were brief and do not capture all species utilizing the habitat. Due to the instream and riparian complex habitats, this creek could support small mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles.

Special-Status Wildlife Several special-status species have a potential to occur within the reach of Los Carneros Creek within the City’s limit. These include, but are not limited to, monarch butterfly, southwestern pond turtle, California red-legged frog, California newt, and two-striped garter snake. In addition, tidewater goby were observed in the Los Carneros Creek sedimentation basin in 2008 (ECORP 2008, as cited in SBFCD 2010). There is some potential for white-tailed kites to frequent the adjacent grasslands for feeding opportunities and, if suitable habitat is present, nesting opportunities along Los Carneros Creek. The presence of tall trees and adjacent open space to Los Carneros Creek provides ideal nesting and feeding opportunities for raptor species. Special-status bats may also have a potential to roost under suitable bridge locations along this creek. The vegetation at the intersection of Calle Real and Los Carneros Road is designated as a monarch overwintering site (Xerces 2020). However, monarch butterflies were last observed at this location in 2015 with a count of 67 individuals (Xerces 2020). This creek is also designated as USFWS critical habitat for steelhead. However, the approximately 0.4 miles of concrete lined channel in the southern portion of the City would be considered a barrier to migration. It is possible steelhead could occur in the vegetated channel, but steelhead have not been observed in Los Carneros Creek for many years. USFWS critical habitat for tidewater goby is also located immediately south of HollisterAvenue and the City limits. The concrete channel may also impede the movements of tidewater goby upstream.

Wildlife Corridor and Linkages

Wildlife corridor camera and tracking studies (Appendix E) documented the following mammal species of particular interest within Los Carneros Creek: black bear, bobcat, coyote, raccoon and multiple resident species, including Virginia opossum, striped skunk, squirrel, brush rabbit, rodents, and domestic cats. Los Carneros Creek is a well shaded creek with many natural resources. The creek provides connectivity from the Santa Ynez Mountains to habitat areas south of the City, including Goleta Slough.

A total of 26 bird species were observed along Los Carneros Creek during surveys (Appendix F). Riparian birds of interest observed during surveys includes yellow warbler observed in May and June. The creek bed contains a variety of boulders, cobbles, and sediments which, along with intermittent flow, provide various pooling and riffle features throughout the creek. These water features provide feeding and bathing opportunities for birds. The bed of this creek is generally open closer to Calle Real and Cathedral Oaks Road; however, the reach in between these two roads becomes dense with a willow understory provide great opportunities for riparian birds that nest closer to the ground. In addition, the dense understory of willows and canopies along this creek provide sufficient cover as well as nesting opportunities. This creek would provide suitable nesting, feeding, and cover opportunities for a variety of species, particularly those associated with the following general habitats during the breeding season: riparian, open habitats, woodland, grassland, chaparral, scrub, cosmopolitan areas, and some possibility for those utilizing wetland, marsh, and waterbodies.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 120 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

4.3.6.6 Glen Annie

Quick Facts Watershed Area 4.6 mi2 (contributing sub-watershed); 1.1 mi2 (City sub-watershed) Creek Length 5.34 miles (total); 1.44 miles (City sub-watershed) Creek Elevation (within 15 – 75 feet above mean sea level City boundaries)1 Land Use Adjacent 76% of adjacent parcels (400-foot buffer) are designated commercial, Creek (City sub- education, or street; 8% is residential, 7% open space/parks, and 7% is watershed) industrial 46% of the watershed in the City is designated as impervious Channel Alignment Natural alignment to Glen Annie Road and then has been realigned and is conveyed through a concrete channel to the Highway 101 culvert. Downstream from Highway 101 flow is conveyed through an earthen engineered channel to the Goleta Slough. Hydrology Primarily seasonal/intermittent; usually perennial south Highway 101 – Several perennial reaches are located within the upper and middle watershed, including one reach in the upstream section of the City limits (adjacent the Dos Pueblos High School). A 135-foot tall dam is located near the base of the foothills but is not used to impound water due to structural concerns. Beneficial Uses MUN, AGR, GWR, PROC, IND, REC-1, REC-2, WILD, COLD, WARM, MIGR, SPWN, RARE, FRSH, COMM Geomorphology Channel set approx. 15 – 25 feet below the adjacent land surface Channel Sediments Clayey- to silty- and gravel- to cobble-sized sediments Biology Well-shaded (generally 90% canopy cover),2 suitable habitat for both common and special-status species 1 Elevations estimated from Google Earth. 2 Based on an adjusted modified convex densiometer (OWEB 1999) at one representative sampling location.

Glen Annie Creek is positioned between Los Carneros Creek to the east and El Encanto Creek to the west within the City of Goleta. The total watershed area is 5.7 square miles, with 17% of that area within City limits. Approximately 82% of the watershed is upstream of City limits, while the remaining

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 121 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

1% is downstream of the City. Glen Annie Creek begins along the Santa Ynez Mountain ridgeline and enters the City limits at Cathedral Oaks Road. Glen Annie Creek collects runoff from one of the three largest sections of the City (with Las Vegas Creek and Devereux Creek being the other two). Glen Annie Creek joins Los Carneros Creek at the northwest corner of the Santa Barbara Airport prior to discharging into Goleta Slough.

Aerial photographs show that in 1928, Glen Annie Creek appeared to be in its natural alignment as a single-thread channel upstream of the railroad tracks, with agricultural land (ranchland and orchards), homesteads, or open space on either side. Scattered trees were present along most of the channel upstream of the railroad tracks, although they were markedly lacking in the area near present-day Cathedral Oaks Road. At that location the creek appeared to be fairly wide and incised, with signs of recent bank erosion. Downstream of the railroad, the channel appeared somewhat straightened with an agricultural field abutting it on the west, but scrub and small trees lined the channel through that reach as well (especially near present-day Hollister Avenue) suggesting that the alignment had been present for some time. By 1956, State Route 1 had been built and the creek downstream of Glen Annie Road had been straightened and channelized into its present-day configuration. Between 1956 and 1972, the earthen-engineered channel running parallel to the highway was converted into a concrete-lined channel, while downstream of the railroad it has remained an earthen, engineered channel to the present day.

Land Use

The watershed analysis was split between the City and the contributing sub-watersheds (Figures 2 and 4). The contributing Glen Annie Creek sub-watershed comprises approximately 81% of the entire assessed watershed area for Glen Annie. Approximately 45% of the contributing Glen Annie Creek sub-watershed is located within undeveloped (44%) and sparse residential (1%) areas of the Santa Ynez Mountains and foothills. The remaining 55% of the contributing sub-watershed is comprised mostly of agriculture (47%), golf course (2%), and utilities (2%) areas. The City sub-watershed is mostly comprised of agricultural (31%), streets (18%), industrial (14%), and commercial (16%) uses. All land uses identified within the contributing and City sub-watersheds are provided in Table 18, Glen Annie Creek Land Uses.

Table 18. Glen Annie Creek Land Uses

Acres within City Sub- Acres within Contributing Sub- Land Uses Watershed Watershed General Agriculture 216.4 1,388.4 Golf Course -- 67.9 Auto Shop/ Retail 0.8 -- Cemetery -- -- Commercial 111.4 -- High Density Residential 58.2 -- Industrial 95.1 -- Mixed agricultural/residential -- 10.7 Mixed Commercial/Residential 3.1 -- Residential Ranchette -- 1.0

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 122 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 18. Glen Annie Creek Land Uses

Acres within City Sub- Acres within Contributing Sub- Land Uses Watershed Watershed Santa Ynez Mountains - -- 26.4 Residential Santa Ynez Mountains - -- 1,297.9 Undeveloped Park/Open Space 46.3 57.1 Utility -- 61.9 Slough 0.1 -- Street 129.4 13.4 School/Education 39.8 -- TOTAL 700.5 2,924.6

Land use within the 200-foot buffer on either side of the channel within the City limits consists of: 40% streets, 18% educational uses, and 19% commercial areas. Within the City, there are 23 parcels and approximately 18 structures within 100 feet of the centerline of Glen Annie Creek. Of those 18 structures, 10 are in residential zone districts, seven are in office and industrial zone districts, and one is in a public and quasi-public zone district.

Beneficial Uses and Water Quality

The beneficial uses of Glen Annie Creek are as follows:

• Municipal and domestic water supply • Agricultural • Industrial Processing and industrial service supply • Groundwater recharge • Recreation water with body contact (swimming) • Recreation water (non-body contact like hiking, boating etc.) • Wildlife habitat • Cold freshwater habitat • Warm freshwater habitat, • Migration of aquatic organisms • Useful for rare, threatened and endangered species • Freshwater replenishment • Spawning, reproduction and/or early development • Commercial and sports fishing

A complete list of the WQOs associated with all inland waters and WQOs established for specific Beneficial Uses is provided in Appendix D. Glen Annie Creek meets all but four of the WQOs established for it (Table 19). Potential sources for each impairment are also discussed in Appendix D.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 123 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 19. Glen Annie Creek Water Quality Impairments

Numeric/Qualitative Applicable Thresholds (based upon most Glen Annie Creek WQOs Beneficial Uses stringent WQO) Status Floating Materials All Inland Avoid nuisance or adverse Not Meeting WQOs Waters impacts to beneficial uses (SBCK) for trash associated with floating solids, liquids, foams, and scum. Toxicity All Inland All waters shall remain free of Not Meeting WQO Waters toxic substances in (State 303(d) list) concentrations which are toxic for exceeding plant to, or which produce toxicity limits in 4 detrimental physiological out of 4 samples response in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Inorganic Chemicals MUN Not exceed maximum Not Meeting WQO contaminant levels of inorganic (State 303(d) list) chemicals for primary drinking for Chloride, water standards (CA Code of Sodium, and Regulations, Title 22) Nitrates Bacteria REC-1 / REC-2 30-day 5-sample mean fecal Not Meeting WQOs coliform concentration not to (State 303(d) list) exceed 200/100 mL, nor more for Enterococcus, than 10% in that 30-day period E. coli, and fecal exceed 400/100 mL (REC - 1) coliform

Channel Geomorphology

Field surveys were conducted along the creek within City limits (Figure 9b). In general, Glen Annie Creek is partially- to well- Photo GA-1 shaded by riparian trees throughout and contains clayey-to-silty and gravel-to-cobble sized sediments. Fence revetment is present along channel banks of the creek downstream of Cathedral Oaks Road (though notably absent upstream of Del Norte Drive) and between Hollister Avenue and South Los Carneros Road. The channel is downcut into the alluvial plain, whether naturally as a function of watershed processes (including tectonic activities or changes in sea level), or perhaps more likely as a result of land use changes over the past century or more as the area has progressively developed into agriculture, ranching, and urban land uses. This means that the natural

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 124 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA stream channel is set approximately 15 to 25 feet below the surrounding terrace surfaces, depending on location.

The natural channel bed upstream of Calle Real contains slowly flowing water and aquatic vegetation at multiple locations and supports riparian growth and understory on the channel banks. Clayey-silty sediments have formed a cohesive channel bed with pool bedforms, whereas larger gravel-cobble sediments have formed riffles; together indicative of active geomorphic processes that can support habitat for aquatic species. The creek has a bedrock outcrop on the right bank upstream of Del Norte Drive (Photo GA-1), and two old bridge piers near Cathedral Oaks Road, one in the channel and one perched on the left bank.

Photo GA-2 From Glen Annie Road to the south side of Highway 101, the channel bed and banks are concrete-lined, and traverse underground culverts in two locations. Trees are present along the top of the banks for portions of this reach, and enough sediment has been deposited in the channel to allow for growth of scrub and willows within the channel downstream of the Highway 101 on-ramp, establishing some geomorphic structure and variability that is atypical of most other concrete channels within the City.

The creek transitions to an earthen, engineered channel between Highway 101 and the City boundary at Goleta Slough. The reach is well-shaded, supporting aquatic vegetation, riparian trees, heavy willow growth and understory species. Clay- cobble-sized sediments have formed cohesive pool bedforms with some riffles in between, as well as sand bars; all are indicative of active geomorphic processes that can support habitat for aquatic species. Fence revetment was present between Hollister Avenue and South Los Carneros Road, but set further back from the channel than in other locations – likely a function of the width of the earthen-engineered channel (Photo GA-2).

Flooding

Based on review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 100-Year Flood Zone (Figure 5) (FEMA 2020), flooding resultant from the 100-year event begins just upstream from Cathedral Oaks Road. Floodwater overtops the left (east) bank and inundates agriculture and mixed agriculture/residential areas down to the underpass at Glen Annie Road. Flow continues downstream fully contained within the riparian corridor until it reaches the Highway 101 underpass where it backs up and overtops the road. Floodwater remains within the natural alignment of the channel though, and within approximately 1,000 channel feet downstream from Highway 101 flow is fully contained within the riparian corridor.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 125 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Biological Resources

Vegetation Communities

Glen Annie Creek is well-shaded (generally 90% canopy cover) supporting habitat for plants and wildlife (Photo GA-3). As shown in Figure 7e, Biological Resources: Glen Annie, three vegetation communities were observed within the creek: (1) 1.36 acres of arroyo willow thicket; (2) 12.84 acres of coast live oak woodland; and (3) 5.22 acres of western sycamore – coast live oak – arroyo willow. During site visits the creek was flowing with water measuring approximately 3.5 feet deep. Directly north of Los Carneros Road the creek is bordered by residential and office buildings. As a result, parts of the edges of the banks Photo GA-3 and upper terrace are characterized by landscaped plantings and shrubs. Shrubs common in the understory include blackberry, lemonade berry sumac, coyote brush, and toyon. In addition, bulrush occurs both within and along the edges of the channel.

The creek is characterized by occasional riffles, pools, and runs. The instream characteristics include the presence of some filamentous algae, presence of emergent vegetation, few boulders, woody materials, overhanging vegetation, and live tree roots. These components provide some opportunities for habitat and food, or contribute to the organic components of the community, including the soil. In addition, the soil composition along the banks is composed of a moderately fine silty clay loam. The presence of seasonal water flow, complex in-stream characteristics, soil composition, and an abundance of organic material suggest that Glen Annie Creek has the potential to provide suitable feeding, cover, and nesting opportunities for a variety of plant and wildlife species.

Invasive Plants

Few invasive plants were present during the site visits. Groves of eucalyptus are mapped along this creek.

Wildlife Species

Common Wildlife As described above, the vegetation communities along Glen Annie Creek are well known to provide suitable food, shading, and nesting sources for both common and special-status species. During the biological reconnaissance surveys, several wildlife species, particularly birds, were observed. Appendix G provides a cumulative list of wildlife species observed. Reconnaissance surveys were brief and do not capture all species utilizing the habitat. Due to the complex habitat present, this creek would support small mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles.

Special-Status Wildlife Several special-status species have a potential to occur within the reach of Glen Annie Creek within City limits. These include, but are not limited to, monarch butterfly, California newt, southwestern pond turtle, California red-legged frog, and two-striped garter snake. In addition, this creek may provide nesting opportunities for raptors. USFWS critical habitat for tidewater goby is also located immediately south of Hollister Avenue and the City limits. Tidewater goby were documented within the Glen Annie

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 126 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA sediment basin in 2008 and 57 adults and 217 juveniles were captured along the west end of Santa Barbara Airport in 2010 (CDFW 2020). Monarch butterfly overwintering habitat is also located at the northern extent of the mapped vegetation within the City’s limits along Cathedral Oaks Road in mapped coast live oak woodlands. At this location five monarch butterflies were last documented in 2017 (Xerces 2020). Although this creek is designated as USFWS critical habitat for steelhead, barriers are present, including a box culvert along Highway 101 and additional barriers considered high to impassible (Stoecker et al. 2002). The Hollister Avenue bridge may also impede the movements of tidewater goby upstream.

Wildlife Corridor and Linkages

Wildlife corridor camera and tracking studies (Appendix E) documented the following mammal species of particular interest within Glen Annie Creek: Bobcat, coyote, raccoon and multiple resident species, including Virginia opossum, striped skunk, squirrel, brush rabbit, rodents, and domestic cats. Glen Annie is a well shaded creek with many natural resources. The creek provides connectivity from the Santa Ynez Mountains to habitat areas south of the City, including Goleta Slough.

A total of 32 bird species were observed along Glen Annie Creek during surveys (Appendix F). Riparian birds of interest observed during surveys includes yellow warbler in May and June. North of US 101 the riparian oak woodlands along Glen Annie exhibit a relatively broader width of woodlands, providing more cover and nesting opportunities for a variety of species. The adjacent agriculture and open spaces along Glen Annie would also attract raptor species. South of US 101 the creek is immediately constrained by development and the narrow banks and terraces of the creek, although narrow, exhibit some sufficient areas of understory growth to provide cover and some nesting opportunities for low nesting birds. As with other creeks above, the variety of tree and dominant plant species along the creek provide a diverse range of resources for birds. In addition, the channel of this creek is frequently inundated with water which has contributed to the growth of typical wetland species within and along the channel. Overall, the diversity of tree species, understory vegetation, canopy heights, and presence of intermittent water flow would provide suitable nesting, feeding, and cover opportunities for a variety of species, particularly those associated with the following general habitats during the breeding season: open areas, riparian, open habitats, woodland, grassland, chaparral, scrub, wetland, marsh, waterbodies, and cosmopolitan areas.

4.3.6.7 El Encanto

Quick Facts Watershed Area 0.38 mi2 (contributing sub-watershed); 0.74 mi2 (City sub-watershed) Creek Length 2.5 miles (total); 1.5 miles (City sub-watershed) Creek Elevation (within 10 – 133 feet above mean sea level City boundaries)1 Land Use (City sub- 62% of adjacent parcels (400-foot buffer) are designated commercial, Land Use Adjacent residential, or street; 33% is open space/parks, 4% is education Creek (City sub- 44% of the watershed is designated as impervious watershed)

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 127 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Quick Facts Channel Alignment El Encanto Creek is primarily naturally aligned down to Evergreen Park (despite a 500+ foot underground culvert through Glen Annie Golf Club), after which the creek enters a series of culverts and earthen and concrete lined channels engineered to convey flow to the Devereux Slough. Hydrology Primarily seasonal/intermittent – One perennial reach is located just upstream from the Glen Annie Golf Club, and one reach within and below Evergreen Park Beneficial Uses General Beneficial Uses apply which include municipal and domestic water supply, and protection of both recreation and aquatic life Geomorphology Channel set approx. 2 – 8 feet below the adjacent land surface Channel Sediments Clayey-to sandy-sized sediments Biology Well-shaded, (generally 100% canopy cover),2 suitable habitat for both common and special-status species 1 Elevations estimated from Google Earth. 2 Based on an adjusted modified convex densiometer (OWEB 1999) at one representative sampling location.

El Encanto Creek is positioned next to Glen Annie Creek to the east. Devereux Creek lies to the southwest, and small portions of Ellwood Canyon and Winchester Canyon Creeks (which together become Bell Canyon Creek) lie to the northwest. The total watershed area is 1.1 square miles, with 66% of that area within City limits. El Encanto Creek drains a small watershed with headwaters located within the foothills of the Santa Ynez Mountains. Despite its size, this watershed contains a number of perennial reaches within the main channel along one tributary within the City limits. El Encanto Creek ultimately joins the other Devereux Creek tributaries within the Devereux Slough just south of the City limits.

El Encanto Creek is a relatively small watershed, formed primarily within the alluvial fan deposits at the base of the Santa Ynez Mountains, without an extensive watershed extending into the mountains. The 1929 aerial photograph shows a natural channel alignment and three crossings: at a railroad spur near the present-day alignment of Tuolumne Drive, at the current railroad, and at a road at the

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 128 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA present-day alignment of Hollister Avenue. The channel form became indistinct downstream of the Hollister Avenue alignment, with evidence of distributary flow (and no trees) on the alluvial plain as it approached Devereux Slough. Extensive agricultural fields were present within the watershed and adjacent to the creek by 1948. Residential neighborhoods had been built just upstream of Highway 1 by 1959, and a 700-foot section of the creek was culverted underneath the development at that time. By 1975 residential neighborhoods had expanded further up into the watershed, as well as downstream of Hollister Avenue, and a golf course had been built along the upper arms of Devereux Slough (downstream of what is now the City limits). During the mid-1970s, the lower-most section of El Encanto Creek was converted to a concrete channel. During the 1990s, another golf course was built which buried El Encanto Creek in a culvert upstream from Cathedral Oaks Road just north of City limits.

Land Use

The watershed analysis was split between the City and the contributing sub-watersheds (Figure 2 and Figure 4). The City sub-watershed of El Encanto Creek watershed comprises approximately 66% of the entire assessed watershed area for El Encanto Creek. The City sub-watershed is mostly comprised of high-density residential (51%), streets (23%), open space/park (11%), and commercial (9%) areas. The contributing El Encanto Creek sub-watershed is composed of 7% sparse residential within the Santa Ynez Mountain foothills, 45% agricultural, 38% golf course, and 9% residential areas. All land uses identified within the contributing and City sub-watersheds are provided in Table 20, El Encanto Creek Land Uses.

Table 20. El Encanto Creek Land Uses

Acres within City Sub- Acres within Contributing Sub- Land Uses Watershed Watershed General Agriculture 14.1 108.0 Golf Course -- 92.1 Commercial 44.0 -- High Density Residential 242.0 -- Residential Ranchette -- 22.2 Santa Ynez Mountains - -- 16.2 Residential Santa Ynez Mountains - -- -- Undeveloped Park/Open Space 53.0 3.6 Street 109.5 -- School/Education 9.3 -- TOTAL 471.8 242.0

Land use within the 200-foot buffer on either side of the channel within the City limits mainly consisted of: 15% streets, 36% high-density residential, 33% open space/park, and 11% commercial areas. Within the City, there are 84 parcels and approximately 78 structures within 100 feet of the centerline of El Encanto Creek. Of those 78 structures, 68 are in residential zone districts, nine are in commercial zone districts, and one is in a public and quasi-public zone district.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 129 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Beneficial Uses and Water Quality

El Encanto Creek does not have specific Beneficial Uses assigned to it. Therefore, El Encanto Creek is assigned the general Beneficial Uses associated with all inland waters in the Central Coast. These include the protection of water quality to support municipal or domestic water supply (MUN), as well as recreation (potential to include REC-1, REC-2, and/or COMM), and aquatic life (potential to include WARM, COLD, EST, WILD, RARE, MIGR, and/or SPWN). El Encanto Creek is also not identified on the State’s 303(d) list as impaired for any water quality parameters. However, trash has been identified as a problem within the creek.

Channel Geomorphology

Field surveys were conducted along the creek within City limits Photo EL-1 (Figure 9c, Geomorphic Resources: West). In general, the natural reaches of El Encanto Creek are shaded by riparian trees and support willows and other understory species, whereas there are almost no trees along the banks of the concrete-lined reach. The natural channel has clayey-to-sandy sized sediments. The channel is less downcut into the alluvial plain than other watersheds to the east, likely because of a smaller watershed area and a gentler slope, which translates into lower flows and less erosion potential; the maximum basin height is 561 feet (compared to over 3,000 feet for most creeks to the east). Nevertheless, modest channel downcutting that has occurred may be natural as a function of watershed processes (including tectonic activities or changes in sea level) or perhaps more likely as a result of land use changes over the past century or more as the area has progressively developed into agriculture, ranching, and urban land uses. In the present-day, the stream channel is set approximately 2 to 8 feet below the surrounding terrace surfaces, depending on location.

Photo EL-2 The natural channel in Evergreen Park contains some ponded water, which supports a riparian overstory and a thick willow understory near Alpine Drive just upstream of the underground section, and the channel contains the most in-stream wood encountered during field reconnaissance (Photo EL-1). Clayey-silty sediments have formed a cohesive channel bed with pool bedforms, which, along with wood jams, are indicative of active geomorphic processes that can support habitat for aquatic species. The channel is daylighted for a short distance south of Tuolumne Drive and then again downstream of Highway 101.

Downstream of Hollister Avenue, the channel bed and banks are concrete-lined with few trees lining the top of the banks. Concrete channels such as this one, with no structural elements to slow flows or locally trap sediment, do not provide geomorphic function to the creek. Open space is present along both sides of the concrete-lined channel, particularly downstream of Davenport Road (Photo EL-2).

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 130 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Flooding

Based on review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 100-Year Flood Zone (Figure 5) (FEMA 2020), the 100-year event produces flooding between the train tracks and Highway 101, and within the neighborhood just south of Hollister Avenue. The majority of the floodwater is contained within the roadways in this neighborhood excluding a section between Davenport Road and Evanston Place where the flood stage does enter the residential parcels.

Biological Resources

Vegetation Communities

The vegetated portions of El Encanto Creek, south of Phelps Road and north of Hollister Avenue, are well-shaded (generally 100% canopy cover), providing habitat for plants and wildlife (Photo EL-3). As shown on Figure 7f, Biological Resources: El Encanto, three vegetation communities were observed within the creek: (1) 2.45 acres of coast live oak woodland; (2) 9.50 acres of coast live oak – arroyo willow; and (3) 4.16 acres of coyote brush scrub located south of Phelps Road. It should be noted that the portion of the Photo EL-3 creek between Hollister Avenue and Phelps Road is mapped as a Flood Control Concrete Channel, which provides no habitat value for plants and wildlife. As a result, the remainder of this section focuses on the vegetated portions of the creek. The creek understory is dense with poison oak and English ivy and interspersed with additional shrubs such as mulefat. Portions of the creek are composed of an open understory, especially under mature oak trees where non-native grasses and leaf litter are present. The topsoil in the center of the channel is a clay to silty clay substrate. Generally, the conditions of this creek suggest the potential to provide suitable feeding, cover, and nesting opportunities for a variety of plant and wildlife species.

Invasive Plants

English ivy was particularly present at sites visited, suggesting potential locations for any future restoration activities. The general locations of these observations are shown in Figure 7f.

Wildlife Species

Common Wildlife As described above, the vegetation communities along El Encanto Creek provide suitable food, shading, and nesting sources for both common and special-status species. In addition, the vegetated structure of this creek provides many opportunities for a variety of wildlife to seek refuge, food, and/or nesting activities. During the biological reconnaissance surveys several wildlife species were observed. Appendix G provides a cumulative list of wildlife species observed. Reconnaissance surveys were brief and do not capture all species utilizing the habitat. It is also likely that amphibians, such as Pacific chorus frog, frequent this creek, but were not noted during surveys.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 131 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Special-Status Wildlife Several special-status species have the potential to occur within the reach of El Encanto Creek within the City’s limit. These include, but are not limited to, Cooper’s hawk and special-status bats at suitable bridge locations. Tidewater goby were documented downstream in Devereux Slough in 2007 (CDFW 2020). It is possible, but unlikely, that this species would travel upstream due to the presence of an approximately 0.35 mile stretch of flood control channel in the southern portion of this reach within the City.

Wildlife Corridor and Linkages

Wildlife corridor camera and tracking studies (Appendix E) documented the following mammal species of particular interest within El Encanto Creek: raccoon and multiple resident species, including Virginia opossum, striped skunk, squirrel, brush rabbit, rodents, and domestic cats. El Encanto is a well shaded creek with many natural resources. The creek provides connectivity from the Santa Ynez Mountains to habitat areas south of the City, including Devereux Slough.

A total of 35 bird species were observed along El Encanto Creek during surveys (Appendix F). Riparian birds of interest observed during surveys includes yellow warbler in May and June. Although areas along the periphery of this creek are generally composed of an open understory, the central portion of the creek is quite dense and the density increases north towards Cathedral Oaks Road. The combination of oak woodlands and arroyo willows provides many feeding, nesting, and cover opportunities for a variety of bird species, particularly those associated with the following general habitats during the breeding season: open areas, riparian, open habitats, woodland, grassland, chaparral, scrub, and cosmopolitan areas. 4.3.6.8 Devereux

Quick Facts Watershed Area 1.82 mi2 (City sub-watershed) Creek Length 1.6 miles (City sub-watershed) Creek Elevation (within 11 – 100 feet above mean sea level City boundaries)1 Land Use Adjacent 36% of adjacent parcels (400-foot buffer) are designated residential, or Creek (City sub- street; 17% is golf course, and 46% open space/parks watershed) 48% of the watershed is designated as impervious Channel Alignment Natural alignment for the majority of the numerous smaller tributaries that make up the Devereux Creek watershed. The westernmost tributary is noted as blocked at the culvert beneath the train tracks just south of Highway 101, directing flow west to the Bell Canyon Creek watershed. Hydrology Seasonal/intermittent Beneficial Uses MUN, GWR, REC-1, REC-2, WILD, WARM, FRSH, COMM Geomorphology Channel set approx. 1 – 3 feet below the adjacent land surface Channel Sediments Clay- to sand-sized sediment

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 132 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Quick Facts Biology Well-shaded (generally 100% canopy cover),2 narrow bed and eucalyptus dominated habitat provides suitability for some common and special-status species 1 Elevations estimated from Google Earth. 2 Based on an adjusted modified convex densiometer (OWEB 1999) at one representative sampling location.

Devereux Creek is positioned between El Encanto Creek to the east, Winchester Canyon and Ellwood Canyon Creeks to the north, and Bell Canyon Creek to the west. The total watershed area is 1.8 square miles, with 100% of that area within City limits. Devereux Creek is the only watershed with its headwaters within the City limits, so there is no area upstream of City limits. The Devereux Watershed is comprised of multiple small tributaries which drain central and western Goleta into the Goleta Slough. This series of creeks drain the largest area within the City limits out of the 12 creeks assessed in the CWMP.

The 1929 aerial photograph shows a predominantly natural channel alignment with multiple tributary branches, with crossings under the railroad and Hollister Avenue. Fields and roads were demarcated, and it appears that trees (perhaps eucalyptus groves, of which remnants remain today) had been planted along two or three branches. It appears that a trailer park was present south of Hollister by 1959 and by 1965 new residential neighborhoods were in various states of construction throughout the watershed within City limits. By 1975, channels had been undergrounded through many of the neighborhoods and the Sandpiper Golf Course was operational.

Land Use

Devereux Creek’s watershed sits entirely within the City’s boundaries, so the watershed analysis only discusses land uses within the City limits (Figure 2 and Figure 4). Devereux Creek’s watershed is mostly comprised of high density residential (36%), streets (18%), open space/park (20%), and commercial (12%) areas. All land uses identified within the Devereux Creek watershed are listed in Table 21, Devereux Creek Land Uses.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 133 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 21. Devereux Creek Land Uses

Land Uses Acres Within City Sub-Watershed General Agriculture <0.0 (0.02) Golf Course 92.6 Auto Shop/ Retail 2.8 Commercial 144.2 High Density Residential 425.6 Industrial 17.1 Mixed Commercial/Residential 4.4 Park/Open Space 234.8 Slough 47.5 Street 1.4 School/Education 37.3 TOTAL 1,166.9

Land use within the 200-foot buffer on either side of the channel within the City limits mainly consisted of: 17% golf course, 27% high-density residential, and 46% open space/parks. Within the City, there are 345 parcels and approximately 260 structures within 100 feet of the centerlines of Devereux Creek. Of those 260 structures, 257 are in residential zone districts, two are in public and quasi-public zone districts, and one is in an open space zone district.

Beneficial Uses and Water Quality

The beneficial uses of Devereux Creek are as follows:

• Municipal and domestic water supply • Groundwater recharge • Recreation water with body contact (swimming) • Recreation water (non-body contact like hiking, boating etc.) • Wildlife habitat • Warm freshwater habitat • Freshwater replenishment • Commercial and sports fishing

A complete list of the WQOs associated with all inland waters and WQOs established for specific Beneficial Uses is provided in Appendix D. Devereux Creek meets all but three of the WQOs established for it (Table 22). Potential sources for each impairment are also discussed in Appendix D.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 134 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 22. Devereux Creek Water Quality Impairments

Numeric/Qualitative Thresholds Applicable (based upon most stringent Devereux Creek WQOs Beneficial Uses WQO) Status pH All inland Waters / pH shall not be depressed Not Meeting MUN / AGR / REC- below 7.0 (COLD / WARM), or WQOs (SBCK) 1 / REC -2 / COLD raised above 8.3 (MUN, AGR, for pH / WARM REC-1, REC-2) Dissolved Oxygen All Inland Waters / Dissolved Oxygen shall not be Not Meeting AGR / COLD / reduced below 7.0 mg/L at any WQO (State SPWN/WARM time (COLD, SPWN). 303(d) list) for exceeding WQO in 11 of 17 samples Bacteria REC-1 / REC-2 30-day 5-sample mean fecal Not Meeting coliform concentration not to WQOs (State exceed 200/100 mL, nor more 303(d) list) for than 10% in that 30-day period fecal coliform exceed 400/100 mL (REC - 1)

Channel Geomorphology

Field surveys were conducted along the creek within City limits Photo DEV-1 (Figure 9c). In general, the portions of Devereux Creek that are above-ground are either well-shaded or not shaded at all (including portions of the golf course and south of Sora Court). The natural channel has clay- to sand-sized sediment. The channel is less downcut than other watersheds to the east, likely because the watershed drains marine terrace and coastal sand dune areas, so the underlying sand substrate is porous and infiltrates flows efficiently in areas where the natural channel is not disturbed. Maximum basin height is just 163 feet (compared to over 3,000 feet for most creeks to the east). The stream channel is typically set approximately 1 to 3 feet below the surrounding surfaces, depending on location, although surrounding surfaces are somewhat higher in areas where development has encroached along the channel, such as along Pebble Beach Drive.

The natural channel bed was dry during field reconnaissance and does not support an understory along the channel banks. Clayey-to-sandy sediments have formed a cohesive channel bed in some areas with steps (formed by woody materials in the channel) and pools, which are indicative of active geomorphic processes that can support habitat for aquatic species. The majority of trees in this watershed are non-native eucalyptus that support monarch butterfly overwintering habitat.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 135 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Two tributary branches of Devereux Creek originate at culverts downstream of Hollister Avenue. One branch originates from a 42-inch pipe into a eucalyptus grove between Pebble Beach Drive and Santa Barbara Shores Drive and exhibits some step-pool bedform configurations (Photo DEV-1). The other branch originates from a 4-foot by 4-foot culvert and shortly thereafter traverses the golf course. Along the east-west recreational trail, there is an open, vegetated, sandy area with no discernable channel Photo DEV-2 formed (Photo DEV-2).

Flooding

Excluding a few sections between Highway 101 and the train tracks, floodwater is primarily contained within the riparian corridor in the upper and middle Devereux Creek watershed (Figure 5) (FEMA 2020). There are a few residential structures adjacent to the western Devereux Creek tributaries that appear to become inundated in this area, but most of the flooding appears confined to the residential communities adjacent to Devereux Slough (at the southern end of the City limits).

Biological Resources

Vegetation Communities

The portion of Devereux Creek, and its tributaries, within the City limits is well-shaded (generally 100% canopy cover) which provides habitat for many plant and wildlife species, including special-status species. Most of this creek is composed of eucalyptus groves, but also includes arroyo willow thickets and additional vegetation communities. As shown in Figure 7g, Biological Resources: Devereux, four vegetation communities were mapped within the creek: (1) 8.72 acres of arroyo willow thickets; (2) 51.31 acres of Photo DEV-3 eucalyptus woodlands; (3) 0.49 acre of coastal sage scrub; and (4) 21.28 acres of non-native grasslands. Additional trees and shrubs are present within the mapped eucalyptus area, including species such as ash, Brazilian pepper tree (Schinus terebinthifolius), cotoneaster (Cotoneaster sp.), bottlebrush, and understory non-native grasses, nasturtium, and wood sorrel. The arroyo willows on site include various understory species such as sages, mulefat, and in some places, emergent wetland species, such as bulrush and cattails. As shown in Figure 7g, within the City’s limits, most of the creek is eucalyptus woodlands. In some northern tributaries the creek bed is very narrow and opens up in the southern reaches of the creek. During site visits, water was present along the southern portions of this creek. Although this creek may have some pools and manufactured boulder placings, the dominance of eucalyptus leaf litter tends to preclude additional native species from establishing and producing a significant understory. Generally, the substrate along the creek is coarse loamy sand as a top layer and moderately fine clay loam within a few inches under the topsoil. Overall, this creek provides some opportunities for habitat, food, and shelter for some common and special-status plant and wildlife species.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 136 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Invasive Plants Invasive plants, such as arundo and extensive areas of ivy, were present during site visits. Eucalyptus groves are mapped along this creek.

Wildlife Species

Common Wildlife Although this creek may have some pools and manufactured boulders, the dominance of eucalyptus leaf litter tends to preclude additional native species from establishing and producing a significant understory that is typically used by riparian birds for nesting. Riparian birds may find nesting opportunities in the eucalyptus woodlands, adjacent scrub, grasslands, and arroyo willow. As a result, there are plenty of opportunities for nesting, feeding, and cover for birds. In addition, small to medium sized mammals, such as rabbits, coyote, and bobcat, utilize the trails and open understory of the eucalyptus to traverse across the site. The adjacent grasslands provide feeding opportunities for raptors and the eucalyptus also provide nesting opportunities for raptors. Similarly, amphibians and reptiles find suitable feeding and refuge in the leaf litter and aquatic habitats present along this creek.

During the biological reconnaissance surveys several species were observed. Appendix G provides a cumulative list of wildlife species observed. Reconnaissance surveys were brief and did not capture all species utilizing the habitat.

Special-Status Wildlife Most notable at this location is the overwintering eucalyptus groves for monarch butterflies. Although in recent years, due to drought, the condition of the eucalyptus grove has diminished, during strong years monarchs have numbered in the tens of thousands at this location. In 2018 a total of 207 monarchs were observed within the various groves along Devereux Creek (Xerces 2020), a small fraction of the numbers in previous years. Additional special-status species that may occur at this site includes species such as white-tailed kite, grasshopper sparrow, California horned lark, burrowing owl, southern California rufous crowned sparrow, Cooper’s hawk, Bell’s sage sparrow, possibly California newt, possibly southwestern pond turtle, and bat species.

Wildlife Corridor and Linkages

Wildlife corridor camera and tracking studies (Appendix E) documented the following mammal species of particular interest within Devereux Creek: bobcat, gray fox, coyote, raccoon and multiple resident species, including Virginia opossum, striped skunk, squirrel, brush rabbit, rodents, and domestic cats. Devereux Creek is a well shaded creek with many natural resources. The creek provides connectivity from the Santa Ynez Mountains to habitat areas south of the City, including the Devereux Slough.

A total of 49 bird species were observed along Devereux Creek during surveys (Appendix F). Riparian birds of interest observed during surveys includes yellow warbler and common yellowthroat in May and June. The Ellwood Mesa/Sperling Preserve Open Space is a popular recreational area attracts many birders to the region and this area is considered an Important Birding Area along the Goleta Coast (Audubon 2020). The mosaic and expanse of open space and resources attract many species of birds to utilize the variety habitats for feeding, cover, resting, nesting, and perching. The main groves are dominated by eucalyptus woodlands, surrounded by open space grasslands, and interspersed with thickets of arroyo willow and scrub habitat. The groves of Eucalyptus provide many wooded

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 137 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA resources (e.g., downed logs, woody debris, cavity nesting, seed caching opportunities) for a variety of bird species. Generally, the understory within these groves is open. The arroyo willow thickets interspersed in the area is composed of a thick understory and in some areas adjacent to small pockets of wetland. This open space is bordered on the south by the Pacific Ocean with a portion of the shores along the beach designated as critical habitat for the western snowy plover (Charadrius nivosus nivosus; 77 FR 36727–36869). This creek would provide suitable nesting, feeding, and cover opportunities for a variety of species, particularly those associated with the following general habitats during the breeding season: riparian, open habitats, woodland, grassland, chaparral, scrub, and cosmopolitan areas; with some potential for species utilizing wetland, marsh, and waterbody habitats. 4.3.6.9 Bell Canyon Creek (including Ellwood and Winchester Canyon Creeks)

Quick Facts Watershed Area 5.89 mi2 (contributing sub-watershed); 0.32 mi2 (City sub-watershed) Creek Length 10.7 miles (total); 0.90 miles (City sub-watershed) Creek Elevation (within 6 – 80 feet above mean sea level City boundaries)1 Land Use Adjacent Bell Canyon Creek: 33% of adjacent parcels (400-foot buffer) are Creek (City sub- designated mixed commercial and residential, or street; 37% is golf course, watershed) and 11% open space/parks, 13% coastline Ellwood Canyon Creek: 50% of adjacent parcels (400-foot buffer) are designated residential, or street; 32% is agriculture, and 18% open space/parks Winchester Canyon Creek: 78% of adjacent parcels (400-foot buffer) are designated residential; 22% open space/parks 67% of the total Bell, Ellwood and Winchester Canyon Creeks are designated as impervious. Channel Alignment Primarily natural alignment Hydrology Seasonal/Intermittent with potential perennial sections during above average rainy seasons. Beneficial Uses General Beneficial Uses apply which include municipal and domestic water supply, and protection of both recreation and aquatic life Geomorphology Bell: channel set approx. 3 – 5 feet below the adjacent land surface Ellwood: channel set approx. 3 – 10 feet below the adjacent land surface Winchester: channel set approx. 10 – 20 feet below the adjacent land surface Channel Sediments Bell: sandy to cobble-sized sediments Ellwood: silty-to cobble-sized sediments Winchester: silt- to cobble-sized sediments Biology Well-shaded (generally 99% canopy cover north of US 101),2 suitable habitat; lagoon in south Bell Canyon Creek is less shaded (generally 7% canopy cover)2 also provides additional habitat for both common and special-status species 1 Elevations estimated from Google Earth. 2 Based on an adjusted modified convex densiometer (OWEB 1999) at two representative sampling locations.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 138 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Ellwood Canyon Creek (east) and Winchester Canyon Creek (west) converge at the northwesternmost corner of the City above Cathedral Oaks Road to become Bell Canyon Creek, which continues to the coast. Ellwood Canyon Creek is positioned next to El Encanto Creek and Glen Annie Creek to the east, and Winchester Canyon Creek and Tecolote Creek to the west. Winchester Canyon Creek is positioned between Ellwood Canyon Creek to the east and Tecolote Creek to the west. Bell Canyon Creek is west of Devereux Creek and east of the lower Tecolote Creek watershed. The total watershed area of Ellwood Canyon Creek is 3.9 square miles, with 3.5% of that area within the City limits; all remaining watershed area is upstream of the City. The total watershed area of Winchester Canyon Creek is 1.7 square miles, with just 0.2% of that area within City limits; all remaining watershed area is upstream of the City. The total watershed area of Bell Canyon Creek is approximately 0.6 square miles, with 34% of that area within the City limits; all remaining watershed area outside of the City (contributing).

The combined Bell/Ellwood/Winchester Creek watersheds begin along the Santa Ynez Mountain ridgeline and discharge into a lagoon along the coast just south of Highway 101, west of the Devereux Slough. This, along with Tecolote Creek, are the only creeks within the City limits that do not discharge to either the Goleta or Devereux Sloughs.

The 1929 aerial photograph shows a natural channel alignment at the confluence of Ellwood Canyon and Winchester Canyon Creeks, with orchards and ranchland on the adjacent terraces. Downstream of Hollister Avenue, the lower watershed appeared in the process of being developed for oil extraction. The coastline was lined with piers and oil derrick platforms by 1947 but by 1965 oil tanks and piers had been removed (although oil production continued farther offshore). By 1975, the upstream agricultural fields had been converted into a residential neighborhood, and the downstream left bank floodplain was under re-development for an oil and gas processing plant, while vegetation appeared to be regenerating along the creek channel and in the rest of the floodplain.

Land Use

The watershed analysis was split between the City and the contributing sub-watersheds (Figure 2 and Figure 4), and include all areas draining to Bell Canyon, Ellwood Canyon, and Winchester Canyon

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 139 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Creeks. The total contributing Bell/Ellwood/Winchester Canyon Creek sub-watersheds comprise approximately 95% of the entire assessed watershed area. Approximately 53% of the contributing sub- watersheds are located within undeveloped areas of the Santa Ynez Mountains and foothills. The remaining 47% of the contributing sub-watersheds are comprised mostly of agriculture (42%) and mixed agricultural-residential (4%) areas. The City sub-watershed is mostly composed of agricultural (12%), streets (29%), high density residential (25%), and golf course (17%) uses. All land uses identified within the contributing and City sub-watersheds are provided in Table 23, Bell Canyon Creek Land Uses.

Table 23. Bell Canyon Creek Land Uses

Acres within City Sub- Acres within Contributing Sub- Land Uses Watershed Watershed General Agriculture 24.0 1,580.3 Golf Course 34.3 -- Coastline 13.0 -- High Density Residential 53.9 -- Oil and gas 4.5 -- Mixed agricultural/residential -- 158.0 Mixed Commercial/Residential 5.0 -- Moderate Density Residential -- 0.3 Residential Ranchette -- 9.3 Santa Ynez Mountains - -- 2,005.3 Undeveloped Park/Open Space 3.0 0.2 Street 60.7 19.2 TOTAL 198.8 3,772.6

Land use within the 200-foot buffer on either side of the channel within the City limits mainly consisted of: 24% streets, 42% high-density residential, and 20% open space/parks. Within the City, there are 35 parcels and approximately 17 structures within 100 feet of the centerline of Bell Canyon Creek. Of those 17 structures, 14 are in residential zone districts and three are in agricultural districts.

Beneficial Uses and Water Quality

Bell Canyon Creek and its tributaries do not have specific Beneficial Uses assigned to them. Therefore, they are assigned general Beneficial Uses associated with all inland waters in the Central Coast. These include the protection of water quality to support municipal or domestic water supply (MUN), as well as recreation (potential to include REC-1, REC-2, and/or COMM) and aquatic life (potential to include WARM, COLD, EST, WILD, RARE, MIGR, and/or SPWN).

A complete list of the WQOs associated with all inland waters and WQOs established for specific Beneficial Uses is provided in Appendix D. Bell Canyon Creek meets all but four of the WQOs established for it (Table 24). Potential sources for each impairment are also discussed in Appendix D.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 140 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 24. Bell Canyon Creek Water Quality Impairments

Numeric/Qualitative Thresholds Applicable (based upon most stringent Bell Canyon WQOs Beneficial Uses WQO) Creek Status Floating Materials All Inland Avoid nuisance or adverse Not Meeting Waters impacts to beneficial uses WQOs (SBCK) associated with floating solids, for trash liquids, foams, and scum. Toxicity All Inland All waters shall remain free of Not Meeting Waters toxic substances in WQO (State concentrations which are toxic 303(d) list) for to, or which produce detrimental exceeding plant physiological response in, toxicity limits in human, plant, animal, or aquatic 2 out of 3 life. samples Inorganic Chemicals MUN Not exceed maximum Not Meeting contaminant levels of inorganic WQO (State chemicals for primary drinking 303(d) list) for water standards (CA Code of Nitrate Regulations, Title 22) Bacteria REC-1 / REC-2 30-day 5-sample mean fecal Not Meeting coliform concentration not to WQOs (State exceed 200/100 mL, nor more 303(d) list) for than 10% in that 30-day period fecal coliform exceed 400/100 mL (REC - 1)

Channel Geomorphology

Ellwood Canyon Creek Field surveys were conducted along the creek within the Photo EL-1 City limits (Figure 9c). In general, Ellwood Canyon Creek is well-shaded. The natural channel has silty-to-cobble sized sediments. The channel bisects uplifted marine terrace deposits and occupies a relatively broad channel (along with inset alluvial terraces) within this corridor. The stream channel is set approximately 3 to 10 feet below the surrounding alluvial terrace surfaces, depending on location, and even further below the adjacent uplifted marine terraces, likely as a result of land use changes over the past century or more as the area has progressively developed into agriculture, ranching, and urban land uses.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 141 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

During reconnaissance, the natural channel bed contained ponded or slowly flowing water that supported aquatic vegetation and some understory species, with riparian species along the upper banks. Silt- to-gravel-sized sediment formed shallow pool bedforms just upstream of the confluence with Winchester Canyon Creek, which is indicative of active geomorphic processes that can support habitat for aquatic species. A bedrock outcrop composed of weathered mudstone or siltstone is present on the right bank just upstream of the confluence (Photo EL-1). Winchester Canyon Creek Field surveys were conducted along the creek within the Photo WI-1 City limits (Figure 9c). In general, Winchester Canyon Creek is well-shaded. The natural channel has silt- to cobble-sized sediments. The channel is downcut into the alluvial plain, whether naturally as a function of watershed processes (including response to tectonic uplift or changes in sea level) or perhaps more likely as a result of land use changes over the past century or more as the area has progressively developed into agriculture, ranching, and urban land uses. Today the stream channel is set approximately 10 to 20 feet below the surrounding terrace surfaces, depending on location.

The natural channel bed contains ponded or slowly flowing A grade control drop-structure approximately 10 feet in height steps the channel bed elevation down into a concrete-lined channel that is at a 90 degree angle from the creek, runs parallel to Armas Canyon Road for a short distance and then crosses under the road and continues downstream outside the City limits (Photo WI-1).

Bell Canyon Creek Field surveys were conducted along the creek within City limits Photo BE-1 (Figure 9c). In general, Bell Canyon Creek downstream of Highway 101 and the UPRR is well-shaded. The natural channel is composed of sandy to cobble-sized sediment. The channel is modestly downcut into the alluvial plain, whether naturally as a function of watershed processes (including tectonic activities or changes in sea level), likely as a result of upper watershed land use changes over the past century or more as the area has progressively developed into agriculture, ranching, and urban land uses, or due to historical use of the area for oil production. The stream channel is set approximately 3 to 5 feet below the surrounding terrace surfaces, depending on location.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 142 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

The natural channel bed emerges through a culvert at the base of a UPRR track embankment that is approximately 20 to 30 feet high and shows signs of slope rilling (Photo BE-1). The channel upstream and downstream of the bridge on Hollister Avenue contains ponded or slowly flowing water that supports aquatic vegetation, understory species, and a mature riparian corridor. Shallow pool and riffle channel bedforms and sand bars are present within the channel, which are indicative of active geomorphic processes that can support habitat for aquatic species. The lowermost section of the creek is affected by tidal conditions and back-water effects of the lagoon and beach sand bar barrier that is seasonally present at the mouth of the stream.

Photo BE-2 At Bell Canyon Lagoon, cobbles and wood line the lagoon edges closest to the sand bar barrier that separate it from the ocean (Photo BE-2). The sand bar barrier was approximately 2.5 to 3 feet high when field surveys were conducted. Sand bar breaching can occur naturally via an accumulation of low streamflows or from an abruptly larger flood flow. The outflow channel, once open, additionally provides a route for tidal flows to enter the lagoon.

Flooding

Based on review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 100-Year Flood Zone (Figure 5) (FEMA 2020), flooding outside of the riparian corridor appears just upstream from the City limits on Ellwood Canyon Creek. The floodwaters initially inundate mixed agriculture/residential parcels, but then proceed south away from the main channel into a residential area (along Rio Vista Drive and between Old Ranch Drive and Wagon Wheel Drive). Floodwaters also extend beyond the riparian corridor along the main Ellwood channel prior to the confluence with Winchester Canyon Creek, impacting houses along Langlo Ranch Road. Flooding also occurs just upstream from Highway 101 but is contained within agricultural land. Downstream from Highway 101 floodwaters are contained within the riparian corridor until reaching the lagoon.

Biological Resources

Vegetation Communities

The combined reaches of Bell Canyon Creek, Winchester Canyon Creek, and Ellwood Canyon Creek provide a diverse range of habitats suitable for both common and special- status plants and wildlife species. As shown in Figure 7h and Figure 7i, a lagoon is present along the southern portion of Bell Canyon Creek, which transitions into arroyo willow thickets. In Bell Canyon Creek, Winchester Canyon Creek, and Ellwood Canyon Creek, north of Highway 101, the creek is characterized as a shady (generally 99% canopy cover) relatively narrow channel with moderately Photo BE-3 fine sandy clay loam along the channel. Overall, these creeks support a variety of plant and wildlife species, including special-status species. As shown in Figure 7h and Figure 7i, seven vegetation communities

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 143 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA were observed within these creeks: (1) 4.25 acres of arroyo willow thickets; (2) 1.46 acres of coast live oak woodland; (3) 6.48 acres of western sycamore – coast live oak – arroyo willow; (4) 2.92 acres of eucalyptus woodland; (5) 0.77 acres of coastal sage scrub; (6) 1.10 acres of cattail marsh; and (7) 0.17 acres of emergent wetland north of Highway 101, the understory vegetation is composed of arroyo willow, cape ivy, arundo, nasturtium, periwinkle, watercress, and non-native grasses (Photo BE- 3). These areas have a high potential for restoration as the creek is composed of multiple riffles and pools, and invasive plant species are abundant. The center of this channel is relatively open and walkable with occasional occurrences of watercress in the center of the channel, suggesting water is present in the creek.

As shown in Figure 7h and Figure 7i, within the City’s limits, there are multiple riffles and pools along this creek, with moderate to high substrate embeddedness. The instream characteristics include the presence of a few boulders, moderate amounts of woody material, algae, abundance of overhanging vegetation, and moderate amounts of live tree roots. These components provide some opportunities for habitat, food, or contribute to the organic components of the community. The soil is composed of a moderately fine sandy clay loam. As shown through the characteristics of this creek, this soil is ideal plant-growing medium that supports the dense and complex vegetation communities, plants, and wildlife present along this creek. The presence of seasonal water flow, complex in-stream characteristics, and presence of an abundance of organic material suggest that the creek reach north of Highway 101 has the potential to provide suitable feeding, cover, and nesting opportunities for a variety of plant and wildlife species.

The Bell Canyon Creek lagoon canopy is more open (generally 7% canopy cover) and also provides suitable habitat for a variety of plant and wildlife species. The depth of this lagoon varies and during site visits was measured between 3 to 4 feet deep. In addition, the wetted width varies but can be greater than 60 feet at the mouth of the lagoon.

Invasive Plants

In the creek reach north of Highway 101, arundo, cape ivy, and periwinkle are abundant, suggesting potential locations for any future restoration activities. The general locations of these observations are shown in Figures 7h and 7i.

Wildlife Species

Common Wildlife As described above, the various vegetation communities and habitats along these creeks provide suitable food, shading, and nesting sources for both common and special-status species. The Bell Canyon Creek lagoon provides feeding opportunities for a variety of wildlife, including waterbirds, waterfowl, and small songbirds. In addition, the adjacent scrub, eucalyptus, and willow vegetation provide suitable nesting and cover opportunities for a variety of wildlife. Small mammals and reptiles also may find suitable cover and refuge along the upland habitat on the edges of the lagoon, whereas amphibians may find suitable conditions within the lagoon.

Photo BE-4

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 144 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

In the creek reach north of Highway 101, boulders are present (Photo BE-4). These conditions would provide suitable habitat for small mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. The northern reach also includes a moderate amount of woody materials, abundance of overhanging vegetation, algae, and a moderate amount of live tree roots. These components provide some opportunities for habitat, food, or contribute to the organic components of the community, including the soil.

The vegetated structure of these creeks and their riparian zones Photo BE-4 provides many opportunities for a variety of wildlife to seek refuge, food, and/or nesting activities. During the biological reconnaissance surveys many wildlife species were observed. Appendix G provides a cumulative list of wildlife species observed. It should be noted that reconnaissance surveys were brief and did not capture all species utilizing the habitat.

Special-Status Wildlife Several special-status species have a potential to occur within Bell Canyon Creek, Winchester Canyon Creek, and Ellwood Canyon Creek within the City’s limits. These include, but are not limited to, California brown pelican, California red-legged frog, southern California rufous-crowned sparrow, tidewater goby, southwestern pond turtle, California newt, two-striped garter snake, and monarch butterfly. In addition, the eucalyptus groves mapped along Bell Canyon Creek (south of Highway 101) are a known overwintering habitat for monarch butterflies with six individuals recorded last in 2016 (Xerces 2020).

Wildlife Corridor and Linkages

Wildlife corridor camera and tracking studies (Appendix E) documented the following mammal species of particular interest within Bell Canyon Creek: black bear, bobcat, coyote, gray fox, raccoon and multiple resident species, including Virginia opossum, striped skunk, squirrel, brush rabbit, rodents, and domestic cats. Bell Canyon Creek is a well shaded creek with many natural resources. The creek provides connectivity from the Santa Ynez Mountains to habitat in the Bell Canyon Creek Lagoon.

A total of 43 bird species were observed along Bell/Winchester/Ellwood Canyon Creeks during surveys (Appendix F). Riparian birds of interest include warbling vireo observed in May and yellow warbler observed in June. North of US 101, the creek is well shaded and although narrow and incised in some placed, sufficient understory vegetation is present to provide nesting opportunities for low nesting species. Similar to creeks above, the varied tree species present provides a variety of opportunities for various bird species to utilize the habitat, such as woodpeckers and other cavity nesting birds; intermittent water flow; and tall shady trees for higher nesting birds. The creek is bordered by residential to the south and open lands/agriculture to the north. The location coupled with taller trees may attract raptors to this area and, indeed, red-shouldered hawk, red-tailed hawk, and white-tailed kite (fly over only) were observed along this creek. The relatively short reach of the creek south of US 101 is composed of a variety of species that utilize riparian habitat, marshes and open waters, shorelines, woodlands, and scrub. As a result, the composition of bird species observed along the creek both north and south of US 101 includes all breeding habitat groups described in the Riparian Bird Survey Report (Appendix F).

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 145 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

4.3.6.10 Tecolote

Quick Facts Watershed Area 5.7 mi2 (contributing sub-watershed); 0.12 mi2 (City sub-watershed) Creek Length 6.91 miles (total); 0.30 miles (City sub-watershed) Creek Elevation (within 6 – 64 feet above mean sea level City boundaries)1 Land Use Adjacent 58% of adjacent parcels (400-foot buffer) are designated mixed Creek (City sub- commercial and residential, 20% as street and 22% as coastline watershed) 43% of the watershed is designated as impervious Channel Alignment Natural alignment Hydrology Seasonal/Intermittent Beneficial Uses MUN, AGR, PROC, IND, GWR, REC-1, REC-2, WILD, COLD, WARM, MIGR, SPWN, RARE, EST, FRSH, COMM Geomorphology Channel set approx. 3 – 10 feet below the adjacent land surface Channel Sediments Sand and sandy-to cobble-sized sediments Biology Partially shaded (generally 61% canopy cover)1, lagoon and adjacent vegetation provide suitable habitat for both common and special-status species 1 Elevations estimated from Google Earth. 2 Based on an adjusted modified convex densiometer (OWEB 1999) at one representative sampling location.

Tecolote Creek runs along the western boundary of the City and is positioned between Bell Canyon Creek to the east and Eagle Creek to the west. The total watershed area is 5.8 square miles, with approximately 2% of that area within City limits and 98% upstream of the City limits. Tecolote Creek is the furthest west drainage that passes through the City limits. The creek terminates directly into the Pacific Ocean.

Land Use

The watershed analysis was split between the City and the contributing sub-watersheds (Figure 2 and Figure 4). The contributing Tecolote Creek sub-watershed comprises approximately 98% of the entire Creek and Watershed Management Plan 146 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA assessed watershed area for Tecolote. Approximately 69% of the contributing Tecolote Creek sub- watershed is located within undeveloped areas of the Santa Ynez Mountains. The remaining 31% of the contributing watershed is comprised mostly of agriculture (25%) with the remaining 6% including open space park, streets and, residential uses. The City sub-watershed is mostly comprised of mixed commercial and residential (62%), street (21%), and coastline (15%). All land uses identified within the contributing and City sub-watersheds are provided in Table 25, Tecolote Creek Land Uses.

Table 25. Tecolote Creek Land Uses

Acres within City Sub- Acres within Contributing Sub- Land Uses Watershed Watershed General Agriculture -- 894.2 Coastline 12.0 -- Mixed Commercial/Residential 47.9 -- Mixed agricultural/residential -- 12.0 Moderate Density Residential -- 157.6 Santa Ynez Mountains- -- 2,525.0 Undeveloped Park/Open Space 1.2 23.1 Street 16.6 32.1 TOTAL 78.0 3,644.0

Land use within the 200-foot buffer on either side of the channel within the City limits mainly consisted of: 20% streets, 58% mixed commercial/residential and 22% open coastline. Within the City, there are four parcels and no structures within 100 feet of the centerline of Tecolote Creek.

Beneficial Uses and Water Quality

The beneficial uses of Tecolote Creek are as follows:

• Municipal and domestic water supply • Agricultural • Industrial processes supply • Industrial service supply • Groundwater recharge • Recreation water with body contact (swimming) • Recreation water (non-body contact like hiking, boating etc.) • Wildlife habitat • Cold freshwater habitat • Warm freshwater habitat • Migration of aquatic organisms • Freshwater replenishment • Usage by rare, threatened and endangered species • Spawning, reproduction and/or early development

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 147 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

• Estuarine habitat • Commercial and sports fishing

A complete list of the WQOs associated with all inland waters and WQOs established for specific Beneficial Uses is provided in Appendix D. Tecolote Creek meets all but three of the WQOs established for it (Table 26). Potential sources for each impairment are also discussed in Appendix D.

Table 26. Tecolote Creek Water Quality Impairments

Numeric/Qualitative Thresholds Applicable (based upon most stringent Tecolote Creek WQOs Beneficial Uses WQO) Status Floating Materials All Inland Avoid nuisance or adverse Not Meeting Waters impacts to beneficial uses WQOs (SBCK) associated with floating solids, for trash liquids, foams, and scum. Dissolved Oxygen All Inland Dissolved Oxygen shall not be Not Meeting Waters / AGR / reduced below 7.0 mg/L at any WQOs (SBCK) COLD / SPWN time (COLD, SPWN). for Dissolved Oxygen Inorganic Chemicals MUN Not exceed maximum Not Meeting contaminant levels of inorganic WQO (State chemicals for primary drinking 303(d) list) for water standards (CA Code of Sodium and Regulations, Title 22) Chloride

Channel Geomorphology

Several locations along the creek within City limits were surveyed (Figure 9c). In general, Tecolote Creek is well-shaded by riparian trees and understory species and contains sandy- to-cobble sized sediments. The channel bisects uplifted marine terrace deposits and occupies a relatively broad channel (along with inset alluvial terraces) within this corridor. The stream channel is set approximately 3 to 10 feet below the surrounding alluvial terrace surfaces, depending on location, and even further below the adjacent uplifted marine terraces, likely as a result of upper watershed land use changes over the past century or more as the area has progressively developed into agriculture, ranching, and urban land uses, or due to historical use of the area for oil production facilities. Photo TE-1 The natural channel bed emerges through a culvert at the base of a UPRR track embankment. The channel downstream of the bridge on Hollister Avenue contains slowly flowing water that supports

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 148 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA aquatic vegetation, understory species, and a mature riparian corridor (Photo TE-1). Sand- to cobble- size sediments form shallow pool and riffle channel bedforms and sand bars, which are indicative of active geomorphic processes that can support habitat for aquatic species.

Nearing the lagoon/tidal influence but still in the freshwater stream, the channel bed is composed of sand with planar bedforms and sand bars, which are indicative of active geomorphic processes that can support habitat for aquatic species. The channel banks support a riparian corridor and understory species and the bars and shallow water support aquatic vegetation.

At Tecolote Lagoon, wood is present throughout the narrow lagoon (Photo TE-2). During field surveys, the sand bar barrier was breached, and flows were exiting slowly. The presence of wood indicates rainy season geomorphic riverine processes that convey sediment and organic materials downstream during elevated flows. Sand bar breaching can occur via an accumulation of low stream flows, from an abruptly larger flood flow, or from people opening the sand bar manually. The outflow channel, once open, additionally provides a route for tidal flows to enter Photo TE-2 the lagoon.

Flooding

Based on review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 100-Year Flood Zone (Figure 5) (FEMA 2020), floodwaters are primarily contained within the riparian corridor until flow is backed up at Highway 101. Flood stage exceeds the capacity of the channel and enters the residential lots on either side of the channel just upstream of Highway 101 at this location.

Biological Resources

Vegetation Communities

Overall, Tecolote Creek is partially shaded (generally 61% canopy cover) provide diverse feeding, nesting, and cover opportunities for plants and wildlife. As shown in Figure 7h and Figure 7i, five vegetation communities were observed within the creek: (1) 1.12 acres of arroyo willow thicket; (2) 1.25 acres of coast live oak woodland; (3) 0.91 acres of western sycamore woodland; (4) 2.06 acres of eucalyptus woodland; and (5) 3.67 acres of coastal sage scrub. The understory vegetation is composed of California brittle bush (Encelia california), watercress, clematis vines (Clematis sp.), cape ivy, stinging nettle (Urtica dioica), castor bean, blackberry, periwinkle, bulrush, nutsedge, poison oak, and other species. The lagoon transitions relatively quickly into a creek characterized by arroyo willow thicket and California sycamore before traveling under Hollister Avenue and transitioning to eucalyptus woodlands and coast live oak woodlands.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 149 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

As shown in Figure 7h and Figure 7i, within the City’s limits, there are pools and the presence of a few riffles. The pool depth of the lagoon measured approximately 21 inches. Along the riffles the substrate embeddedness generally is 10%. The instream characteristics include the presence of filamentous algae, emergent vegetation, a few boulders, some woody materials, undercut banks, large amounts of overhanging vegetation, and live tree roots. These components provide some opportunities for habitat, food, or contribute to the organic components of the community, including the soil, characterized as moderately fine sandy clay loam along the banks. In addition, the wetted width of the channel measured approximately 6.5 to 13 feet. The presence of seasonal water flow, complex in- stream characteristics, and presence of an abundance of organic material suggest that Tecolote has the potential to provide suitable feeding, cover, and nesting opportunities for a variety of plant and wildlife species.

Invasive Plants

Few invasive plants were present during site visits.

Wildlife Species

Common Wildlife As described above, the diverse vegetation communities and presence of the lagoon provides many feeding, cover, and nesting opportunities for wildlife. During the biological reconnaissance surveys several wildlife species were observed. Appendix G provides a cumulative list of wildlife species observed. It should be noted that reconnaissance surveys were brief and did not capture all species utilizing the habitat.

Special-Status Wildlife Several special-status species have a potential to occur within the reach of Tecolote within the City’s limit. These include, but are not limited to, California brown pelican, California red-legged frog, globose dune beetle, monarch butterfly, tidewater goby, southwestern pond turtle, two-striped garter snake, California newt, and steelhead. In addition, the eucalyptus groves mapped are a known overwintering habitat for monarch butterflies with 287 individuals recorded last in 2018 (Xerces 2020). Tecolote Creek is designated as USFWS critical habitat for steelhead. Although steelhead may be present within the lagoon, the long culvert that runs under Hollister Avenue and Highway 101 is considered a barrier to steelhead movement (Stoecker et al. 2002). Tidewater goby was also last detected in Tecolote Creek during surveys in 2002 (CDFW 2020). In addition, a California red-legged frog was observed in this creek in 2000.

Wildlife Corridor and Linkages

Wildlife corridor camera and tracking studies (Appendix E) documented the following mammal species of particular interest within Tecolote Creek: Gray fox, coyote, raccoon and multiple resident species, including Virginia opossum, striped skunk, squirrel, brush rabbit, rodents, and domestic cats. Tecolote is a well shaded creek with many natural resources. The creek provides connectivity from the Santa Ynez Mountains to habitat at the Tecolote Lagoon.

A total of 25 bird species were observed along Tecolote Creek during surveys (Appendix F). No particular riparian birds of interest observed during surveys. The creek is bordered by scrub habitat

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 150 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA and the mouth of this creek is a brackish open water (lagoon) that periodically connects with the Pacific Ocean. As a result, the bird species observed in this creek reflect the mosaic of plant communities and opportunities within and surrounding this creek. Foot and vehicle bridges traversing this creek provide nesting substrates for birds that nest on ledges or other vertical substrates, such as black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans) and swallow species.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 151 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 152 October 2020

5 Creek and Watershed Impairments

Impairments within the City’s creeks and watersheds are a result of many factors including historical and current land uses and practices within and outside of the City’s jurisdiction. Impairments can vary between creeks as they are tightly interwoven with the creek characteristics, adjacent land uses, and physical, biological, and chemical elements associated with each creek, as discussed in Section 4, Baseline Watershed Characterization. In the context of this discussion, impairments are physical, biological, and chemical changes to the environment that affect the larger watershed system.

Field reconnaissance efforts for the CWMP focused on creek segments within the City’s limits. However, other efforts have documented impairments within the creeks that traverse the City outside of the City’s limits which may impact the larger watershed or City creeks. Generally, the magnitude of impairments in creeks is related to the extent of human development and uses within the watershed, and may include water quality impairments and pollutants (SBCK 2006, 2014; RWQCB 2019); altered hydrology and geomorphology (e.g., fence revetments, concrete lined channels, and reduced baseflows) due to historical flood control projects, soil conservation projects, and on-going maintenance (see County of Santa Barbara 2020); fish impediments and barriers (Stoecker et al. 2002; CDFW and CalFish 2020); habitat fragmentation due to barriers and/or impediments to species movement; and generally the introduction of noise, lighting, and predation by domestic pets. Additional potential impairments to creeks may also include increased erosion and sedimentation and pollutants in creeks as a result of adjacent development or land management practices; intentional and inadvertent introduction of non-native plant and animal species which outcompete native species for resources; inadvertent removal of native vegetation; and altered hydrology and geomorphology due to land development, water diversions, and agricultural wells. 5.1 Creek Impairments Outside of the City

As shown in Table 2, Summary of Sub-Watershed Area by Jurisdiction and Region, in Section 4, the majority of the watershed is located outside of the City’s limits and particularly north of the City. As a result, activities, land uses, and decision making outside of the City impact creeks within the City. For example, impediments to wildlife movement or destruction of habitat located north of the City may result in reduced or lack of occurrences for that species within the City’s limits. In addition, any activities that result in chemicals or pollutants discharging into creeks north of the City may be detected and cause impairments within the City’s limits. Water wells and creek diversions north of the City may impair, or eliminate, creek flows within the City. Similarly, activities, land uses, and decision making within the City’s limits may have similar effects on creek reaches (and associated lagoons and estuaries) south of the City’s limits.

Any recognition of impairments outside of the City will require a collaborative and multi-jurisdictional approach to resolve. Appendix H, Potential Impairments Outside the City of Goleta, provides a list of impairments outside City limits identified by EDC. These potential impairments can be used to discuss future implementation actions through collaboration with other agencies, land use regulatory authorities, and other interested parties.

Section 6, Implementation Program, includes a variety of strategies and actions to address regional issues regarding creek and watershed issues. These strategies and actions reflect the reality that the

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 153 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

City cannot solve impairments to creeks and their associated watersheds alone. Even many impairments identified below that are within the City may be difficult to resolve without collaboration. Collaboration and engagement with other agencies and interested parties will be crucial to improve the quality of the City’s creeks as part of CWMP implementation. 5.1.1. Multi-jurisdictional Approach to Watershed Management and Agency Responsibilities

As described in Section 1.1, Section 2.0, and CE-IA-3 of the City’s General Plan Conservation Element, one of the purposes of the CWMP is to “participate in multijurisdictional watershed management plans, where appropriate.” The following provides the jurisdiction and existing watershed management plan(s) within the extent of the Goleta Slough and Goleta Watersheds (Table 27).

Table 27. Summary of Creek and Watershed Plans in the Goleta Slough and Goleta Watersheds

Agency / Committee / Organization Year Plan Coverage Notes U.S. Forest Service 2011 Watershed National Forests Local focus is the Los Condition Padres National Forest Classification Technical Guide (USDA Forest Service FS-978) National Marine 2012 Recovery Plan Southern Fishery Service (NOAA California Fishery) Steelhead DPS Central Coast RWQCB -- TMDL Impaired State None are in preparation (R3) Waters for the creeks that extend through the City of Goleta CDFW -- No plan in Goleta Slough Regulations for conception Ecological recreational use noted: Reserve (440- 630(e)(17) acre) SBFCD Annual Annual Routine County creeks Includes reaches of Maintenance creeks within the City’s Plan jurisdiction SBFCD 1991 San Jose Creek 1.5-mile segment Revegetation of San Jose Creek Plan SBFCD 1992 San Jose Creek 1.5-mile segment Restoration of San Jose Creek Project: Geomorphic

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 154 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 27. Summary of Creek and Watershed Plans in the Goleta Slough and Goleta Watersheds

Agency / Committee / Organization Year Plan Coverage Notes Investigation and Recommendation s County of Santa 2003 San Jose Creek Entire watershed Provides an overview of Barbara Water Watershed Plan conditions and Resources Agency management of watershed. City of Santa Barbara 2000 Creek Inventory Creeks within the The Inventory – Creeks Division and Assessment City of Santa documents and Study Barbara evaluates the physical, biological, hydrological, and water quality conditions of City Creeks, and the overall functioning of the creeks; identifies problem areas; and, proposes restoration approach on short- and long-term projects U.C. Santa Barbara 2004 Coal Oil Point Lower Devereux Includes a watershed (revised Reserve Watershed management program. in 2015) Management Plan U.C. Santa Barbara 2016 North Campus Devereux Creek Focus on restoration Open Space and Lagoon and improving the Restoration habitats of Devereux Project Slough Goleta Slough 2015 Goleta Slough Goleta Slough Includes reaches of Management Area Sea Level Ecosystem creeks and watersheds Committee Rise and within the City’s Management jurisdiction Plan

Many impairments to City creeks and watersheds are a result of actions within the City, however, areas that are under the purview of federal, state, and other local jurisdictions may cumulatively contribute to these impairments. Although many have management plans in place, ongoing coordination with creek and watershed directions, public works, and flood control districts is essential in restoring City creeks and watersheds back to highly functional systems.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 155 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

5.2 Creek Impairments within the City

Below is a summary of impairments associated with the twelve creeks traversing the City and occurring within the City’s limits. The impairments are discussed by the topics covered in Section 4, including hydrology and water quality, geomorphology, and biological resources. In addition, impairments are described in greater detail in this section and some impairments are characterized in detail in Appendix I, Project Description Sheets. Project Description Sheets (PDS) are concise 2- page summaries that describe sources of degradation, and what objectives would be needed to achieve rehabilitation, preservation, or management goals. The management or restoration approach is summarized, along with target conditions and/or success criteria, estimated project implementation timeframe or phasing approach, pre- and post-monitoring recommendations, cost range estimate, and graphics/photos to illustrate the specific problems at the site location, as introduced here and described in Section 6). In addition, specific recommended actions to address impairments identified in this section are discussed in Section 6. 5.2.1 Hydrology and Water Quality Impairments 5.2.1.1 Stream Flow

In-stream diversions and groundwater production utilized for agriculture within the foothills and for urban use within the Goleta Groundwater Basin have been identified as potentially reducing inputs to creeks which could reduce the rate, duration, and/or amount of flow in several of the creeks .

As noted in Section 4.3, there are only a few stream gauges currently in use that provide historical stream flow data within City creeks, either as measured within the City or upstream from the City (Maria Ygnacio, San Jose, and San Pedro Creeks). Existing data suggest that stream flow is highly correlated with rain fall quantities and duration. In addition, base flow and seasonal duration of stream flow, particularly for intermittent streams, is heavily reliant on groundwater inputs. However, other activities within the watersheds may impact stream flows, including permitted and unpermitted water diversions, municipal water wells, private wells, reductions in groundwater intrusion, and structures that pond or otherwise hold up the natural flows within a creek. Section 6 includes a variety of actions to address the potential flow impairments. Additional analysis of flow rates and their changes over time are needed to better understand changes in flow over time within each creek. Additional research into creek diversions and the rates of extraction may also enhance this understanding. At that point, further analysis could be done where abnormal flow rates, based on expected flows due to rainfall amounts and basin characteristics, occur and at points downstream from documented creek diversions.

5.2.1.2 Water Quality Objective Exceedances

A generalized matrix of water quality issues present within City creeks is provided below. This data provides a way to broadly assess which creeks exhibit high levels of water quality impairment, currently compared against the water quality thresholds that are identified in Table 28 and in the future against the Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL), and to plan which watersheds may warrant specific attention.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 156 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

The following section discusses the types of water quality issues, as presented in Section 4.3.6, for individual creeks and summarized below in Table 28, along with potential sources that cause the impairments. In general, a variety of human-driven pollutant discharges cause these water quality impairments, including from agricultural, residential, and non-residential land uses. Section 6 includes a variety of actions to address the variety of potential sources discussed.

In the future, additional water quality analyses may be warranted in watersheds shown as having the greatest number of impairments, especially with non-point source pollution where the root causes of the problems are not currently known, or where, for example, impairments may be in response to issues further up in the watershed, outside of the City.

Table 28. Summary of In-Creek Water Quality Objectives Impairments by Creek within the City1

3 2

2

Creek Materials Floating Turbidity pH Chemicals Inorganic Bacteria Conductivity Specific Biostimulatory Substances Oxygen Dissolved Temperature Toxicity IBI BMI Flow Stream Maria Ygnacio X X X X X ------Creek -- X X X X ------X- -- San Jose Creek -- Poor Old San Jose ------Creek Las Vegas ------X ------Creek San Pedro -- -- X X X -- X X X ------Creek Los Carneros -- -- X X X ------Creek Glen Annie X -- -- X X ------X -- -- Creek El Encanto ------Creek Devereux Creek -- -- X -- X -- -- X ------Winchester X -- -- X X ------X -- -- Canyon Creek Ellwood Canyon X -- -- X X ------X -- -- Creek

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 157 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 28. Summary of In-Creek Water Quality Objectives Impairments by Creek within the City1

3 2

2

Creek Materials Floating Turbidity pH Chemicals Inorganic Bacteria Conductivity Specific Biostimulatory Substances Oxygen Dissolved Temperature Toxicity IBI BMI Flow Stream Bell Canyon X -- -- X X ------X -- -- Creek -- -- X ------X -- -- X- -- Tecolote Creek X Poor Notes 1 “X” denotes streams that have exceeded thresholds or general/specific baseline water quality objectives as identified in SBCK or the State’s 303(d) list. 2 Biostimulatory substances are most directly linked to increased nutrient loading (i.e., nitrogen and phosphorus). 3 BMI = Benthic Macro-Invertebrate – IBI Index of Biological Integrity 4 Stream flow not an identified Water Quality Objective Impairment for any City creeks. See Section 5.2.1.1 for more information.

Based on recent monthly water quality sampling data, yearly stream bioassessment analysis (BMI), and the impairment designation by the Central Coast RWQCB all water quality impairments continue to exist in City creeks and watersheds. Water quality impairments continue in City’s creeks and watersheds, but also in areas above and below (i.e. Goleta Slough, Atascadero Creek) the City’s jurisdiction, which likely contribute to water quality issues observed through two decades of water quality data collection.

Source control retrofitting, including a more thorough description of the problem, cost estimate, time implementation, and monitoring recommendations, is provided in the Project Description Sheet provided in Appendix I. 5.2.1.3 Floating Materials

Floating materials are typically associated with trash entering the creek system. Field surveys, including those conducted by SBCK and EDC, found floating materials in several City creeks. Trash is often transported by stormwater runoff and can be illegally dumped directly into a creek. Trash is increasingly the result of homeless encampments along creek corridors. Regardless of source or type, trash is a form of water pollution. EDC staff and volunteers removed 6,432 pounds of trash from six Goleta creeks in 2019 (EDC 2020). Common items found in streams include plastic cups, plastic bags and wrapping materials, fast-food wrappers, plastic bottles, and other plastic containers. Plastics can be especially hazardous to wildlife. Depending on their form they can either be ingested, causing internal organ failure, or they can cause a slow strangulation. Furthermore, toxic materials can leak or leach out of certain kinds of trash (e.g., pressure-treated lumber, used oil filters, and lead- acid batteries). Further discussion of trash impacts on the biological integrity of creeks and riparian corridors is provide below in Section 5.2.3.1, Trash/Debris.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 158 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

5.2.1.4 Turbidity and Total Suspended Solids

Turbidity is a result of suspended sediment load and biomass (e.g., algae, suspended sediment, and organic matter particles [SWAMP 2020]) in a given environment. Waters with low concentrations of total suspended solids (TSS) are clearer and less turbid than those with high TSS concentrations. Turbidity can be caused by high concentrations of biota such as phytoplankton, or by loading of abiotic matter such as sediments. Turbidity is important in aquatic systems as it can alter light intensities through the water column, thus potentially affecting rates of photosynthesis. Lowered rates of photosynthesis may in turn affect the levels of DO available in a given body of water, thus affecting larger populations such as fish.

City parks and sparsely vegetated open areas can have bare areas and abrupt transitions to riparian habitat(s) and are, therefore, subject to soil erosion that can lead to impacts to turbidity and TSS. One example of a City park experiencing sparse vegetation adjacent to a riparian corridor is Evergreen Park adjacent to El Encanto Creek. Sparse vegetation can also result from illegal vegetation removal along riparian corridors on private property and homeless encampments. In addition, certain agricultural activities, especially on steep slopes, may lead to increased erosion, leading to greater turbidity and TSS. 5.2.1.5 pH pH assumes a value between 0 and 14, defining how acidic or basic (or alkaline) a body of water is along a logarithmic scale. The alkalinity of water varies due to the presence of dissolved salts and carbonates, as well as the mineral composition of the surrounding soil. Photosynthesis, respiration, and decomposition all contribute to pH fluctuations due to their influences on carbon dioxide levels. pH changes depend on the alkalinity of the water, but there are often noticeable diurnal variations (Radke 2006). Potential sources for this impairment in City creeks include agricultural runoff (if lime used), local geology, and concrete production operations, and waste (construction runoff). 5.2.1.6 Inorganic Chemicals

Inorganic chemical contaminants can include plastics, resins, pharmaceuticals, disinfectants, deodorants, detergents, petroleum products, road runoff, and pesticides and biocides. Inorganic chemicals of note within City creeks include sodium (Maria Ygnacio, San Jose, San Pedro, Glen Annie, and Tecolote Creeks), nitrates (Los Carneros, Glen Annie, and Bell Canyon Creeks), and chloride (San Jose, Glen Annie, and Tecolote Creeks). For many of these substances, accumulation in aquatic environments can cause environmental problems. 5.2.1.7 Fecal Bacteria

There are three different indicator bacteria on the State’s 303d list: Enterococcus, Escherichia coli (E. Coli), and Fecal Coliform. All three are indicators of fecal matter within water, although E. Coli and enterococcus are considered better indicators for identifying waste from humans and warm-blooded animals. Potential sources include manure, pet waste, leaking septic systems, and wildlife. Elevated bacteria levelstend to have higher conductivity because of the presence of materials that ionize when washed into the water. Ground water inflows can have the same effects depending on the bedrock they flow through (EPA 2020).

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 159 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Changes in conductivity are an early indicator of change in a water system. For example, a failing sewage or septic system would raise the conductivity because of the presence of chloride, phosphate, and nitrate ions, whereas an oil spill would lower the conductivity as the oil would do not break down into ions. Most bodies of water maintain a constant conductivity that can be used as a baseline of comparison for future measurements. Significant change, whether it is due to natural flooding, evaporation, or human-caused pollution can be very detrimental to water quality by negatively affecting the creek biota. Studies of inland fresh waters indicate that streams supporting good mixed fisheries have a range between 150 and 500 µmhos/cm. Conductivity outside this range could indicate that the water is not suitable for certain species of fish or macroinvertebrates. Industrial waters can range as high as 10,000 µmhos/cm (EPA 2020). Potential sources leading to this impairment include fertilizers (agriculture, residential, commercial, livestock/equestrienne, cemetery, and golf), general urban runoff (streets, commercial, industrial, and residential), leaking septic systems (moderate to low density residential), wastewater treatment plants, and aerial deposition. 5.2.1.9 Biostimulatory Substances

Biostimulatory substances stimulate primary productivity within water bodies and is most directly linked to increased nutrient loading (i.e., nitrogen and phosphorus) which causes algal blooms and can lead to eutrophic conditions (depleted DO concentrations with increased bacteria digestion of dying organic matter and algal respiration at night). Potential sources include: fertilizers (agriculture, residential, commercial, livestock/equestrienne, cemetery, and golf), leaking septic systems, septic systems located near creeks, wastewater treatment plants, homeless encampments, and aerial deposition. 5.2.1.10 Dissolved Oxygen

Dissolved Oxygen (DO) is the amount of gaseous oxygen (O2) dissolved in the water; the amount of oxygen available to living aquatic organisms. Oxygen enters the water by direct diffusion from the atmosphere, by rapid mixing, or as a byproduct of plant photosynthesis. The concentration of DO in surface waters are affected by temperature and has both a seasonal and a daily cycle. Cold water can hold more DO than warm water. In winter and early spring, when the water temperature is low, the DO concentration is high (depending on organic loading). In summer and fall, when the water temperature is high, the DO concentration is often lower. DO in surface water is used by all forms of aquatic life. Photosynthesis is the primary process affecting the DO/temperature relation; water clarity and strength and duration of sunlight, in turn, affect the rate of photosynthesis and nutrient inputs. Depletion in DO can cause major shifts in the kinds of aquatic organisms found in water bodies. Anaerobic organisms may also become abundant in waters with low levels of DO. Low DO can be caused by decomposition of algae blooms. 5.2.1.11 Temperature

Temperature influences several other parameters and can alter the physical and chemical properties of water. Temperature affects metabolic and photosynthetic rates, influences the responses of organisms to toxins, and directly affects levels of DO, conductivity, salinity, oxidation reduction potential, pH, and water density. For example, colder waters can hold more DO, result in a lower pH, and decrease water density. Low temperature can also inhibit plant respiration and photosynthesis (Wetzel 2001).

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 160 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Temperature is also an important habitat parameter for fish and aquatic wildlife, with steelhead, for instance, requiring cooler water. In general, algal photosynthesis will increase with temperature, although different species will have different peak temperatures for optimum photosynthetic activity (Wetzel 2001) and temperature tolerance ranges. Potential sources for increased temperature in City creeks include loss of riparian canopy (including along concrete lined channels) and broadened/shallow channel bottoms (including along concrete channels).

5.2.1.12 Benthic Macroinvertebrates

Benthic macroinvertebrates (BMIs) are small invertebrates living among stones, logs, sediments, and aquatic plants, which may be affected by several factors that are identified as creek impairments. The abundance and variety of BMIs within a creek is an indication of the biological condition of that creek. BMIs respond in varying ways to changes in water quality and the physical environment. For example, a polluted creek may result in the mortality of a diversity of BMIs and only provide suitable habitat for pollutant-tolerant BMIs, whereas increased sedimentation reduces available habitat for BMIs.

The County and City of Santa Barbara conduct BMI sampling on several creeks within the south coast of Santa Barbara County. However, within the City, only San Jose and Tecolote Creeks (and Bell and Tecolote Lagoons) have typically been sampled. BMI samples are analyzed in the laboratory, and six core metrics specified in the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) for Southern Santa Barbara County Streams (Ecology Consultants Inc. 2004) are calculated for each study reach. The IBI provides a measurement of biological integrity for study streams based on the evaluation of the six, core metrics, all of which reflect different aspects of the BMI community including diversity, composition, and trophic structure. Both San Jose and Tecolote Creeks had poor IBI values during the most recent sampling (Ecology Consultants Inc. 2016).

Bioassessment sampling for BMIs was not performed for the CWMP and should be considered for future efforts. Such information would provide further details about the biological quality of City creeks beyond existing sampling methods.

5.2.1.13 Flooding

As shown in Figure 5, Flood Hazard Zones, all City creeks exhibit some level of flood hazards. The most extreme flood hazards occur within the eastern portion of the City, with extensive flood risk in Old Town, although this has been substantially lessened by the San Jose Creek Flood Control and Fish Passage Project. With the expectation of more extreme weather events associated with climate change, including greater ocean storm surges, sea level rise, more intense rainfall events, flood hazards are likely to increase over time (see Section 5.2.5, Climate Change).

One of the key findings in the City’s Coastal Hazards Vulnerability Assessment and Fiscal Impact Report is that three neighborhoods within the City face flooding impacts: the Winchester Canyon neighborhood located north of Highway 101; the Aero Camino neighborhood located just south of the 101; and the Placencia neighborhood located in the southern portion of Old Town, east of Highway 217. Additionally, the Coastal Hazards Vulnerability Assessment and Fiscal Impact Report includes a

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 161 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA key finding that “Climate change impacts on future creek flooding extents, including changes to precipitation and sea level rise, have not been modeled and therefore remain a significant data gap in the vulnerability assessment, especially considering the extent of existing creek flood hazards mapped by FEMA.” 5.2.2 Channel Geomorphology A generalized matrix of geomorphic constraints and problems present within creek corridors of each of the watersheds within the City is provided in Table 29. This provides a way to broadly assess which channels exhibit the most extensive geomorphic degradation, and to plan which watersheds (or geomorphic impairment type) may warrant specific attention.

Additional geomorphic analyses may be warranted in watersheds shown as having the greatest number of geomorphic impairments, especially where the root causes of the problems are not currently well established, or where problems may be responses to channel or hydrologic disturbances further up in the watershed, in areas not surveyed for the CWMP.

The following section discusses the types of geomorphic problems summarized in Table 29 and shown in Figures 9a through 9c.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 162 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 29. Summary of Geomorphic Impairments by Creek Within the City of Goleta1

2

4

6

3 Bank Bank bed bed top top

-

8

12

5 11 lined channel lined 9 -

7 10

Creek Concrete revetment Fence and Streambed structures protection channel Altered alignment sedimentation High transport Sediment barriers Knickpoints incised Relict condition bank extensive Active erosion Constrained floodplain bank of Lack vegetation Maria Ygnacio short present at -- yes -- yes yes -- yes -- Creek portions crossings San Jose Creek long prevalent at lower yes -- yes yes present yes below portions crossings segment Hollister Old San Jose Creek -- -- at lower -- yes -- yes -- yes -- crossings segment Las Vegas Creek long prevalent at portions yes -- yes yes -- yes periodically portions crossings above Covington Way San Pedro Creek long prevalent at -- yes -- yes yes -- yes between portions crossings Calle Real and Avenida Gorrion Los Carneros long -- at -- -- yes yes -- yes below Creek portions crossings Hollister Glen Annie Creek long present at ------yes yes -- yes -- portions crossings El Encanto Creek long present at ------yes -- yes small portions crossings portions

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 163 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 29. Summary of Geomorphic Impairments by Creek Within the City of Goleta1

2

4

6

3 Bank Bank bed bed top top

-

8

12

5 11 lined channel lined 9 -

7 10

Creek Concrete revetment Fence and Streambed structures protection channel Altered alignment sedimentation High transport Sediment barriers Knickpoints incised Relict condition bank extensive Active erosion Constrained floodplain bank of Lack vegetation Devereux Creek -- -- at -- -- yes ------portions crossings through golf course Winchester Canyon -- -- at -- -- yes some yes -- yes -- crossings Ellwood Canyon -- -- at ------yes -- yes -- crossings Bell Canyon -- -- at -- -- yes -- yes ------crossings Tecolote Creek -- -- at -- -- yes -- yes ------crossings Notes: 1 Note that the classifications highlight generalized conditions; some impairments may be locally present but not noted here, or in reaches that were not canvassed in some watersheds. 2 Does not include culverts under roads. 3 Constructed in the mid-1900's, presumably for bank erosion protection. 4 Streambed and bank protection structures include grouted rock, rock rip rap, gabions, and/or concrete aprons or walls that significantly impinge on in-channel geomorphology. These structures are often present upstream and downstream of road crossings or bridges as a transition between natural channel segments to protect against downcutting of the stream bed (grade control structures) and erosion of the stream banks (armoring). These structures are also often present at concrete culvert inlets and outfalls, narrowed engineered channel segments, and at utility crossings. 5 Watersheds where long sections of creek have been moved or diverted to a different location; does not include sections that have been straightened but maintain the same general alignment; aerial photographs from the 1920's were generally the earliest reference data for this assessment and indicate that in some cases, such as Los Carneros Creek and El Encanto Creek, channels in the lower segments of the watershed were indistinct prior to agricultural production and are therefore considered channelized but not necessarily realigned. 6 Where some portion of the creek appears to have depositional zones with more sediment than would be expected; potentially supplied by upstream processes. 7 Undersized culverts or other disruptions in channel continuity that may block sediment transport in natural flows. 8 Generally a localized condition, often located downstream of concrete aprons associated with road culverts. 9 Historical incision over the past 100 years or so; different than active (current) incision mechanisms as described in Note 10 Creek and Watershed Management Plan 164 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

10 Bank erosion, generally located on the outer edge of a bend in the channel; recorded here where extensive or occurring frequently on a reach-wide scale 11 Incised channels, levees, elevated floodplains, road crossings, or other features that prevent flood waters from flowing onto adjacent floodplains 12 Deep-rooted bank-top vegetation provides resistance to erosion in natural or earthen-banked channels; riparian corridors also provide shade, temperature modulation, and organic materials to channels, enhancing in-stream and near-stream habitat for aquatic and terrestrial species.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 165 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

5.2.2.1 Concrete-Lined Channels

Long sections of creeks within the City have been converted to concrete-lined flood control channels. These channels essentially have no beneficial geomorphic value, having little to no complexity to slow flows or to serve as habitat or migration refugia for fish and other aquatic species, greatly reduce terrestrial wildlife movement, increase temperature, and typically provide no sediment storage/buffering capacity. Three exceptions encountered during field reconnaissance: 1) in lower San Jose Creek, refugia structures have been installed within a concrete-lined channel that provide some channel complexity (Figure 7); 2) a fish passage structure in San Pedro Creek, upstream of Calle Real, provides passage at the transition from the natural channel to the concrete channel because, and 3) Glen Annie Creek between Highway 101 and Glen Annie Road.

In addition, short concrete-lined segments are present at many of the road crossings within the City, either as culverts or as grade-stabilization structures within the channel. Many of these structures are associated with knickpoints, but at the same time are serving to locally stabilize stream grades.

Concrete-lined channel removal, including a more thorough description of the problem, cost estimate, time implementation, and monitoring recommendations, is provided in the Project Description Sheet provided in Appendix I.

5.2.2.2 Pipe and Wire Fence Revetment

Sturdy fencing has been used along extensive reaches of some channels, likely installed along with urban expansion as a way to provide for bank protection . Presumably, these fences were intended to partially slow flows near the stream banks and provide some protection from bank erosion. In some of the segments surveyed, the portion of channel within the fencing was almost entirely devoid of woody vegetation.

Fence revetment removal, including a more thorough description of the problem, cost estimate, time implementation, and monitoring recommendations, is provided in the Project Description Sheet provided in Appendix I. 5.2.2.3 Streambed and Bank Protection Structures

With the exception of localized bank protection near road and footbridge crossings (and concrete- lined segments, as discussed above), extensive bank protection structures other than fence revetments do not appear to be present within most City creeks. Some segments of grouted and ungrouted rock riprap, concrete walls, and/or gabion structures were noted during field reconnaissance (mostly within the San Jose and Maria Ygnacio watersheds), but these tend to be locally associated with protection of roads and pathways rather than evidence of extensive, reach- wide patchwork bank repair. Due to the limited extent of these impairments, no specific actions are identified to address this issue.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 166 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

5.2.2.4 Altered Channel Alignment

Most of the mainstem channels within the City appear to remain along their historic alignment, though portions have been straightened locally to accommodate development. One exception is in the lower San Jose Creek watershed, where the lower section of creek (downstream of Hollister Avenue) was diverted to a new flood control channel around 1962. The historic alignment is still an active channel (Old San Jose Creek), but simply drains the surrounding urban development area.

It is important to note that the “historic” alignment of the channels is not necessarily the “natural” alignment for the channels, especially in the lower-gradient portion of the watersheds. Agricultural ditching around the early 1900s likely locked some channels into place, and/or created well-defined channels where none were present under natural conditions. For example, the lower-most portions of Old San Jose Creek and El Encanto Creek did not have a well-defined channel in aerial photographs from 1927; Old San Jose Creek was ditched at its current location by 1944 and El Encanto Creek appeared to be ditched downstream of Highway 101 by 1948. 5.2.2.5 High Sedimentation

City creeks are within the lower portions of their watersheds where sediment has historically settled, and will continue to settle, as the steep watershed comes in contact with the coastal area where it historically could spread but is now forced to remain in channels. However, several channels within the City, most notably those within the eastern portion of the City, appear to exhibit conditions typical of disproportionate sedimentation. Some channel bottoms have extensive sand and small gravel deposits, with little distinction between morphologic units such as pool, riffle, and bar features. Sediment is fairly soft and lacked established in-channel vegetation. It is unclear whether this condition is the result of a temporary episodic input (e.g., landslide/debris flows) or a more chronic condition (geologic source material or long-term response to anthropogenic disturbance in the watershed, such as steep slope agriculture, which occurs in the middle or upper sections of each Goleta Valley watershed). In either case, the current condition in these reaches represents a relative lack of in-channel complexity, a potential geomorphic constraint regardless of whether it’s a natural or anthropogenic cause. In addition, the excess sediment may be contributing to active bank erosion noted within the San Jose Creek watershed (as discussed further below). 5.2.2.6 Sediment Transport Barriers

Undergrounded portions of channels and undersized culverts, which have the potential to become blocked, are the primary sediment transport barriers in the City. Blockages can occur when organic or other materials, such as fencing, accumulate at a culvert entrance; regular maintenance is needed to keep the channel open. The smallest culvert encountered during field reconnaissance was in Devereux Creek, at the south embankment of Hollister Avenue. Just north of this location, the culvert under the UPRR tracks has been identified as exhibiting blockage due to sediment buildup.

5.2.2.7 Knickpoints

Stream profile knickpoints, which are features that erode the channel bed and move in the upstream direction, were observed at a number of locations during reconnaissance. In most cases, these

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 167 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA features are present at the downstream end of culverted road crossings or other grade control structures, either as an intentional engineered grade drop or an arrested headcut indicative of former or active incision of the stream channel. Though field reconnaissance did not cover all portions of all creeks, there is little evidence of currently active, reach-wide downcutting in most channels within the City.

However, accentuated knickpoints at stream grade controls and high channel banks throughout some channel reaches illustrate that there has been significant reach-wide downcutting in past decades (see discussions of relict incised bed condition and constrained floodplain), especially those toward the eastern side of the City such as Maria Ygnacio Creek and San Jose Creek, which have experienced historical downcutting up to, or exceeding, approximately 10 to 20 feet in height.

Channel knickpoints and scour, including a more thorough description of the problem, cost estimate to address, time implementation, and monitoring recommendations, is provided in the Project Description Sheet provided in Appendix I. 5.2.2.8 Relict Incised Bed Condition

Channel incision (or channel downcutting) is a natural process of channel adjustment and is not solely an indication of degraded geomorphic conditions. However, rapid or extensive (reach-wide) incision is a key indicator of geomorphic impairments, often related to anthropogenic disturbances. In general, incised channel conditions were observed at many (if not most) of the sites canvassed within the City, which is indicative of broad-scale geomorphic channel adjustment throughout the City. This broad-scale incision appeared to be related to historical land use changes and/or tectonic uplift, such that there were fewer observations of active, ongoing, channel incision than evidence of incision that occurred during previous decades. 5.2.2.9 Active Bank Erosion

Stream bank erosion is a natural process of channel adjustment and migration and is not, in and of itself, an indication of degraded geomorphic conditions. However, rapid or extensive (reach-wide) bank erosion is a key indicator of geomorphic impairment, often related to anthropogenic disturbances. In general, sites canvassed within the City lacked evidence of reach-wide bank erosion. Although bank erosion was noted at several locations, most appeared to be related to local channel conditions (in-channel obstructions, deflection effects of pre-existing creek bank armoring, or localized scour at outfalls, for example) rather than indicative of broad-scale geomorphic channel adjustment. One notable exception, however, is a reach of San Jose Creek between Cathedral Oaks Road and Calle Real. Here, several segments of bank erosion are present that likely indicate broad- scale geomorphic adjustment.

Bank repair and stabilization, including a thorough description of the problem, cost estimate, time implementation, and monitoring recommendations, is provided in the Project Description Sheet provided in Appendix I.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 168 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

5.2.2.10 Constrained Floodplain

Overbank areas adjacent to stream channels provide important flood and sediment attenuation capacity functions within the lower (alluvial) portions of watersheds. Urbanization adjacent to stream channels can constrain this floodplain area, restricting this function and exacerbating flooding and sediment problems in and near the downstream receiving waters. Confinement can be the result of raising the elevation of adjacent terrace surfaces (in preparing housing pads, for example), construction of berms or levees (as noted within the lower Maria Ygnacio Creek watershed), construction of floodwalls, entrenched flood-control channels, culverted creek sections, road crossings, or accelerated downcutting of the stream channel due to hydromodification effects. Channel downcutting may be natural or induced/exacerbated by urbanization. Under natural conditions a downcut channel typically widens by initiating bank erosion to establish a new inset floodplain, but under urbanized conditions this process is typically restricted. Nearly all channels within the City exhibit at least some aspect of floodplain confinement. 5.2.2.11 Lack of Bank-Top Vegetation

Deep-rooted trees and understory vegetation that has grown along the channel bank provides resistance to erosion in natural or banked earthen-engineered channels; riparian corridors also provide shade, temperature modulation, and organic materials to channels, enhancing in-stream and near-stream habitat for aquatic and terrestrial species. Lack of mature trees and understory vegetation are most prevalent in channels that are concrete-lined. Some more natural channel reaches support narrow bands of riparian species along both banks and other reaches support more robust riparian corridors.

There are areas within City-owned open spaces, as well as private properties, that exhibit a lack of adequate riparian vegetation, including multiple locations within Evergreen Park and Bella Vista Park along tributaries of El Encanto Creek and in Stonebridge Neighborhood Open Space along San Pedro Creek. These locations lack understory vegetation and either lack, or contain unhealthy, non-native, and/or dying native trees. 5.2.3 Biological Resources

Based on the field reconnaissance surveys, a variety of biological concerns are present along the creeks within City limits. Table 30 provides a summary of these concerns along with a description of each below. Biological resources (including plants, animals, habitats, and other living organisms within the creeks) are affected by synergistic effects of the water quality, water quantity, and geomorphology concerns mentioned above. For example, the pollutants described under Hydrology and Water Quality affect the quality of habitat for biological resources within the creeks. Impaired flows, discussed under Hydrology and Water Quality, affect the health and diversity of riparian plants, and the presence of avian species, and special-status fish, reptile, and amphibian species Similarly, the concrete-lined channels described under Channel Geomorphology affect the quantity quality, size, and diversity of habitat or space available for biological resources. In addition, although this section focuses on biological resources, it should be noted that people play a critical role in the health of the ecosystems within the creeks. Healthy creek environments provide recreational and enjoyment opportunities to the community. Therefore, the health of the entire ecosystem and community are intertwined.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 169 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 30. Summary of Biological Impairments by Creek Within the City of Goleta1,2

4 3 and Vibration and

Time Lighting Time -

Invasive Plant Plant Invasive Noise

lined Channels lined -

Native Native -

Creek Trash/Debris for Potential General Pollutants Presence Human Non Species Passage Fish to Barriers Concrete Movement Wildlife to Barriers Outdoor/Night Nighttime Fencing Impermeable Hydrology Altered Maria Ygnacio X X X X X -- … … … … X Creek San Jose Creek X X X X X X … … … … X Old San Jose X X X X X X … … … … X Creek Las Vegas Creek X X X X X X … … … … X San Pedro Creek X X X X X X -- … … … X Los Carneros South X -- -- X -- South … … … X Creek of Hwy of 101 Hwy 101 Glen Annie Creek X X -- X X X … … … … X El Encanto Creek X X X -- -- X -- … … … X Devereux Creek X X X X ------… … … X Winchester -- X -- X -- -- … … … … X Canyon Creek Ellwood Canyon -- X -- X -- -- … … … … X Creek Bell Canyon South X -- X -- -- … … … … X Creek of Hwy 101 Tecolote Creek X X X X Und -- … … … … X er Hwy 101 Notes 1 “X” denotes the impairment is noticeable concern along the creeks within the City; lack of an “X” does not signify the impairment does not exist, but its presence was not noticeable during reconnaissance surveys performed within the City in Fall 2019 / Winter 2020. 2 “...” denotes the impairment is likely but requires additional investigation 3. Includes homeless encampments 4. Includes impaired baseflows due to upstream dams (e.g., Glen Annie Dam and Dennis Reservoir Dam on Fremont Creek) and creek diversions, increased runoff rates due to impervious surfaces, and lowered groundwater tables due to water well pumping.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 170 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

5.2.3.1 Trash/Debris

During the reconnaissance surveys in Fall 2019/Winter 2020, trash was nearly absent; however, prior to site visits, six clean-up events were scheduled from August to October 2019 throughout several of Goleta’s creeks, including Devereux Creek, Glen Annie Creek, San Pedro Creek, San Jose Creek, and Maria Ygnacio Creek organized by the EDC, and the City. In 2019 the Goleta Creek and Watershed Protection and Cleanup Program, led by the EDC, removed 6,432 pounds of trash from five City creeks and Atascadero Creek.9 These critical efforts protect water quality, geomorphology (from larger sized trash), and biological resources throughout the creeks. In addition, creek clean- ups minimize the amount of debris and pollutants that would travel downstream and into the sloughs, lagoons, and ocean. It is estimated that 80% of the debris in the oceans is attributed to trash, packaging, and waste improperly disposed on land that has washed into creeks and lakes and has traveled down into the ocean (EPA 2020).

Trash not only brings potential pollutants into creek systems (see Section 5.2.1.3.) but can also pose as physical hazards to the wildlife residing within the creeks. For example, rope, twine and six-pack rings can pose physical hazards to wildlife traversing or living in the creeks. Similarly, plastic bags, deflated balloons, and other debris can be mistaken as food and swallowed by wildlife; ultimately blocking an individual’s airway or causing interior damage and bleeding within the digestive system. Broken glass, sharp, rusty metal debris, and fence revetment wires pose risk of injury to fish and wildlife. In addition, the presence of smaller sized bits of trash (e.g., plastic lids, plastic bags, bottles, cigarette butts.) signals to pedestrians that such behavior is tolerated in the community. This may lead to a complacency and buildup of trash to the point where large, more unsightly trash may appear in a waterway (e.g., tires) causing additional erosion along the creek banks.

Trash can originate from several sources, including homeless encampments, pedestrians, motorists, trucks with uncovered loads, inappropriate household trash placement or receptacles, project/construction sites, stockpiles inappropriately located adjacent to creeks, and improper trash management on commercial sites. Similarly, wind processes can pick up plastic bags and other light debris and carry it to locations away from disposal sites. Trash impacts have been noted along all City creeks, notably including El Encanto Creek at Phelps Road and along Las Vegas Creek and along Glen Annie Creek on the east side of Glen Annie Road by the intersection of Highway 101. 5.2.3.2 Human Presence

During reconnaissance surveys, individuals were observed within City creeks, including groups of community members experiencing homelessness. Human presence typically results in increased trampling of vegetation, soil compaction that could affect the viability of plant communities, water quality impairments, fires, human excrement, noise, nighttime light, and exotic plants, and the decreased presence of wildlife species. In addition, human presence can introduce unwanted diseases or pollutants or invasive species in the water which affect the viability of aquatic organisms. Trampling may also affect the rate of rainfall interception and evapotranspiration, soil moisture, water penetration pathways, surface flows, and erosion. An increased human population using riparian corridors increases the risk for damage to special-status vegetation communities.

9 The five City creeks include Devereux, Glen Annie, San Pedro, San Jose, and Maria Ygnacio Creeks. Creek and Watershed Management Plan 171 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

The homeless population utilizing creeks corridors for shelter may also contribute to an increase in creek bank erosion, trash on the banks and within the creek, and a reduction in flood control capacity. The health and human hazard risks extend to those living in or adjacent to creeks as well as the health of the watershed, those working in creeks, downstream water users, and beachgoers.

Additionally, impacts can result from unpermitted activities on private property such as removal of vegetation within the riparian corridor, as seen on San Pedro Creek and from unpermitted activities within City-owned open spaces such as a BMX jump within Stonebridge Open Space adjacent to San Pedro Creek. These alterations to the landscape can increase erosion and adversely affect wildlife and riparian habitat, water quality, as well as impact aesthetic and recreational values. 5.2.3.3 General Potential for Pollutants

Chemical pollution (releases of fuel, oil, lubricants, paints, release agents, herbicides, rodenticides, and other construction materials) from adjacent land uses may affect biological resources within the creeks. Many are direct toxins or have sublethal effects on the biota. Used motor oil and paints are known pollutants in City creeks based on observations during creek cleanup events. The introduction of chemical pollutants within and along the creeks may lead to a decrease in the number of plant pollinators, increase the existence of non-native plants, and cause damage to and destruction of native plants. The introduction of chemical pollutants can arise from several situations, including when members of the public perform oil changes or tune-ups within parking lots adjacent to creeks, run-off from residential and non-residential areas, chemicals released in backyards, and from businesses which leak into riparian areas. 5.2.3.4 Non-Native Invasive Species

5.2.3.4.1 Plant Species

Non-native invasive plant species are located throughout the creeks with particular areas containing significant stands of these invasive species, becoming a focus for restoration efforts, as shown in Figures 7a through 7i, Biological Resource. Additional information on invasive species within each creek corridor is provided in Section 4.3.6, Individual Creek Characteristics.

Invasive plant species that thrive in edge habitats are a well-documented problem in Southern California. Non-native invasive species establish and quickly reproduce and spread resulting in the displacement of native species and hybridization with native species, thereby potentially altering biological communities and ecosystem processes (Cal-IPC 2020). Bossard et al. (2000) list several adverse effects of non-native on native species in natural open areas, including but not limited to competition for light, water, and nutrients. Invasive species also can create a thatch that blocks sunlight from reaching smaller native plants. Invasive plant species may alter habitats and displace native species over time, leading to extirpation of native plant species and unique vegetation communities, as well as contribute to an increase in the frequency of wildfires. For example, non- native annual grasses that have invaded a shrubland can increase fire frequency and the length of the fire season (Brooks and Lusk 2008). In addition, invasive plant species can degrade or eliminate the functionality of creeks as wildlife corridors, as discussed below.

Over time non-native invasive species can colonize and displace native riparian plant species. Specific locations with non-native trees along City creek corridors include within Evergreen Park along

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 172 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

El Encanto Creek, within the Highway 101 Northbound Glen Annie/Storke Road Onramp landscape area along Glen Annie Creek (Shamel Ash Trees [Fraxinus uhdei]), and along San Pedro Creek (Shamel Ash). In addition, arundo is located in multiple creeks in abundance. Arundo has been documented to decrease bank stability, outcompete native riparian species, and increase fire risk.

5.2.3.4.2 Animal Species

The introduction of non-native, invasive animal species can also be detrimental to native wildlife species. Non-native, invasive animal species have multiple and compounding impacts on native populations including, but not limited to, predation on native populations leading to reduced population sizes, introduction of diseases, and competition for resources. For example, non-native species introduction is one of the primary factors that have adversely affected the California red- legged frog throughout its range. In California, the decline and eventual local disappearance of California and northern red-legged frogs has been observed in systems supporting bullfrogs (Twedt 1993; Jennings and Hayes 1994), red swamp crayfish (Procambarus clarkia), signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus), and several species of warm water fish including sunfish (Lepomis spp.), goldfish (Carassius auratus), common carp (Cyprinus carpio), and mosquitofish (see USFWS 2002). These declines and disappearances have been attributed to predation, competition, and reproduction interference. Non-native species introduction is one of the primary factors that have adversely affected the California red-legged frog throughout its range.

5.2.3.5 Impediments and Barriers to Fish Passage

Steelhead are of particular concern along City creeks, with several designated as critical habitat for the endangered Southern California steelhead, which has been observed in multiple creeks across the region (see Section 4, Baseline Watershed Characterization).

Stoecker et al. (2002) provides an extensive review of steelhead migration and barriers in southern Santa Barbara County. In this report, most of the creeks traversing the City contain a barrier that would prevent steelhead from traveling upstream to spawn. Overall, a total of 22 features consisting of 8 total barriers, 11 partial barriers, and 3 features with an unknown status are located within the City’s limits (Table 31) (Stoecker et al. 2002; CDFW and CalFish 2020). In general, the features within the City that pose barriers to fish passage include concrete channels, grade control structures, and box culverts, which may pose barriers to passage due to a variety of features including, but not limited to, inappropriate lengths and slopes, lack of resting areas, shallow water during low flows, and accelerated water velocities during high flow.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 173 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 31. Summary of Barriers and Impediments to Fish Passage Within the City of Goleta1

4

3

2

artial artial 6

5 7 Number of of Number

Creek Summarized Notes for Barriers (north to south)1 Total Total Features Barriers Total Barriers Partial Barrier Total Natural P Natural Barrier Unscreened Diversion Passage Unknown Status Maria Ygnacio Creek 2 -- 2 ------Partial Barrier ▪ Concrete channelization and drop under UPRR and Hwy 101 bridges. Concrete channelization/box culvert under Hollister Avenue. Note: Two additional partial barriers are located on Maria Ygnacio Creek downstream of City limits and an additional two partial barriers are located along Atascadero Creek downstream of the confluence of Maria Ygnacio and Atascadero Creeks. San Jose Creek 1 1 ------Total Barrier ▪ Concrete channelization south of Hollister Avenue. In 2013, the first 4,100 feet (~0.776 miles) of channel was replaced with a wider channel and an articulated concrete revetment mimicking a natural creek bottom, and a low flow fish passage channel (30 weirs and pools) was installed on the east side of the flood control channel which is deeper and narrower than the rest of the channel. The low flow fish passage channel uses weirs to slow the release of water and allow for resting pools for fish. The weirs in San Jose Creek will ensure the water will be deep enough for the fish to swim. The channel replacement and low-flow fish passage channel stopped short of a privately owned steel bridge so that it could be utilized for access. The steel bridge is just downstream of Hollister Avenue. Phase II of the San Jose Creek Flood Control and Fish Passage Project will widen the channel and install a low-flow

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 174 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 31. Summary of Barriers and Impediments to Fish Passage Within the City of Goleta1

4

3

2

artial artial 6

5 7 Number of of Number

Creek Summarized Notes for Barriers (north to south)1 Total Total Features Barriers Total Barriers Partial Barrier Total Natural P Natural Barrier Unscreened Diversion Passage Unknown Status channel. The Hollister Avenue Bridge must be replaced prior to the widening the channel and the Hollister Ave Bridge replacement is dependent on the Ekwill Street Extension project. The City of Goleta is working on a monitoring plan with NMFS. Due to the drought, there has not been much to monitor so it is unknown at this time if the remediation in the lower portion of the channel passes fish. Total length of flood control channel: ~ 4,250 feet. Las Vegas Creek 3 ------2 Unknown Status ▪ Road crossing directly northwest of Bolsa Chica Court. La Goleta Road Crossing. San Pedro Creek 4 1 3 ------Partial Barrier ▪ One grade control structure north of Stow Canyon Road. ▪ Two grade control structures between Stow Canyon Road and Covington Way. Total Barrier ▪ Concrete channelization for 0.29 miles north of Hwy 101. Los Carneros Creek8 1 ------1 Unknown Status ▪ Road crossings under Cathedral Oaks Road and under Hwy 101. Glen Annie Creek 9 4 5 ------Total Barrier ▪ Double box culvert and apron road crossing under Cathedral Oaks Road

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 175 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 31. Summary of Barriers and Impediments to Fish Passage Within the City of Goleta1

4

3

2

artial artial 6

5 7 Number of of Number

Creek Summarized Notes for Barriers (north to south)1 Total Total Features Barriers Total Barriers Partial Barrier Total Natural P Natural Barrier Unscreened Diversion Passage Unknown Status ▪ Concrete channelization and double box culvert between Hwy 101 and the Calle Real offramp. ▪ Road crossing under Hwy 101. ▪ Double box culvert road crossing directly south of UPRR. Partial Barrier ▪ Concrete slab blockage east of Dos Pueblos High School. ▪ Grade control structure between Hwy 101 and the Calle Real offramp. ▪ Railroad crossing box culvert under UPRR. ▪ Grade control structure between South Los Carneros Road and Cortona Drive. ▪ Double box culvert under Hollister Avenue, bordering the City of Goleta limits. El Encanto Creek8 1 -- 1 ------Partial Barrier ▪ Concrete channel and culvert under Hwy 101. Devereux Creek8 ------None Bell/Winchester/Ellwood ------Canyon Creek None Bell Canyon Creek8 1 1 ------Total Barrier (south of Hwy 101) ▪ Long culvert under Hwy 101. Tecolote Creek 1 1 ------Total Barrier ▪ Long culvert under Hwy 101. Likely impassible due to length, slope, apparent lack of resting areas, absence of light,

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 176 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 31. Summary of Barriers and Impediments to Fish Passage Within the City of Goleta1

4

3

2

artial artial 6

5 7 Number of of Number

Creek Summarized Notes for Barriers (north to south)1 Total Total Features Barriers Total Barriers Partial Barrier Total Natural P Natural Barrier Unscreened Diversion Passage Unknown Status shallow water during low flows, and accelerated velocities during high flow. Total 22 8 11 ------3 Sources: Stoecker et al. 2002; California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Passage Assessment Database, March 2020, Version v5.89.14c. Notes 1 Barrier definitions and summarized notes from CDFW and CalFish 2020. The following are recorded in the database but not included in this table: “Not a Barrier, Remediated”, “Fish Response Unconfirmed”, “Screened Diversion”, “Unassessed” 2 Total barrier = A barrier that is not naturally occurring, and blocks fish passage for all anadromous species at all life stages at all flows. This includes sites where site type is not ‘non-structural’ and barrier status is ‘total’. 3 Partial Barrier = Barriers that are not naturally occurring and partially restrain or obstruct passage by either blocking passage at certain flows and/or to certain species or life stages. This includes sites where the site type is listed as ‘Non-structural’ and where barrier status is listed as ‘partial’, ‘temporal’, ‘temporal & total’ or ‘temporal & partial’. 4 Natural Total Barrier = A barrier that is naturally occurring, and blocks fish passage for all anadromous species at all life stages at all flows. This includes sites where site type is ‘non-structural’ and barrier status is ‘total’. 5 Natural Partial Barrier = Barrier that is naturally occurring, and partially restrains or obstructs passage by either blocking passage at certain flows and/or to certain species or life stages. This includes sites where the site type is listed as ‘Non-structural’ and where barrier status is listed as ‘partial’, ‘temporal’, ‘temporal & total’ or ‘temporal & partial’. 6 Unscreened Diversion = Water diversion without a fish screen. 7 Unknown Passage Status = Barrier/passage status is unknown or inconclusive, the structure may no longer be in existence, or the site is a diversion and it is unknown whether it is screened. Assigned to records with barrier/passage statuses listed as ‘Unknown’, ‘structure may no longer be in existence’ and ‘unknown/diversion’. 8 The following features not listed above may also pose barriers to fish passage: (a) Los Carneros Creek: Concrete flood control channel between Hollister Avenue and Los Carneros Road; Rock dam directly west of the Calle Real and North Los Carneros intersection; and Concrete channel below 101 to the slough; (b) El Encanto Creek: Underground culvert along Alpine Drive and Tuolumne Drive; Concrete channel between Hollister Avenue and Phelps Road; (c) Devereux Creek: (Culverts under Hollister Avenue; (d) Bell Canyon Creek north of Hwy 101: Grade control (grouted rock check dam) adjacent to San Miguel Open Space and concrete channel along and under Winchester Canyon Road (from geomorphic reconnaissance surveys).

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 177 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

5.2.3.6 Concrete-Lined Channels

Concrete-lined channels may not only pose barriers to fish passage but change the dynamic of creek systems. Concrete-lined channels reduce the quantity of natural substrates and vegetation in the creek; change the hydrology of the system; and result in fragmentation of creek systems. These channels are typically not buffered and may change the water quality or temperature in a system. Concrete-lined channels have their greatest effects on aquatic organisms. They destroy natural substrates, flow patterns, shading, and geomorphology, eliminating or reducing the habitat needed by many native species. By eliminating or reducing riparian vegetation they also reduce riparian species and disconnect migratory corridors. With enough concrete-lined channels installed. there is a potential for a type of habitat fragmentation within the creek system. In general, habitat fragmentation and isolation of plant populations may cause extinction of local populations as a result of two processes: reduction in total habitat area, which reduces effective population sizes, and insularization of local populations, which affects dispersal rates (Wilcove et al. 1986; Wilcox and Murphy 1985). Although these effects, including reduced genetic diversity in isolated populations, are more readily observable in wildlife, there are potential ecological effects, such as changes in pollinator populations, that can result in altered plant community composition and thus adversely affect special-status vegetation communities. 5.2.3.7 Barriers to Wildlife Movement

As discussed in the Wildlife Corridor Study Report (Appendix F), during the study three large mammal species (mountain lion, black bear, and mule deer), three medium-sized mammals (coyote, bobcat, and raccoon), and multiple resident species (such as striped skunk and Virginia opossum) were captured on camera traveling in creeks within the City of Goleta. Brown bears and mountain lions have also been documented at UCSB and in Goleta in recent years (e.g., Edhat 2019; Noozhawk 2016). However, coastal habitat patches within Goleta are not large enough to sustain populations of these species.

During dire conditions such as fire or drought, coastal habitat patches, and the wildlife corridors these species may use to access them, may provide an important safety valve for individuals of these species by providing additional space away from core habitats where these species can temporarily find food, water, and cover. The complex of natural lands in the Devereux/Coal Oil Point/Ellwood Mesa area may also provide a linkage to safety west of the City.

All species observed in creeks within the City of Goleta likely have the potential to utilize any of the creeks. Although the creeks currently provide movement and habitat opportunities for various species, changes in management practices may potentially improve these opportunities, and enhance the safety and habitat for a variety of wildlife species, including birds, utilizing the creeks. There may be various direct and indirect barriers to wildlife movement, which include lighting, noise, and fencing. These topics are discussed below.

5.2.3.7.1 Outdoor/Nighttime Lighting

As discussed in Section 4.3.5.5, Wildlife Movement Areas, approximately 91% of observations captured during wildlife camera studies (Appendix F) occurred during the evening or night hours. As a result, outdoor and nighttime lighting within or along City creeks may pose indirect barriers to wildlife movement or to wildlife usage of the habitats at night. Nighttime lighting may disturb wildlife activities which results in the alteration of behavior and movement. For example, nighttime lighting Creek and Watershed Management Plan 178 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA may disrupt night vision; internal timing rhythms (biological clocks); and foraging behavior as well as increase the risk of predation or mortality, including mortality along roads; and disrupt behavior due to indirect habitat fragmentation from various levels of light illumination across the landscape (Rich and Longcore 2006; Schirmer et al. 2019). Sources of nighttime lighting can come from residential neighborhoods, adjacent commercial or industrial areas, including parking lots, highways and roadways, and recreational facilities.

5.2.3.7.2 Noise and Vibrations

Due to the nature of the urban environment surrounding City creeks, typical daytime noise is not expected to significantly affect wildlife utilizing the creeks. However, daytime construction-related noise and vibrations could occur from equipment used during construction activities. These daytime construction noises may have a variety of indirect effects on wildlife species, including increased stress, weakened immune systems, altered foraging behavior, displacement due to startle, degraded communication with conspecifics (e.g., masking), damaged hearing from extremely loud noises, and increased vulnerability to predators (Lovich and Ennen 2011; Brattstrom and Bondello 1983, as cited in Lovich and Ennen 2011). Noise significantly reduces, although is not entirely eliminated, at nighttime which may provide opportunities for wildlife adverse to utilizing creeks during the day to venture into the systems at night. However, noise at night (if significantly loud for nighttime levels) may lead to similar behaviors as discussed above, depending on the location, noise level, and length of noise activity occurring at night.

5.2.3.7.3 Impermeable Fencing

Impermeable fencing is fencing that is not passable by wildlife. Depending on the type of material used, fencing may not be passable by smaller and/or larger wildlife. For example, mesh fencing, chain-link, or solid fence structures, and fence revetments pose barriers to movement within and along creeks; whereas fencing with significant space between fencing material may allow movement. However, fencing designed for wildlife passage must ensure the spacing is sufficient to allow movement while preventing injury (MFWP 2012). As discussed in Section 4, in general the creek reaches within the City limits are constrained and the majority of land uses adjacent to creeks are highly developed and urbanized. These adjacent land uses utilize a variety of fencing structures to exclude unwanted passage through private and/or closed properties. Specific fence designs and placements may serve as direct barriers to wildlife movement across the Goleta landscape, including within the creeks, to adjacent open space areas. To date, fencing designs and their effects on wildlife passage have not been studied or examined in detail throughout the creeks. 5.2.3.8 Riparian Bird Habitat

Like many land bird populations, riparian birds, and particularly those obligate riparian bird species, are experiencing population declines. The loss of riparian habitats is likely the most important contributor to the decline of these populations (RHJV 2004). Additional threats to riparian bird populations, habitat, and corridors for migratory birds include pesticides and pollution, degradation of habitat, habitat modification, increased wildfires, human interference and disturbance when nesting, nest parasitism (Kus et al. 2020), and invasive mammalian predators, such as the domestic or feral cat (Doherty et al. 2016). Within the City, some significant threats to riparian bird habitat include the spread of non-native invasive plant and wildlife species, pollutants, domestic or feral cats, removal and clearance of native vegetation, reduced creek flows, altered hydrology and, in some places, human disturbance. In addition, any creek maintenance activities such as removal of downed Creek and Watershed Management Plan 179 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA trees and limbs, removal of live vegetation, brushing, removal of exotic plant species and other maintenance activities have the potential to impact birds during various periods of their life cycles (e.g., nesting, fledgling, migration) and their prey resources. 5.2.3.9 Altered Hydrology

Altered hydrology is the process of altering the seasonally variable patterns of creek flow patterns and sediment and nutrients. Depending on the actions, human activities may result in an altered hydrology and cause a variety of pressures on the hydrology including, but not limited to, changes to the quantity, quality, velocity, and temperature of the water flows, changes to the channel and bed erosion and deposition process, and alteration in water availability to biological resources, such as riparian vegetation, plants, wildlife, and health of creek communities. In addition, altered hydrology can allow for the establishment of non-native plants and/or invasion by Argentine ants (Linepithema humile), which can compete with native ant species that could be seed dispersers or plant pollinators. Altered hydrology may results in many impairments discussed in this Section. Additional information on the affects of an altered hydrology is available in the various subsections related to specific impairments, such as, but not limited to, Stream Flow (5.2.1.1), Temperature (5.2.1.11), Benthic Macroinvertebrates (5.2.1.12), Altered Channel Alignment (5.2.2.4), Active Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9), Non-Native Invasive Species (5.2.3.4), and Riparian Bird Habitat (5.2.3.8). 5.2.3.10 Data and Information

Many important organizations within the region have dedicated countless hours to further the understanding and protection of Goleta’s watersheds and the creeks that traverse the City’s jurisdiction. These organizations include, but are not limited to, the organizations that are represented on the Technical Advisory Committee associated with this project (see Acknowledgements). These organizations have collected large quantities of data on the state of Goleta’s creeks and the City would benefit from future collaborative efforts that utilize these datasets to inform decisions regarding the creeks, including understanding and addressing impairment of the creeks.

In addition, the City of Goleta would benefit from the compilation of long-term datasets that would help decision-making bodies to make informed decisions. These datasets can be generated in several ways, including utilizing currently available datasets and efforts by organizations to collect data from the creeks, establishing citizen science efforts, and/or collaborating with local organizations and institutions of higher learning for data collection. Beneficial long-term datasets could include information related to, but not limited to: • Climate Modeling – In order to make informed decisions regarding the ecological impacts of sea-level rise and climate change, datasets should be compiled and studies planned to examine the effects of future development and climate change on community resources; • Wildlife Corridor Movements – Studies to understand the usage of creeks as wildlife habitat and migration corridors, connecting open spaces; as well as the role lands north and south of the City’s limits serve in sustaining wildlife populations; • Riparian Bird and Wildlife Studies – Studies to provide a comprehensive understanding of bird and wildlife habitat use and diversity hotspots, which complement current citizen efforts; • Hydrology – Hydrological studies of flow records and flow conditions within creeks to understand factors affecting flow patterns and how groundwater availability affects creek conditions; and

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 180 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

• Invertebrates – Studies related to benthic invertebrates and creek quality. 5.2.4 Flood Control Activities

As discussed in Section 3.3.7.2, SBFCD conducts annual maintenance activities within creeks Countywide and these activities typically include maintenance activities within City creeks. Although these activities address flooding and drainage issues, they can have negative environmental impacts. SBFCD completed programmatic EIRs in 1990 and 2001 to analyze these impacts. The 2001 EIR identified four Class I (significant and unavoidable) impacts associated with annual maintenance activities. Below is a summary of these impacts as they are described in the 2001 EIR:

• Potentially Reduce the Amount of Natural Biofiltering. Removal and/or thinning of vegetation from channel bottom due to brushing, herbicide application, desilting, and channel shaping cause a temporary reduction in vigor and/or cover of successional riparian habitats and emergent wetlands. This same impact could occur due to clearing pilot channels and outlet works in debris basins, as well as removing sediments from basins. It could potentially reduce the bio-filtration effects (if any) of emergent wetland present along the wetland channel and debris basin bottom. As such, maintenance activities could contribute to an overall decrease in water quality.

• Reduce Amount and Quality of Channel Bottom Habitat. Removal and/or thinning of vegetation from channel bottom due to brushing, herbicide application, desilting, and channel shaping cause a temporary reduction in vigor and/or cover of successional riparian habitats and emergent wetlands. This same impact could occur due to clearing pilot channels and outlet works in debris basins, as well as removing sediments from basins. Although the functions and values of the habitat temporarily disturbed by maintenance would be replaced through SBFCD’s habitat restoration program, there is a potentially adverse cumulative effect of annual habitat disturbances throughout the County.

• Displace Wildlife due to Vegetation Removal in the Channel Bottom. Removal and/or thinning of vegetation from channel bottom due to brushing, herbicide application, desitling, and channel shaping cause a temporary reduction in vigor and/or cover of successional riparian habitats and emergent wetlands. This same impact could occur due to clearing pilot channels and outlet works in debris basins, as well as removing sediments from basins. These actions could reduce foraging and loafing habitat for certain riparian and wetland dependent bird species. It can also reduce habitat heterogeneity for reptiles and small mammals and degrade aquatic habitats by removing protective cover and increasing temperatures. While the long- term functions and values of the habitat temporarily disturbed by maintenance would be replaced through SBFCD’s updated habitat restoration program, there will be a temporal impact to wildlife that cannot be fully mitigated.

• Adverse Effects of Maintenance on Aquatic Habitat. Channel shaping, bank stabilization by placing fill or grading banks, sandbar removal, excessive removal and/or thinning of in- channel vegetation, and pilot channel construction could reduce vegetation cover, pools and gravel beds, organic input from overhanging vegetation supporting aquatic productivity, and instream cover and debris providing micro-habitat. In addition, fish and aquatic organisms could be directly displaced. These impacts are temporary and reversible.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 181 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Although the above four impacts were classified as significant and unavoidable, the EIR includes several mitigation measures to address these impacts, including compensatory habitat mitigation, minimization of vegetation removal from channel bottoms, and construction monitoring during vegetation removal.

In addition to the Class I impacts detailed above, the EIR also includes several Class II (significant, but mitigable) impacts. These included a variety of impacts to hydrology; water quality; wetlands, riparian habitat, and rare plants; fish, aquatic species, and wildlife; air quality; noise; cultural resources; recreation; and visual impacts.

With respect to herbicide application, several Class II impacts were identified and a mitigation measure (W-2: Responsible Herbicide Application), among others, was included in the EIR. Mitigation Measure W-2 includes timing limitations for herbicide application (August-November), a requirement for hand-held sprayers rather than truck mounted sprayers, dilution requirements, wind limits, and a requirement for post-application informational signage near public recreation locations. 5.2.5 Climate Change Changes resulting from climate change are expected to exacerbate impairments within City creeks and watersheds. The Santa Barbara Area Coastal Ecosystem Vulnerability Assessment (SBA CEVA; Myers et al. 2017) report addresses five topics: climate change, watershed runoff, coastal hazards and shoreline change, estuaries, and beaches. Scientists worked in close collaboration with the Cities of Santa Barbara, Carpinteria, and Goleta, the County of Santa Barbara, and UCSB throughout the duration of the research.

Four major take-home messages were identified:

• All climate models examined were consistent in predicting increasing temperatures across the region throughout the 21st century.

• The amount of annual watershed runoff will increase for all Santa Barbara watersheds. However, a majority of models project greater year-to-year- variability of annual precipitation by the second half of the 21st century that would increase the likelihood of extended periods of drought.

• Many beaches will narrow considerably, and as many as two-thirds will be completely lost over the next century.

• Estuarine wetlands and sandy beaches of Santa Barbara County are extremely vulnerable to the effects of sea level rise.

Climate change is likely to result in increases in temperature with associated changes in precipitation, more extreme storm events, including increased rainfall intensity and droughts, as well as increases in sea level and other consequences (ESA August 2015 for the GSMC). Below is a more detailed explanation of how climate change impacts can exacerbate the impairments identified in the CWMP.

Southern California is projected to have:

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 182 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

• Warmer winters, earlier warming in the spring, and increased temperatures year-round.

• Some evidence for a slightly drier future climate relative to today.

Even as overall precipitation in the Southwest is projected to decrease, the number of heavy rainfall events is anticipated to increase (Walsh et al. 2014). Climate change is expected to continue to affect average annual temperature, temperature extremes, drought and fire frequency, and contribute to sea-level rise affecting the coastal portion of the City. 5.2.5.1 Fire, Flood, and Debris Flows

California faces a dramatic increase in the number and severity of wildfires, with 10 of the most destructive fires occurring since 2015 (CAL FIRE 2020). The state’s major study on climate impacts, the Fourth Climate Assessment (Bedsworth et al. 2018), projects that California’s wildfire burn area is likely to increase by 77% by the end of the century. There is potential for reduced wildfire risk due to the lack of vegetation resulting from drought conditions (City of Goleta 2015). However, recent local examples show a high frequency of significant wildfire events. These events, with the potential to be exacerbated by climate change, can have significant impacts on City creeks and watersheds.

Neighborhoods built on alluvial fans below debris laden slopes are at risk even without climate change. Analysis of erosion hazards in drainages above those neighborhoods may identify actions that can be taken to reduce risk of catastrophic debris flow. For example, where runoff from mountain roads can be slowed, and spread out to facilitate safe retention of runoff, debris flow risks may be lessened. This highlights the need for inter-jurisdictional watershed planning. 5.2.5.2 Sea Level Rise

As noted in Section 4, sea level rise would threaten people and infrastructure located along the California coastline and in coastal communities, including increased erosion and threats to vital infrastructure such as roads, bridges, power plants, ports and airports, gasoline pipes, and emergency facilities as well as negatively impacting coastal recreational assets such as beaches and tidal wetlands. The 2015 Goleta Slough Area Sea Level Rise and Management Plan (GSMC 2015), re-evaluates the Goleta Slough study area and assesses vulnerability and risk to environmental and human resources, and recommends policies and potential adaptation strategies but does not include a fluvial hydrological analysis. 5.2.5.3 Drought

Stream flow conditions would be highly affected by drought conditions. Drought, especially prolonged drought, would greatly affect water availability in underground aquifers as well as above ground stream conditions. In addition, during drought conditions, the GWD may extract groundwater to address local water use needs. This occurred during the recent drought conditions in the Goleta Valley (see Section 3.3.71, including information on GWD’s peak groundwater extractions in 2015). In addition, alluvial and bedrock water wells the lower the water table can cause significant impacts on biological resources. As noted in the City’s Environmental Thresholds Guidelines, “[l]owering of the water table can effect biological resources on the land surface by reducing access to water by deep-rooted native vegetation or by reducing discharge of groundwater (baseflow) in streambeds.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 183 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Even if a basin were pumped at a hydrologic ‘safe yield’ rate (long-term water levels remain stable) a drop in water levels during a drought could adversely affect biologic resources.” (County of Santa Barbara 2002, at 88). In addition, drought would affect habitat quality (including increased opportunities for invasion of non-native invasive species) and availability of water for aquatic organisms, including endangered southern California steelhead and threatened California red-legged frogs. Reduced flows can also diminish pool habitat, dissolved oxygen concentrations, and water quality, which would affect fish and invertebrate growth and survival. As a result, overall plant and wildlife communities would be adversely affected.

5.2.5.4 Vegetation Type Conversion

Type conversion is the process of change from a native shrubland to a non-native dominated grassland. One potential consequence of climate change is type-conversion of chaparral. Chaparral is well adapted to fire and regenerates readily after fire through sprouting or seeds. However, when fire occurs too frequently native shrubs are not able to recover as they do after a single fire. Repeated fires at short intervals (e.g., fewer than 10 years) kill young plants before they produce seed. Non- native grasses and annual plants often colonize areas recovering from a fire and during years with long fire intervals chaparral species will grow in and close the canopy. However, frequent fires reduce shrub seed production while grass seeds survive the frequent fires, perpetuate a cycle of more frequent fires (as non-native annual plants are more ignitable than chaparral (KPCC Environment and Science 2017), and reduce shrub cover causing a negative feedback loop. Ultimately, increasing fire frequency is expected to result in vegetation type conversion and may adversely affect vegetation communities, and vegetation cover in Goleta’s watersheds (California Chaparral Institute 2020). Type conversion could result in exposed soils on slopes in the watershed, increased erosion and runoff, and increased sedimentation and debris, including rocks and boulders, in City creeks. Erosion and sedimentation may result in changes to the creek conditions, including suitable habitats for a variety of common and special-status wildlife species (e.g., steelhead, California red-legged frog, and southwestern pond turtle).

5.2.6 Safety

5.2.6.1 Fire

Desiccated fuels ignite easily and burn with intensity, accelerating fire behavior. Safety of riparian fuels, like all vegetation, depends on adequacy of live fuel moisture. Maintaining live fuel moisture in a safe range depends on presence of adequate water in riparian soils. Volatile non-native fuels that have encroached into riparian space also accelerate fire behavior. Where desiccated and/or volatile resinous fuels have accumulated, fire behavior can be extreme and erratic. Risks are increased for both firefighting operations and evacuation of residents.

5.2.6.2 Flooding

As noted in Section 5.2.1.13, Flooding, all City creeks exhibit some level of flooding. Much of the landscape throughout Goleta has lost its ability to absorb rainwater. Urbanization, with proliferation of hard surfaces, roof tops, and concrete storm drains has impaired the ability of the land to absorb storm water and then slowly and safely release it into creeks. This has resulted in flooding risks that

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 184 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA are identified in the CWMP. Future consideration of flooding impacts will be done consistent with existing City, regional, state, and federal regulations.

5.2.6.3 Channelized Creeks

During high flow conditions, concrete channels can be dangerous to individuals due to swiftness of the water and lack of hand holds. These channels are engineered to allow for fast flows and lack roughness elements such as branches or other things to grab onto such that when a person gets trapped in a concrete channel during a storm, they can be washed downstream a long distance and may drown. 5.3 Crosswalk with Section 6

In order to assist the reader in connecting impairments (discussed in Section 5) with implementation actions (discussed in Section 6), Table 32 provides a crosswalk for the impairments with implementation action.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 185 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 186 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood Stream Flow (5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized 1. Plan Management Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 1.1.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 1.2.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 1.2.2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 1.3.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 1.3.2 2. Funding Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 2.1.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 2.1.2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 2.1.3 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 2.2.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 2.3.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 2.3.2

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 187 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood Stream Flow (5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized 3. Data Management and Information Gathering Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 3.1.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 3.1.2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 3.1.3 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 3.1.4 Action X X X X X 3.2.1 Action X X X X X 3.2.2 Action X X X X X 3.2.3 Action X X X X X X X X X X X 3.3.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X 3.3.2 Action X X X X X X X X X X 3.3.3 Action X 3.3.4 Action X X X 3.4.1

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 188 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood

(5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X 3.5.1 Action X 3.6.1 Action X 3.6.2 4. Plan Updates Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 4.1.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 4.1.2 5. Interagency and Non-Profit Organization Coordination Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 5.1.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 5.1.2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X 5.1.3 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 5.1.4 Action X X X 5.1.5 Action X 5.1.6

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 189 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood Stream Flow (5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X X X X 5.1.7 Action X X X X X X X X X 5.1.8 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 5.1.9 Action X X X X X X X X X X 5.1.1 0 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 5.1.1 1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 5.1.1 2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 5.2.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 5.2.2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 5.2.3 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 5.2.4 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X 5.3.1

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 190 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood Stream Flow (5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X X X X X X X X X X X 5.3.2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 5.3.3 Action X X X X X 5.3.4 6. Planning Consistency Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 6.1.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 6.1.2 Action X X 6.1.3 Action X X 6.1.4 Action X X X 6.1.5 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X 6.1.6 Action X X X X X X X 6.1.7 Action X X X X X X X X 6.1.8 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 6.1.9

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 191 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood Stream Flow (5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 6.1.1 0 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 6.1.1 1 7. Public Education and Engagement

Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.1.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.1.2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.1.3 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.2.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.2.2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.3.1 Action 7.3.2 Action X X X X X X 7.4.1 Action X X X X X X 7.4.2

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 192 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood Stream Flow (5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X X X X X X 7.4.3 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.5.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.5.2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.5.3 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.5.4 Action X X X X X X X X X X X 7.6.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.7.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.7.2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.7.3 Action X X X 7.7.4 Action X X X 7.7.5 Action X X X X X 7.8.1 Action X X X X X 7.8.2

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 193 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood Stream Flow (5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.8.3 Action X X X X X 7.8.4 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.9.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.10. 1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.10. 2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.11. 1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.11. 2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 7.12. 1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X 7.12. 2

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 194 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood Stream Flow (5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized 8. Review and Regulation of Development

Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 8.1.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 8.1.2 Action X X 8.1.3 Action X X 8.1.4 Action X X 8.1.5 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 8.1.6 Action X X X X X 8.1.7 Action X X X X X X 8.2.1 Action X X X X X 8.2.2 Action X X X X X X X 8.2.3 Action X X X X 8.2.4 Action X X X X 8.3.1

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 195 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood

(5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X X X X 8.3.2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 8.4.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 8.4.2 Action X X X X 8.5.1 Action X X X X 8.5.2 Action X X X X 8.5.3 Action X X X X X 8.6.1 Action X X X X X 8.6.2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X 8.7.1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X 8.7.2 9. Land Purchases and Conservation Easements

Action X X X X X 9.1.1 Action X X X X X X 9.1.2

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 196 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood

(5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action 9.1.3 Action X X X X X X X 9.1.4 Action 9.1.5 Action X X X X X X 9.1.6 Action X X X X 9.1.7 Action X X X X 9.2.1 Action X X X X 9.2.2 10. Invasive Plant Removal

Action X X X X X 10.1. 1 Action X X X X 10.1. 2 Action X X X X 10.1. 3

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 197 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood

(5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X X 10.1. 4 Action X X X 10.1. 5 Action X 10.1. 6 Action X 10.1. 7 Action X 10.1. 8 Action X X 10.2. 1 11. Riparian Tree and Vegetation Planting and Protection

Action X X X X X X X 11.1. 1 Action X X X X X X X 11.1. 2

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 198 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood

(5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X X X X X X X 11.1. 3 Action X X X X X X X 11.1. 4 Action X X X X X X X 11.2. 1 Action X 11.2. 2 Action 11.2. 3 Action X X X X X X X 11.3. 1 12. Creek Restoration and Enhancement Projects

Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 12.1. 1 Action X X 12.2. 1

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 199 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood

(5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X X X 12.2. 2 Action X X 12.2. 3 Action X X 12.2. 4 Action X 12.3. 1 Action X 12.3. 2 Action X X X 12.4. 1 Action 12.4. 2 Action X X X 12.4. 3

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 200 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood Stream Flow (5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X X 12.5. 1 Action X X 12.5. 2 Action X X 12.6. 1 Action X X 12.6. 2 Action X 12.6. 3 Action X X X 12.7. 1 Action X 12.8. 1 Action X 12.8. 2

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 201 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood Stream Flow (5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X X 12.8. 3 Action X X X X X X X X X X X 12.9. 1 13. Flooding and Drainage

Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 13.1. 1 Action X X X X X 13.1. 2 Action X X 13.2. 1 Action X X 13.2. 2 Action X X 13.3. 1 Action X X 13.3. 2

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 202 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood

(5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X X 13.3. 3 Action X X 13.3. 4 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 13.4. 1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X 13.4. 2 Action X X X X X 13.5. 1 14. Water Quality

Action X X X 14.1. 1 Action X X X 14.1. 2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 14.2. 1

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 203 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood

(5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X X X 14.3. 1 Action X X X 14.3. 2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 14.4. 1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 14.4. 2 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 14.4. 3 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 14.5. 1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 14.5. 2 Action X X X X X X X X X X 14.6. 1

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 204 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Table 32. Crosswalk of Impairments (Section 5) to Implementation Action (Section 6)

Water Quality Impairment Geomorphology Biological Resources Climate Change Safety

Barriers to Fish Passage (5.2.3.5) Passage Fish to Barriers

(5.2.5.2) Top Vegetation (5.2.2.11) Vegetation Top

-

Lined Channels (5.2.2.1) Channels Lined (5.2.3.6) Channel Lined - - Bank Erosion (5.2.2.9) Erosion Bank

and Wire Fence Revetment (5.2.2.2) Revetment Fence Wire and Native Invasive Plant Species (5.2.3.4) Species Plant Invasive Native Level Rise Rise Level - - Program and Action and Program Activities Control Flood Stream Flow (5.2.1.1) Flow Stream (5.2.1.3) Materials Floating (5.2.1.4) Solids Suspended Total and Turbidity (5.2.1.5) pH (5.2.1.6) Chemicals Inorganic (5.2.1.7) Bacterial Fecal (5.2.1.8) Conductivity Specific (5.2.1.9) Substances Biostimulatory (5.2.1.10) Oxygen Dissolved (5.2.1.11) Temperature (5.2.1.12) BMIs (5.2.2.13) Flooding Concrete Piipe (5.2.2.3) Structures Protection Bank and Streambed (5.2.2.4) Alignment Channel Altered (5.2.2.5) Sedimentation High (5.2.2.6) Barriers Transport Sediment (5.2.2.7) Kinckpoints (5.2.2.8) Condition Bed Incised Relict Active (5.2.2.10) Floodplain Constrained Bank of Lack (5.2.3.1) Trash/Debris (5.2.3.2) Presence Human (5.2.3.3) Pollutants for Potential General Non and Impediments Concrete (5.2.3.7) Movement Wildlife to Barriers (5.2.3.8) Habitat Bird Riparian (5.2.3.9) Hydrology Altered (5.2.3.10) Information and Data (5.2.5.1) Flows Debris and Flood, Fire, Sea (5.2.5.3) Drought (5.2.3.4) Conversion Type Vegetation (5.2.6.1) Fire (5.2.6.2) Flooding (5.2.6.3) Creeks Channelized Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X 14.7. 1 Action X X X X X X X X X X X X X 14.8. 1 15. Protection of Baseflows

Action X X X X 15.1. 1 Action X X X X 15.1. 2 Action X X X X 15.2. 1 Action X X X X 15.2. 2 Action X X X X 15.3. 1 Action X X X X 15.3. 2

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 205 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 206 October 2020

6 Implementation Program

6.1 Implementation Introduction

The Implementation Program for the CWMP seeks to address impairments identified in Section 5 as well as ensure general best practices, programs, and projects to protect and improve the overall quality of the City’s creeks and riparian corridors for the multiple benefits these areas provide.

It is important to note that some of the actions identified in this section reflect existing practices and regulatory requirements, whereas other actions highlight potential new activities the City could undertake. New activities identified are, at the time of CWMP adoption, unfunded and would likely require additional staffing and/or funding within the Public Works Department to be achieved. As such, the Implementation Program represents an aspirational set of actions. Over time, the actions will need to be reviewed and priorities considered to best protect and improve creeks within the City given the limited resources available.

For the purposes of this CWMP Implementation Program, the following definitions apply:

Program: A planned series of activities related to a common theme. Goal: A broad statement of the Program’s intention. Strategy: A set of plans or actions. Action: The process of doing something to achieve a goal.

The programs detailed in Section 6.2 provide for a variety of actions to address creek and riparian corridors through a variety of means including increased administrative attention to creeks; heightened public outreach, education, and engagement; continued focus on ensuring new development meets all standards and adheres to all city policies; and new focus on projects and programs to proactively improve habitat, water quality, and the drainage of City creeks.

6.2 Implementation Programs

A. Administrative Programs

1. Plan Management

Goal 1. To implement the CWMP, the City will provide the administrative structure to oversee the CWMP programs, scheduling, and reporting, and to interface with the community at large and other relevant agencies.

Strategy 1.1. Because many of the CWMP actions are related to capital improvement projects, habitat restoration, and stormwater regulation, the City’s Public Works Department Director or the Director’s designee will oversee the implementation of this CWMP. Public Works personnel overseeing implementation will have specific knowledge and experience to properly address the goals, policies and actions of the CWMP.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 207 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Action 1.1.1. The City’s Public Works Department, Neighborhood Services and Public Safety Department, and Planning and Environmental Review Department will meet and coordinate at least quarterly regarding CWMP implementation.

Strategy 1.2. In order to properly implement the CWMP, periodic status reports are needed to identify and describe actions completed and underway that further the goals and policies of the CWMP.

Action 1.2.1. Every two years, prepare a CWMP Status Report summarizing the City’s efforts to comply with the goals, policies, and actions included in the CWMP.

Action 1.2.2. The City’s Public Works Department will present the CWMP Status Report at a public meeting for stakeholder input and City Council receipt. The meeting should serve as an opportunity for the City Council and public to weigh in on the CWMP implementation process and the focus of the next two years of implementation. The CWMP Status report should be timed to inform the 2-year budget process.

Strategy 1.3. To fully implement the CWMP, significant additional staffing resources would be needed. When considering implementation prioritization, staffing and funding levels must be considered.

Action 1.3.1. During the consideration of CWMP Status Report (Action 1.2.2), consider staffing and funding needs to achieve future desired implementation of the CWMP and add staff resources and funding as deemed appropriate.

Action 1.3.2. During consideration of the Public Works Annual Work Program, consider staffing needs to achieve the plan goals and add staff resources and funding as deemed appropriate.

2. Funding

Goal 2. To provide annual and specific project funding to implement the CWMP.

Strategy 2.1. During each budget cycle, the City will consider annual and multi-year funding to support CWMP ongoing programs.

Action 2.1.1. Consider appropriating General Funds or Special Revenue Funds, as available, during the City budgeting process to actions identified in the CWMP.

Action 2.1.2. At an appropriate later date, consider the presentation of a ballot measure to impose a new tax specifically dedicated to CWMP implementation.

Action 2.1.3. Apply for grants to fund staff time on implementation of specific projects.

Strategy 2.2. The City will seek grant funding for projects and programs identified in the CWMP and any other efforts that help achieve the goals of the CWMP.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 208 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Action 2.2.1. Where staffing resources are adequate to manage any grant fund management, or as prioritized by City Council, apply for grants to support relevant projects and actions identified in the CWMP.

Strategy 2.3. The City will monitor relevant funding sources, including federal, state, and local options to ensure that appropriate opportunities to seek funding are identified.

Action 2.3.1. Maintain a potential funding source list. An initial list of funding sources is provided as Appendix J, Potential Funding Sources.

Action 2.3.2. Annually review the state database of funding opportunities found here: https://www.grants.ca.gov/, and inquire with funding agencies, including but not limited to California Coastal Conservancy.

3. Data Management and Information Gathering

Goal 3. To maintain up-to-date information on City creek corridors and attain and/or develop new data to further support management actions identified in the CWMP.

Strategy 3.1. The City shall conduct annual creek surveys in order to identify any changes and new impairments along City creek segments, as staffing and funding allow.

Action 3.1.1. Ensure adequate staffing and/or contractor funding within the City’s budget to support the annual creek surveys.

Action 3.1.2. Survey all City creek segments annually to identify and photo-document changed circumstances and new information.

Action 3.1.3. Develop a standardized monitoring report sheet to be used on all creeks each year to ensure consistent data.

Action 3.1.4. As feasible, address any new impairments identified during creek surveys and forward relevant information to other responsible agencies where appropriate.

Strategy 3.2. The City should maintain a database of aerial imagery to track changes in vegetation patterns along City creeks.

Action 3.2.1. Continue periodic purchases, where opportunities are presented and funding supports, of new aerial imagery Citywide at a 6-inch resolution or less.

Action 3.2.2. When possible, consider the purchase of hyperspectral imagery associated with Action 3.2.1. in order to better identify changes in vegetation locations and health.

Action 3.2.3. Utilize City imagery and spectral data to detect changes in development and vegetation to better understand any illegal and/or unpermitted actions along City creek corridors to ensure implementation of General Plan Conservation Element subpolicy CE 1.4 (Illegal Destruction of ESHAs) and compliance with County and state

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 209 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

regulations, as applicable, including regulations concerning habitat, water quality, and creek flows.

Strategy 3.3. The City shall continue to monitor water quality within City creeks.

Action 3.3.1. Continue water quality monitoring consistent with the City’s MS4 permit and the SWMP.

Action 3.3.2. Review the stormwater monitoring program for effectiveness and consider changes to that would better support CWMP Goals, Strategies, and Actions.. The review should include, at a minimum, consideration of the following criteria: (1) sampling locations; (2) sampling frequency; (3) analytical program and potential additional analyses/speciation, as staffing and funding allow.

Action 3.3.3. Evaluate the need for additional forensic analyses to identify the most likely sources of any impacts, as funding and staffing resources allow. Such analysis could include source and receiving water chemistry comparisons, identification of past illicit discharges in relation to impacted water bodies, water table and groundwater changes and the causes of such changes, and hydrogeologic conditions.

Action 3.3.4. Where funding supports, conduct annual collection and analyses of benthic macroinvertebrate (BMI) samples and other pertinent physiochemical and biological data at various locations along City creeks. See as an example program the Southern Coastal Santa Barbara Streams and Estuaries Bioassessment Program operated by the County and City of Santa Barbara.

Strategy 3.4. The City shall seek to better understand flow rates and changing flow rate impacts on City creeks.

Action 3.4.1. As staffing and funding support, conduct flow rate monitoring, in addition to existing USGS monitoring, on City creeks, including areas north of the City where possible in coordination with other agencies. This monitoring should include installation of new flow gauges and/or visual inspection monitoring. Conduct related studies as needed, such as hydrological analyses.

Strategy 3.5. The City shall seek to better understand the wildlife use of riparian habitat and their linkage to habitat patches and core areas.

Action 3.5.1. Where funding supports, continue wildlife monitoring in riparian habitat. Such activities could include further use of motion sensor cameras and field studies of wildlife presence or activity.

Strategy 3.6. The City shall seek to better understand the impacts of nighttime lighting, noise, and fencing on wildlife behavior within City creek corridors.

Action 3.6.1. Where funding supports, conduct nighttime lighting, noise, and fencing analyses along City creeks.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 210 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Action 3.6.2. Where impacts are identified through Action 3.6.1., seek remedial action through public lighting retrofits and/or working with property owners as feasible to address lighting design, noise impacts, and fencing concerns.

4. Plan Updates

Goal 4. To ensure that the CWMP reflects recent conditions and addresses necessary programs and actions for the City to follow, periodic updates of the CWMP should be conducted.

Strategy 4.1. The City shall review the CWMP as the need for updates arises (including but not limited to changes in physical conditions of City creek corridors, changes in the regulatory setting, and new creek corridor management knowledge or strategies).

Action 4.1.1. Conduct an internal and public review of the CWMP every 5-10 years, as directed by City Council.

Action 4.1.2. Amend baseline conditions, impairments, programs, goals, strategies, and actions in the CWMP as needed to reflect the results of the review and update process. Any updates should include public input, consideration of updated information regarding impacts from climate change, and new or updated plans and reports from other agencies and organizations, as appropriate.

5. Interagency and Non-Profit Organization Coordination

Goal 5. To maintain and develop new cooperative relationships with federal, state, county, municipal, academic institutions, and special district agencies, as well as non-profit organizations engaged with City creeks, in support of integrated management practices favorable to enhancement, maintenance, and restoration of the biological and physical integrity of creek courses and their associated wetlands and riparian habitats within the City and throughout the entire watershed overview area.

Strategy 5.1. The City shall pursue and continue cooperative relationships with other public agencies regarding goals and strategies that the partners have in common concerning City creek corridors and watersheds.

Action 5.1.1. As appropriate and productive, pursue cooperative relationships with federal agencies such as the USFWS, NOAA Fisheries, USFS, US Bureau of Reclamation, and the USACE obtain permits, identify project funding opportunities, and identify and pursue other potentially shared interests regarding USFS, County of Santa Barbara, and City creek corridors and their associated watersheds.

Action 5.1.2. As appropriate and productive, pursue cooperative relationships with state entities such as the CDFW, RWQCB, UCSB, CalTrans, the California Conservation Corps, the California Coastal Conservancy, and California Coastal Commission to obtain potential permits, identify funding opportunities, and identify and pursue other potentially shared interests regarding USFS, County of Santa Barbara, and City creek corridors and their associated watersheds.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 211 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Action 5.1.3. As appropriate and productive, pursue a cooperative relationship with SBFCD to support flood control activities, including mitigation, and provide increased protections and enhancements to City creeks and riparian habitat.

• Such activities should include City annual review and comment, as necessary, on the SBFCD Annual Maintenance Plan. Consideration should be given to supporting activities to protect biological qualities within City creeks. • Whenever feasible, the City should leverage the environmental documents and permits attained for the Annual Maintenance Plan for future City creek and watershed restoration efforts.

Action 5.1.4. Coordinate with the County of Santa Barbara regarding potentially harmful activities within the County north of the City. Issues that could be addressed collaboratively include construction staging, water extraction, and farming activities along creeks and watersheds that eventually drain through the City. Potential issues to focus on for this coordination are included in Appendix H, Potential Impairments Outside the City of Goleta.

Action 5.1.5. Coordinate with the Goleta Water District regarding water resource management activities within the Goleta Water District’s authority. Coordination efforts should include:

• Review and comment, as appropriate, on any Goleta Water District updates to their Groundwater Management Plan, SAFE Water Supplies Ordinance, or any other program, plan, or activity related to groundwater management within the City and/or the Goleta Groundwater Basin, including information regarding well water extractions. • Better understand Goleta Water District use of City-owned properties, including the use of the Berkeley Well site. • Encourage and support Goleta Water District efforts, as appropriate, to increase groundwater storage in the Goleta Groundwater Basin.

Action 5.1.6. Make requests, encourage, and coordinate with CDFW and provide input on any efforts to eradicate invasive species (such as green sunfish, crayfish, and bullfrogs) within City creeks.

Action 5.1.7. Request, encourage, and support CDFW enforcement, when appropriate, of Fish and Game Codes, including Section 1600 et al regarding stream alterations, and Section 5937 regarding stream flows to keep fish in good condition, and water rights donations to protect instream flows pursuant to the Water Code Section 1707.

Action 5.1.8. Coordinate and engage with the USFS, County Fire regarding fire risk management activities and post-fire management with consideration for habitat protection, reduction of sedimentation within City creeks, and habitat type-conversion.

Action 5.1.9. Engage with the Central Coast RWQCB regarding finalization and implementation of Agricultural Order 4.0. Non-point discharges from irrigated lands regulated by this Order include discharges of waste to surface water and groundwater,

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 212 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

such as irrigation return flows, percolation, tailwater, tile drain water, stormwater runoff flowing from irrigated lands, stormwater runoff conveyed in channels or canals resulting from the discharge from irrigated lands, and runoff resulting from frost control or operational spills. The Order also regulates agricultural activities such as the removal or degradation of riparian vegetation resulting in the loss or degradation of instream beneficial uses.

Action 5.1.10. Participate in the Central Coast RWQCB development of TMDLs and remediations for listed impaired waterbodies within the City, and updates to the Central Coast Basin Plan.

Action 5.1.11. Request, encourage, and support, where appropriate, Central Coast RWQCB, CDFW, California Coastal Commission, and other state agencies in enforcement actions related to the City’s creeks and their associated watersheds.

Action 5.1.12. Monitor, through coordination with other agencies, the status of creeks located outside the City.

Strategy 5.2. The City shall pursue and continue cooperative relationships with non-profit and academic organizations that support the goals and strategies in the CWMP.

Action 5.2.1. Engage and build partnerships with non-profit organizations, as appropriate, to further the goals and policies of the CWMP.

Action 5.2.2. Continue relationships with non-profit members of the CWMP Technical Advisory Committee after the adoption of the CWMP.

Action 5.2.3. Support non-profit grant applications, where possible, when the applications support the implementation of the CWMP.

Action 5.2.4. Seek out relationships with researchers and students at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and other universities as opportunities are presented, to conduct research and support restoration efforts.

Strategy 5.3. The City should, as interest and resources allow, continue and develop new regional collaborative efforts to address the interjurisdictional issues related to City creeks.

Action 5.3.1. Continue to engage in the Santa Barbara Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Program. The IRWM is a regional water management group governed by a broad region-wide group that includes water and wastewater districts, community service districts, city departments, county divisions, and a non- governmental organization. The IRWM Program and projects are guided by the Santa Barbara Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP).

Action 5.3.2. Continue to participate in the Santa Barbara County Association of MS4 Mangers (SBCAMM). SBCAMM helps the City achieve regional compliance and collaboration and provides a pool of regional experts and resources for stormwater management and compliance.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 213 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Action 5.3.3. Seek to establish a Goleta watersheds-specific working group or committee comprised of agencies with regulatory authority over City creeks and contributing watersheds as well as non-governmental organizations engaged with issues related to the CWMP. Potential members include Santa Barbara County Planning, SBFCD, GWD, City of Santa Barbara (Airport), UCSB, USFS, CDFW, and NMFS.

Action 5.3.4. Continue where opportunities arise, and seek opportunities, to engage with other jurisdictions, agencies, organizations engaged in CWMP-related activities, and researchers to better understand and plan for climate change impacts on creeks and watersheds. Such activities should include supporting grant applications for further understanding of such impacts and efforts to create regional solutions to the impacts of climate changes. Consideration should be given to the Optional Studies provided in the City’s Coastal Hazards Vulnerability Assessment and Fiscal Impact Report that includes a study to model future creek flooding that incorporates climate impacts on precipitation and sea level rise. Where possible, provide funding or in-kind services to support these efforts where such activities are not managed by the City.

6. Planning Consistency

Goal 6. To implement the CWMP in a manner that is consistent with various City policies, regulations, and adopted management and master plans.

Strategy 6.1. The City shall, to the greatest extent possible, ensure that the implementation of the Goals, Strategies, and Actions of the CWMP complement and support other planning documents adopted by the City. Where conflicts exist, the City must refer to the General Plan for policy direction.

Action 6.1.1. Ensure that all CWMP implementation programs are acted upon in a manner consistent with the General Plan.

Action 6.1.2. Ensure that all CWMP implementation programs are acted upon in a manner consistent with the Goleta Municipal Code.

Action 6.1.3. Ensure that the goals, policies, actions, and projects of the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan are considered when implementing the CWMP.

Action 6.1.4. Ensure that the recommendation goals and objectives of the City’s Parks, Facilities & Playgrounds Master Plan are considered when implementing the CWMP.

Action 6.1.5. Ensure that the vision for Ellwood Mesa, including Devereux Creek, included in the Ellwood-Devereux Coast Open Space and Habitat Management Plan is honored when implementing the CWMP.

Action 6.1.6. Ensure that the implementation of the CWMP supports and complements the requirements of the City’s Stormwater Management Plan

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 214 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Action 6.1.7. Ensure that the implementation of the CWMP supports and compliments the Homelessness Strategic Plan.

Action 6.1.8. Ensure that the goals of the City’s Urban Forest Management Plan are considered when implementing the CWMP.

Action 6.1.9. Annually review CIP project list for consistency with CWMP Goals, Strategies, and actions. Revise CIPs to ensure consistency with CWMP to the maximum extent possible.

Action 6.1.10. Develop a Local Coastal Program that includes policies, programs, and ordinances that maximize protection for the City’s creeks and watersheds in the Coastal Zone, consistent with the CWMP.

Strategy 6.1.11. Update the General Plan (and Local Coastal Program once certified) as appropriate to ensure the City’s policies and ordinances keep up with emerging needs, threats, and opportunities related to City creeks and watersheds. Updates should include updates, as warranted, to Open Space Element Figure 3-5 and Conservation Element Figures 4-1 to map all creek and riparian habitat as ESHA.

7. Public Education and Engagement

Goal 7. To engage with and provide education information to Goleta residents emphasizing the benefits of creek corridors and the important ecological values they provide; ensuring that residents and business owners understand rules regarding stormwater and illicit discharge regulations, understand the limits on development adjacent to City creeks; providing information on available CWMP-related programs residents can utilize; and providing information on how best to protect the valuable ecological resources for the City.

Strategy 7.1. The City shall work to educate Goleta youth on the impacts to and values of City creeks and clean water and what can be done to support healthy creeks and watersheds.

Action 7.1.1. Continue to support K-6 education outreach related to watersheds, local hydrologic conditions, storm and sewer systems, and the benefits of clean and healthy waterways and beaches through an agreement with Explore Ecology, an environmental education and arts non-profit located in Santa Barbara, or through other means.

Action 7.1.2. Consider expanding outreach to grades 7-8 to reach junior high aged students, as funding and staffing supports. Also consider expanding outreach to high school students, as funding and staffing supports.

Action 7.1.3. Consider supporting or leading educational and recreational field trips to Goleta creeks and watershed.

Strategy 7.2. The City shall continue to work with business owners to support green business practices that will support creek water quality and quantity.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 215 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Action 7.2.1. Continue the business-based educational program, by conducting site visits of City businesses to educate the businesses on appropriate BMPs for their particular industry to minimize impacts to storm water quality and stream flows.

Action 7.2.2. Continue to participate in the Green Business Program of Santa Barbara County. The Green Business Program provides resources, assistance and evaluations to businesses that want to operate more sustainably in order to conserve resources, generate savings, and gain certification and recognition.

Strategy 7.3. The City shall notify property owners adjacent to City creeks of limits on development, and other activities and uses which may harm creeks or watersheds, consistent with City policies and regulations.

Action 7.3.1. At least annually, send a mailer to property owners within approximately 125 feet of a creek riparian habitat explaining the values and benefits of healthy creeks and watersheds, and policies and regulations that apply to any potential development on their property. The notice should include limits on activities in SPAs and the procedures for requesting approval of activities potentially impacting a creek ESHA or adjacent ESHA (e.g., wetlands); explain the impacts of pollution, litter, lighting, noise, and vibrations on riparian corridors; and provide suggestions for planting native plants to help protect riparian habitats and stormwater management enhancements, such as infiltration features and ocean friendly gardens See Appendix K, Example of Public Outreach Material, for an example of flier, providing planting suggestions.

Action 7.3.2. Notify property owners if any development or restoration project will result in a change to the mapped area of the riparian habitat ESHA on their property or an adjacent property that would lead to a change in the developable area on the owner’s property.

Strategy 7.4. The City shall seek to inform Goleta residents of best practices for disposal of household hazardous waste in order to prevent those materials from being discharged into City creeks through the storm drain system or through direct dumping into a creek or SPA.

Action 7.4.1. Maintain a household hazardous waste collection center which is available to all City residents and businesses.

Action 7.4.2. Provide the public with information regarding various options for hazardous waste disposal. These options include: hazardous waste collection at UCSB; collection of antifreeze, batteries, oil, paint, and other materials at the Marborg Recycling Center; free medicine collection at CVS Pharmacy; and free Sharps mailing containers for medicinal needles.

Action 7.4.3. Continue to focus outreach efforts on hotspot neighborhoods, identified through the Stormwater Management Program, that have a history of illegal dumping within City creeks.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 216 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Strategy 7.5. The City shall consider the development of a City Creek Interpretive Sign Program to inform residents of the values and regulations related to creeks and associated ESHAs and SPAs within the City.

Action 7.5.1. Identify locations for interpretive signs. Sign locations should be easily viewed by the public along creeks corridors at key viewpoints from streets (including bridges), trails, and bike paths

Action 7.5.2. Design, install, maintain, and replace as needed creek interpretive signage at identified locations as funding is available.

Action 7.5.3. Replace outdated creek identification signage as appropriate to ensure a consistent style for City creek signage that eliminates inconsistent information.

Action 7.5.4. Post signs identifying creeks by name along all public bridges over creeks within the City.

Strategy 7.6. The City shall continue to mark storm drains to notify the public that materials entering the storm drain system discharge directly into City creeks and into the ocean.

Action 7.6.1. Continue to mark all storm drains, new storm drains, and check markers every year and replace as needed.

Strategy 7.7. The City shall utilize the City website (www.cityofgoleta.org) to provide the public with creek-related information.

Action 7.7.1. Continue, when information is not otherwise consolidated, to maintain existing web pages that include information relevant to the Actions within the CWMP. These pages include “Parks and Open Space” and “Environmental Services.”

Action 7.7.2. Review the contents of, and update as needed, these webpages at least quarterly.

Action 7.7.3. Consider developing a separate permanent page for the creek and watershed related information with links to the webpages referenced in Action 7.7.1.

Action 7.7.4. Include in the City’s “Cumulative Projects List”, which is periodically posted on the “Major Development Projects” page on the City website, any request for a SPA buffer reduction request included with a development application request.

Action 7.7.5. Identify in the City‘s “Cumulative Project List” all projects proposed adjacent to a creek or tributary in the City.

Strategy 7.8. The City shall continue to support creek outreach efforts and events within and near the City.

Action 7.8.1. Continue to support Creek Week cleanup events. Support will include inclusion in the City’s online event calendar.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 217 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Action 7.8.2. Where funding and resources are available, support creek cleanup programs, including hauling trash to the transfer station and properly removing dangerous or hazardous materials identified during creek cleanups.

Action 7.8.3. Continue to support other outreach events, including the Lemon Festival and Earth Day, and where feasible utilize these events to inform the public of the City’s efforts to protect creeks and their riparian habitats.

Action 7.8.4. Participate, in collaboration with Explore Ecology and other organizations as appropriate, in the annual California Coastal Cleanup Day.

Strategy 7.9. The City shall utilize email notification to inform interested parties of information, events, and development proposals relevant to City creeks.

Action 7.9.1. Upon adoption of the CWMP, transition the listserv for project updates to a general listserv to provide updates on creek activities, information, and developments adjacent to creeks and associated riparian habitat, including where a SPA buffer reduction is proposed.

Strategy 7.10. The City shall utilize other digital outreach efforts where opportunities exist to engage the public on topics related to creeks and associated riparian habitats.

Action 7.10.1. Engage the public in creek issues through the use of social media platforms including Twitter, Facebook, and other media as appropriate.

Action 7.10.2. Continue to utilize the Monarch Press as a forum to inform the public on City programs aimed at stormwater and water protection through the monthly “Goleta’s Green Room.” Note that the first “Goleta’s Green Room” post in the Monarch Press occurred in June 2020.

Strategy 7.11. The City shall seek to incorporate ongoing public input regarding the implementation of the CWMP.

Action 7.11.1. Hold at least semi-annual meetings with interested community members to discuss issues related to City creeks. Topics to discuss should include the variety of programs and actions outlined in the CWMP.

Action 7.11.2. Provide the City Council with options for an advisory body to support City Council’s prioritization and implementation of the CWMP. Options include, but are not limited to, the creation of a new Creek and Watershed Advisory Committee, an informal advisory committee or utilization of an existing committee or commission,

Strategy 7.12. The City shall seek to coordinate with private property owners to address impairments.

Action 7.12.1. Continue and improve coordination with the Union Pacific Railroad and CalTrans to address impairments. Coordination should include addressing the impacts

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 218 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

of human presence adjacent to creeks, invasive plants (arundo, pampas grass and fountain grass), and ensuring that culverts along the train tracks and Highway 101 do not impede drainage and fish and wildlife movement.

Action 7.12.2. Engage with private property owners along City creek corridors, where appropriate, to support land purchases, conservation easements, and restoration projects, where interest and funding support.

B. Regulation of Development

8. Review and Regulation of Development

Goal 8. To ensure that the various qualities and services provided by City creek corridors and their associated watersheds are protected and considered during the review, permitting, and operation and use of development.

Strategy 8.1. The City shall apply existing General Plan and GMC policies and regulations regarding creek and watershed ESHA to the siting of all new development.

Action 8.1.1. Apply SPA buffer requirements identified in General Plan Conservation Element and Title 17 of the GMC.

Action 8.1.2. Limit the uses and activities allowed in SPA buffers to those allowed pursuant to the General Plan Conservation Element and Title 17 of the GMC.

Action 8.1.3. Ensure that site design and development preserve, and where feasible enhances, wildlife corridors and habitat linkages, consistent with General Plan Conservation Element and Title 17 of the GMC. In conducting this analysis on a project- specific basis, the City should consider the studies and resulting information on wildlife use of City creek corridors provided in the CWMP along with any other information available.

Action 8.1.4. Ensure design of exterior lighting is controlled and directed away from creek and riparian area ESHAs, SPAs, and wildlife corridors, consistent with the General Plan Conservation Element and Title 17 of the GMC.

Action 8.1.5. Address and seek to minimize potentially significant noise, vibration, and lighting impacts to special-status species and wildlife corridors, adjacent to and within creeks, riparian areas, and SPAs consistent with the General Plan Conservation Element and Title 17 of the GMC.

Action 8.1.6. Apply all other General Plan policies and Goleta Municipal Code requirements, as applicable, to new development.

Action 8.1.7. Consider amendments to General Plan subpolicy CE 2.2 and GMC Section 17.30.070 to provide greater clarity regarding SPA buffer requirements and to provide greater protection to SPAs. Consider biological resources and water quality in any proposed amendment to subpolicy CE 2.2 of the General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 219 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Strategy 8.2. The City shall enforce existing policies and regulations related to landscaping design for all new development to support a sustainable riparian habitat.

Action 8.2.1. Require the inclusion and installation of ecologically appropriate native vegetation, collected/propagated from native plants sources in City watersheds, where available, in SPA buffers consistent with General Plan Conservation Element and Title 17 of the GMC.

Action 8.2.2. Ensure that landscaping is sited and designed to avoid or minimize the need for fuel modification post-development, consistent with General Plan Conservation Element and Title 17 of the GMC.

Action 8.2.3. Ensure that landscaping, screening and vegetated buffers support wildlife habitat whenever feasible consistent with General Plan Conservation Element and Title 17 of the GMC. Information from the CWMP should be used in the consideration of landscaping to support wildlife habitat.

Action 8.2.4. Ensure compliance with the City’s Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance.

Strategy 8.3. The City shall ensure that new development meets the requirements of the City’s Stormwater Management planning documents, permits, and regulations during construction.

Action 8.3.1. Consistent with the City’s Phase II Small MS4 Permit, General Plan subpolicy CE 10.7(a), and GMC Chapter 15.09 (Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control), require a Stormwater Control plan, and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (depending on the size of the disturbed area) for all earth moving activities.

Action 8.3.2. Provide a copy of the City’s “Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Preparation Guidance Manual” at the public planning counter for public availability and post on the City’s Planning and Environmental Review and Public Works Department webpages for reference purposes.

Strategy 8.4. The City shall ensure that new development adheres to stormwater management policies and regulations regarding site design and maintenance.

Action 8.4.1. Continue to apply the City’s post-construction stormwater management requirements as detailed in GMC Section 13.04.115.

Action 8.4.2. Provide a copy of the “Stormwater Technical Guide, Compliance with Stormwater Post-Construction Requirements in Santa Barbara County” at the public planning counter and post on the City’s Planning and Environmental Review and Public Works Department webpages for reference purposes.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 220 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Strategy 8.5. The City shall ensure that new development adhere to, or exceeds, City floodplain management policies and regulations to minimize damage to structures and the danger to life caused by flooding.

Action 8.5.1. Ensure that the capacity of natural drainage courses and floodplains are not negatively impacted by proposed development, consistent with the General Plan Safety Element.

Action 8.5.2. Ensure the application of the City’s floodplain regulations found in GMC Chapter 15.10 (Floodplain Management) for new development, consistent with General Plan subpolicy SE 6.3.

Action 8.5.3. Continue to apply a watercourse setback consistent with General Plan subpolicy SE 6.6 and as detailed in GMC Chapter 17.31. Apply this requirement in a way that complements and does not supersede any buffer requirement required to protect creek and riparian ESHA.

Strategy 8.6. The City shall ensure that new development adheres to the requirements of CEQA, where applicable.

Action 8.6.1. Continue to apply the “County of Santa Barbara Thresholds and Guidelines Manual” (last updated October 2002) until the City updates this document.

Action 8.6.2. Conduct a comprehensive update to the City’s CEQA Thresholds Manual, consistent with General Plan Implementation Action CE-IA-2. CE-IA-2 calls for an update to the CEQA Thresholds Manual to incorporate environmental standards consistent with the policies and standards set forth in the City’s General Plan Conservation Element. This update should consider protections to creeks and associated riparian habitats as well as groundwater resources.

Strategy 8.7. The City shall seek to prevent non-stormwater hazardous and non-hazardous discharges into the City’s storm drain system and into City creeks.

Action 8.7.1. Continue to investigate potential illicit discharges, consistent with GMC Section 13.04.120.

Action 8.7.2. Identify and initiate enforcement or report illicit discharges during annual creek surveys within City creeks.

C. Habitat Enhancement and Restoration

9. Land Purchases and Conservation Easements

Goal 9. To utilize land purchases and/or conservation easements, where feasible and appropriate considering the variety of land use demands and constraints within the City, to support riparian habitat enhancement and restoration.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 221 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Strategy 9.1. The City shall, where resources support, consider land purchases and/or support land purchases by conservation organizations for habitat restoration and enhancement purposes.

Action 9.1.1. Continue with land purchases located in the Open Space Overlay on General Plan Figure 2-1 and maintain purchased properties for Monarch Butterfly, Raptor Roosting, and/or Riparian Habitat. These properties are located along and south of Mathilda Drive, adjacent to the Ellwood Mesa Open Space within the Devereux Creek watershed.

Action 9.1.2. Where interested property owners are identified, consider land purchases, or support efforts by a third party, that will serve to restore riparian habitat, preserve floodplains and SPAs, infiltrate stormwater, and/or reconnect wildlife corridors along City creeks.

Action 9.1.3. Ensure that potential land purchases to provide habitat enhancement and/or restoration do not conflict with other land use considerations. These include limitations in state law on the conversion of sites zoned for housing and for sites used in the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment as well as limitations on conversion of agriculturally zoned land as outlined in General Plan Land Use Element Policy LU 7.5.

Action 9.1.4. When considering potential land purchases for restoration, prioritize parcels that contain or are adjacent to riparian and/or stream habitat, or where the opposite bank of the creek is also City-owned, to ensure any future restoration efforts can be done on both sides of the riparian corridor. Additional favorable consideration should be given to parcels within the mapped floodplain and that may provide a natural buffer between creeks and urban and agricultural uses.

Action 9.1.5. When considering potential land purchases, consider input from CWMP stakeholders, and City Council’s advisory body, if established, on advisable locations.

Action 9.1.6. When considering potential land purchases, consider prioritizing efforts to acquire Bishop Ranch south of Cathedral Oaks Road, to protect and enhance Glen Annie Creek and Los Carneros Creek and their associated watersheds.

Action 9.1.7. When considering potential land purchases for restoration, consider sites that will be beneficial to address watershed adaptation to future impacts due to climate change,

Strategy 9.2. The City shall support the establishment of conservation easements along creek corridors within the City.

Action 9.2.1. Continue to apply General Plan Conservation Element Policy 2.4 that supports the establishment of an easement to the City or non-profit land trust where a development project includes a subdivision of land within or adjacent to a SPA.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 222 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Action 9.2.2. Support and pursue, where appropriate, other opportunities for the City or a non-profit land trust to establish conservation easements along City creeks as mitigation or through voluntary action.

10. Invasive Plant Removal

Goal 10. To eradicate existing and future stands of invasive non-native species and prevent or control new occurrences of invasive non-native plant species within creek corridors.

Strategy 10.1. The City shall seek to control invasive plant species within City creek corridors, as feasible, based on funding and staff resources.

Action 10.1.1. Prioritize control of all “High” priority invasive non-native plant species on the Cal-IPC Inventory, including, but not limited to, arundo, Cape ivy, and English ivy.

Action 10.1.2. Control all “Moderate” priority, non-native invasive plant species on the Cal-IPC Inventory (including, but not limited to, periwinkle).

Action 10.1.3. Where feasible, prioritize removal efforts at the highest points in the riparian corridor where such non-native invasive plant species exist, in order to prevent downstream spread to removal sites. Utilize the mapping of invasive non-native species in the CWMP, and other sources as warranted, to prioritize weed abatement locations. Develop cooperative relationships with landowners in support of this action.

Action 10.1.4. Refrain from removal activities when it is determined that the non-native species contribute to habitat values, consistent with General Plan subpolicy CE 1.10(f) and where likely future restoration activities will occur that will address invasive plants.

Action 10.1.5. Where invasive plant removal occurs, restore with native vegetation, utilizing local genotypes collected from City creek watersheds, where available.

Action 10.1.6. Where possible, coordinate invasive plant removal and revegetation efforts with SBFCD to leverage its Annual Maintenance Plan and associated permits and environmental review. Provide input to SBFCD regarding priority invasive plant removal as mitigation for Annual Maintenance Plans.

Action 10.1.7. Consider contract services for invasive plant removal, particularly for arundo, as funding supports. Additionally, consider other relationships with volunteers, non-profit organizations, and the California Conservation Corps to support invasive plant species removal.

Action 10.1.8. Consider training volunteers; through the City’s Adopt-a-Park Program or through other means, to support volunteer weed removal efforts at City-owned parks and open spaces. One such location for eradication is at Jonny D. Wallis Neighborhood Park where Algerian ivy (Hedera algeriensis) has been identified along San Jose Creek.

Strategy 10.2. The City shall undertake annual monitoring, as feasible, to identify and eradicate or control new occurrences of arundo, Cape ivy, English ivy, and Perwinkle and any

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 223 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

other invasive non-native species as listed on the Cal-IPC Inventory of non-native invasive plants in California.

Action 10.2.1. Map the locations of high and medium priority invasive plant infestations, monitor eradication efforts, and document potential new occurrences as part of Strategy 3.1 (annual creek surveys).

11. Riparian Tree and Vegetation Planting and Protection

Goal 11. Improve riparian habitats through the planting of native trees and native vegetation and protection of existing native trees and vegetation within and adjacent to riparian corridors within the City.

Strategy 11.1. The City shall ensure that new trees and plants planted installed in or adjacent to creeks and riparian habitats and within SPAs are from local seed or propagule source (genotype) collected from City creek watersheds, where available.

Action 11.1.1. Establish and maintain a native tree and plant list to use for riparian corridor tree planting and limit plantings to only those trees on the list. A preliminary list of acceptable native trees is provided below:

• Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) • Western sycamore (Platanus racemosa) • Black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) • California bay laurel (Umbellularia californica) • Arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) • Red Willow (Salix laevigata) • Sandbar willow (Salix exugia) • White alder (Alnus rhombifolia)

Action 11.1.2. Where feasible, utilize clones or direct descendants of local native trees from City creek watersheds for new plantings in and adjacent to creek and riparian habitats and within SPAs. See Action 11.1.1 above for acceptable native trees.

Action 11.1.3. Ensure that trees approved as memorial tress in and adjacent to riparian corridors in accordance with Resolution No. 10-54 are on the City’s native tree list. Update Resolution No. 10-54 by 2022, or as soon as feasible, to ensure consistent application.

Action 11.1.4. Prepare and adopt a Tree Protection Ordinance, consistent with General Plan Implementation Action CE-IA-4, by 2024, or as soon as feasible. The Tree Protection Ordinance should address protections for native trees city-wide and the policies outlined in Conservation Element Policy CE 9 (Protection of Native Woodlands).

Strategy 11.2. As resources allow, the City shall plant ecologically appropriate native trees and appropriate vegetation in City-owned open spaces within creeks and SPAs (see also Action 11.1.2 above).

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 224 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Action 11.2.1. Identify locations for tree plantings utilizing the information provide in the CWMP and other documents as warranted. Areas of primary concern include areas in Evergreen Park adjacent to El Encanto Creek. Additionally, consider restoration in other City open spaces, including, but not limited to, La Goleta Neighborhood Open Space along Las Vegas Creek, Stonebridge Open Space on San Pedro Creek, and the San Jose Creek Neighborhood Open Space.

Action 11.2.2. Continue to monitor locations that would benefit from native tree plantings to improve habitat values in City open spaces. Map such locations during annual creek surveys.

Action 11.2.3. Refrain from plantings in areas that may be a location for a larger restoration effort in the near future.

Strategy 11.3. As resources allow, consider the establishment of a private property tree planting program for properties adjacent to City creeks.

Action 11.3.1. Develop a Tree Planting Program for private property owners adjacent to City creeks. Under such a program, the City would provide the trees to ensure they are local genotypes collected from City creek watersheds where available and funding for tree planting, including irrigation. Focus the program on creek segments with identified lack of bank-top vegetation and areas with exotic vegetation.

12. Creek Restoration and Enhancement Projects

Goal 12. To improve the in-creek and riparian habitat through voluntary habitat restoration projects and through mitigation and/or conditioning of development.

Strategy 12.1. The City shall ensure, where the City has regulatory authority, that General Plan policies, as applicable, are adhered to during restoration and enhancement efforts.

Action 12.1.1. Ensure that restoration and enhancement projects comply with General Plan Conservation Element Policy CE 2.6 (Restoration of Degraded Creeks).

Strategy 12.2. The City shall complete existing Capital Improvement Program projects that will improve riparian habitats throughout the City.

Action 12.2.1. Complete planned CIP project #9009 - San Jose Creek Emergency Channel Repair.

Action 12.2.2. Complete planned CIP project #9007‐1 - San Jose Creek Bike Path middle extent.

Action 12.2.3. Complete Action 13.3.1 (Hollister Avenue Bridge Replacement). In addition to decreased flooding, this project will improve fish passage at this location on San Jose Creek.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 225 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Action 12.2.4. Complete the Ellwood Trails project, including restoration along Devereux Creek.

Strategy 12.3. The City should, where funding and resources allow, plan, implement, and complete new capital projects to address fence revetment removal within City creeks.

Action 12.3.1. Develop a CIP project based on the Project Description Sheet (Appendix I, pages 1-2) for fence revetment removal. This CIP may be a programmatic approach for removal of all such revetments or as separate projects for each individual creek identified with this impairment (Maria Ygnacio, San Jose, Las Vegas, San Pedro, Glen Annie Creeks). As part of the CIP project development, identify relevant property owners and permitting requirements for removal. As an example, the fence revetment within Las Vegas Creek was installed as a condition of approval for adjacent development.

Action 12.3.2. Investigate the permit history for fence revetments, collaborate with landowners, and educate landowners about obsolete, or poorly functioning fence revetments, and about more natural alternatives, in order to effectuate fence revetment removal projects, to facilitate wildlife movement, and enhance creek aesthetics.

Strategy 12.4. The City should, where funding and resources allow, prioritize and complete new capital projects to address the removal of concrete channels within the City.

Action 12.4.1. Develop a CIP project or projects based on the Project Description Sheet (Appendix I, pages 3-4) for removal of concrete channels within City creeks. This CIP may be a programmatic approach for removal of all such concrete channels or as separate projects for each individual creek identified with this impairment (Maria Ygnacio, San Jose, Las Vegas, San Pedro, Los Carneros, Glen Annie, El Encanto, and Winchester Canyon Creeks).

Action 12.4.2. Consider prioritizing locations that do not have existing or pending projects to address impairments associated with concrete channels.

Action 12.4.3. Conduct engineering feasibility analyses in support of concrete channel removal and creek restoration projects in a timely fashion.

Strategy 12.5. The City should, where funding and resources allow, complete new capital projects to address channel knickpoints and scour within City creeks.

Action 12.5.1. Develop a CIP based on the Project Description Sheet (Appendix I, pages 5-6) to redesign channel beds to address knickpoints and scour. This CIP may be a programmatic approach for redesign of all such knickpoints and scour or as separate projects for each individual creek identified with these impairments (various locations on most creeks).

Action 12.5.2. Prioritize implementation on City-owned sites.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 226 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Strategy 12.6. The City should, where funding and resources allow, complete new capital projects to address bank repair and stabilization along City creeks.

Action 12.6.1. Develop a CIP based on the Project Description Sheet (Appendix I, pages 7-8) to address streambank repair and stabilization where needed along City creeks. This CIP may constitute a programmatic approach for redesign of all such locations with increased risk of bank failure and channel widening or as separate projects for each individual creek identified with this impairment (San Jose, San Pedro, Glen Annie, Winchester Canyon creeks).

Action 12.6.2. Ensure project consistency with General Plan Safety Element subpolicy SE 5.6 (Streambed Stabilization Projects) and the Conservation Element.

Action 12.6.3. Prioritize San Jose Creek restoration due to the significance of the creek for steelhead, existing CIP projects within the same area of the creek, and the fact that active erosion is occurring along San Jose Creek on a City-owned parcel.

Strategy 12.7. The City should support Flood Control capital projects that support habitat enhancement.

Action 12.7.1. Support funding, design, and permitting, as appropriate, for SBFCD’s San Pedro Creek Fish Passage project. The project will modify the existing concrete- lined trapezoidal channel from Calle Real at the downstream end to the terminus of the concrete lined channel at the upstream end (approximately 1,565 feet) in order to accommodate fish passage.

Strategy 12.8. The City shall develop and support projects to remove fish passage impediments within the City, whenever feasible.

Action 12.8.1. Where opportunities exist, coordinate with relevant local, state, and federal agencies and interested parties to develop projects to remove fish passage barriers to address impairments detailed in Table 31. Information provided in the Project Description Sheet (Appendix I, pages 5-6) to redesign channel beds to address knickpoints and scour can be used for further considerations regarding implementation.

Action 12.8.2. If full removal proves infeasible at specific locations, consider development of projects, with appropriate partners, to consider barrier modifications to support fish passage.

Action 12.8.3. Prioritize, when possible, permitting for fish passage projects.

Strategy 12.9. The City should develop and support projects to address incompatible uses within creeks and SPAs.

Action 12.9.1. Seek to remove incompatible uses and restore creek corridors to natural conditions where feasible. An example project could include addressing recreational disc golf activities within Evergreen Park within the El Encanto creek corridor.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 227 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

D. Flood Control, Drainage, Water Quality, and Baseflows

13. Flooding and Drainage

Goal 13. To ensure an adequate drainage system to address stormwater and flooding within City watersheds.

Strategy 13.1. Ensure existing policies and standards are applied to all new development to address impacts to stormwater and drainage within the City.

Action 13.1.1. Apply post-construction stormwater regulations consistent with Strategy 8.4.

Action 13.1.2. Apply floodplain development regulations consistent with Strategy 8.5.

Strategy 13.2. Study and evaluate drainage issues and sources of flooding in the entire City.

Action 13.2.1. Complete the planned Capital Improvement Program project #9085 - Goleta Storm Drain Master Plan. The proposed Storm Drain Master Plan will study patterns of drainage and flooding that exist throughout the entire City, including a specific focus on Old Town Goleta. The work will include evaluating the capacity of existing storm-drain pipes and channels and providing recommendations for improvements to area drainage, storm drain, and channel capacity.

Action 13.2.2. Implement the recommendations derived from the Storm Drain Master Plan as resources allow.

Strategy 13.3. Complete existing CIP projects that will improve drainage and/or reduce flooding impacts throughout the City while protecting ESHAs and fish and wildlife habitat.

Action 13.3.1. Complete the planned CIP project #9033 – Hollister Avenue Bridge Replacement. The new bridge will have a 100-year storm flow capacity.

Action 13.3.2. Complete the planned CIP project #9081 – Covington Drainage System Improvements. This project will address system capacity, peak flow attenuation, inlet efficiency and downstream conveyance between the inlet at Cathedral Oaks near Laguna Camino Vista, and the outlet at Covington Way and Lake Los Carneros.

Action 13.3.3. Complete the planned CIP project #9090 – La Patera Drainage System Improvements.

Action 13.3.4. Complete the planned CIP project #9105 – Ellwood Beach Drive Drainage Infrastructure Replacement.

Strategy 13.4. Support, as appropriate, SBFCD annual flood control maintenance activities within the City.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 228 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Action 13.4.1. Implement Action 5.1.3, including a review of SBFCD’s planned activities within the City.

Action 13.4.2. Collaborate with SBFCD to modify maintenance and mitigation practices, where appropriate, to further the Goals of the CWMP.

Strategy 13.5. Continue to support and engage in efforts to better understand the impacts of climate change on flooding within City creeks and watersheds.

Action 13.5.1. Implement Action 5.3.4.

14. Water Quality

Goal 14. Improve the water quality within City creeks to provide higher quality habitat.

Strategy 14.1. The City shall address the discharge of trash and other waste into City creeks and riparian corridors through implementation of the City’s Track 2 Trash Implementation Amendment to the City’s MS4 Permit.

Action 14.1.1. Follow the complete implementation of the Track 2 Implementation Plan to address trash impacts as staffing and funding permits. Examples of potential action items include increased street sweeping and signage and trash capture systems.

Action 14.1.2. Complete new actions and changes to City operations as identified through the Track 2 Implementation Plan process as staffing and funding permits.

Strategy 14.2. The City shall conduct water quality testing to understand impairments in water quality and potentially identify specific causes of water quality degradation.

Action 14.2.1. Implement Strategy 3.3 and associated actions.

Strategy 14.3. The City shall complete existing Capital Improvement Program projects that will improve water quality within City creeks.

Action 14.3.1. Complete the planned CIP project #9106 - Phelps Ditch Flood Control Channel (El Encanto Creek) Trash Control Structure.

Action 14.3.2. Complete the planned CIP project #9107 - Old Town South Fairview Trash Capture Devices.

Strategy 14.4. The City should, where funding and resources allow, complete new projects to address uncontrolled flows that cause hydromodification impacts and water quality issues in City creeks.

Action 14.4.1. Develop a proactive approach based on the Project Description Sheets (Appendix I, pages 9-10) to address source control retrofits where needed near City creeks.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 229 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Action 14.4.2. Seek out pilot retrofit projects on City properties, including at City Hall and the Goleta Valley Community Center if possible. When such projects are implemented, utilize outreach tools to demonstrate the success of such efforts to the general public. As an example, the Santa Barbara Creeks Division has installed permeable pavers in City owned parking lots over the past decade.

Action 14.4.3. Encourage and engage with private property owners where potential projects may successfully address hydromodification impacts associated with development built prior to existing stormwater requirements.

Strategy 14.5. The City should incorporate proposed projects in the Santa Barbara County- Wide Integrated Stormwater Resource Plan into the City’s Capital Improvement Program.

Action 14.5.1. Add a new CIP project for the Evergreen Park Bioretention and Dry Wells Project. This potential project provides water quality benefits to El Encanto Creek as well as for native vegetation, groundwater, and flood management.

Action 14.5.2. Add a new CIP project for the Dry Wells Project Concept San Pedro Creek (Stonebridge) Open Space Project. This potential project provides water quality benefits for El Encanto Creek as well as for groundwater and flood management.

Strategy 14.6. The City shall address water quality impacts through the implementation of the Homelessness Strategic Plan.

Action 14.6.1. Implement the Homelessness Strategic Plan. Implementation of this plan is expected to result in co-benefits to creek water quality and riparian habitat over time.

Strategy 14.7. The City shall, where opportunities and interest exist, coordinate with upstream and downstream regulatory agencies to address system wide water quality impacts.

Action 14.7.1. Implement Strategies 5.3 and associated actions.

Strategy 14.8. The City shall update the City’s SWMP as required by the upcoming MS4 Permit.

Action 14.8.1. Update the City’s SWMP to include any new requirements from the upcoming MS4 permit, including the Trash Provisions and the City’s Track 2 Implementation Plan for trash. Additional MS4 requirements are anticipated to include increased inspections for commercial and industrial sites; increased collaboration with school districts; and increased and integrated pest management strategy. The new MS4 permit issuance is anticipated in late 2020/early 2021. A revised SWMP is anticipated within one year of permit issue date.

15. Protection of Baseflows

Goal 15. Ensure that adequate baseflows are available in-creek to support healthy riparian habitats.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 230 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Strategy 15.1. The City should analyze baseflow conditions to adequately understand baseflow conditions and changes to those conditions within each creek in the City.

Action 15.1.1. Based on the monitoring results obtained through Action 3.4.1. (stream flow monitoring), regularly analyze stream flow data with rain and groundwater data and other variables to accurately determine if impairments to base flows exist within City creeks and their likely cause.

Action 15.1.2. Consider any input from local residents and interested parties regarding potential locations to specifically consider and focus on flow analysis.

Strategy 15.2. Where impairments to base flows are identified through Strategy 15.1, the City should investigate the source of the baseflow reductions and seek solutions to the impairment.

Action 15.2.1. Where a baseflow impairment is identified within a specific creek, and where staffing and funding supports, analyze water diversion rights as compiled in the State Water Resources Control Board Electronic Water Rights Information Management System (https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/ewrims/).

Action 15.2.2. Consider methods to address any baseflow impairments identified through flow analysis. Methods could include: • Establish baseline flow through installation of stream gauges in all City creeks and during monthly SBCK water quality sampling. • Coordination with interested water rights holders to dedicate their rights to instream flow through the State Water Resources Control Board, consistent with California Water Code Section 1707. This section of water code enables the State Water Board to approve petitions to change existing water rights for the purposes of preserving or enhancing wetlands, protecting fish and wildlife, and recreation. • Remediation of potential illegal diversions through the State Water Resources Control Board Complaints Program (see Appendix H, Potential Impairments Outside the City, for potential locations to investigate). • Investigation of potential impacts from groundwater well activities.

In many cases, the City would need to work collaboratively on any such efforts with other local jurisdictions and agencies and non-governmental organizations to address such impairments.

Strategy 15.3. The City should continue to regulate the development of new water wells within the City where permitting authority supports this activity.

Action 15.3.1. Continue an effective well moratorium within the City based on City Ordinance No. 15-05.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 231 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Action 15.3.2. Consider adoption of a water well ordinance if appropriate. Any such ordinance should include consideration of water well impacts to the Goleta Groundwater Basin and to instream water flows.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 232 October 2020

7 Glossary of Terms

Glossary of Terms10

Active Channel The width of geomorphic features formed by stream flows, typically defined by Width a break in bank slope along the edge of permanent vegetation, or the area within which sediment is actively transported (and deposited) during small to moderate storm events. Adverse Impact A negative consequence for the physical, social, or economic environment resulting from an action or project. Alluvial Fan The build-up of alluvial sediments at or near the base of steeply sloped canyons (such as along the Santa Barbara Coastal Plain). Sediments build-up over time on floodplains, creating thick wedges of materials that slope gently downstream. Alluvial Terrace Remnant portions of an alluvial fan or plain (multiple fans that coalesce together), formed as a result of downcutting of the stream into the alluvial material, that are no longer (or very rarely) inundated by the stream that deposited the materials. Terraces are often present as a series of stepped surfaces that are elevated above the existing channel, Alluvium Sediments such as silt, sand, gravel, cobble and boulder that are transported by streamflow and deposited in the channel or on the floodplain. Altered Channel When the channel has been purposefully moved from its historical (pre- Alignment European settlement) flowpath, generally for purposes of flood control or urbanization. Ambient Surroundings on all sides; used to describe measurements of existing conditions with response to water, noise, air, and other environments. Aquifer An underground, water-bearing layer of earth, porous rock, sand, or gravel, through which water can seep or be held in natural storage. Aquifers generally hold sufficient water to be used as a water supply. Bank (Left vs. Right) Left bank The left side and/or bank of a creek or river when looking in a downstream direction. Right bank The right side and/or bank of a creek or river when looking in a downstream direction. Bank Protection Boulder-sized rocks, concrete blocks, gabions, or other materials used as Structures protection from bank erosion. These structures are often used at the interface of a natural channel and a culvert or concrete-lined channel, or to slow active bank erosion. Bedforms Features on a channel bed that form as a result of geomorphic processes associated with flowing water in a stream. Bedforms include pools, riffles,

10 Where applicable, definitions acquired from the General Plan Glossary. Creek and Watershed Management Plan 233 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

bars and other features that provide channel complexity and habitat variability to the channel bed. Braided Channel A network of small channels within a larger channel, creek, or river. The network of small channels are separated by temporary land features (e.g., sand). Buffer An open area or barrier used to separate potentially incompatible activities and/or development features; for example, a required setback to separate an area of development from environmentally sensitive habitat, to reduce or eliminate the effects of the development on the habitat. Channelization The straightening and/or deepening of a watercourse for purposes of storm- runoff control or ease of navigation. Channelization often includes lining of banks with a retaining material such as concrete. Coastal Zone That portion of the Coastal Zone, as established by the California Coastal Act (within the City) of 1976, as amended, which lies within the City, as indicated on the City’s Zoning Map. Concrete-lined Sections of a creek with concrete channel banks and/or channel beds. Channels Conservation The management of natural resources to prevent waste, destruction, or degradation. Constrained Channel overbank areas that would naturally be inundated during elevated Floodplains flows, but which have been removed from the natural floodplain through downcutting of the channel as a result of local or upstream land use changes, or by construction of constraining features such as levees, berms, or raised building pads, or where the channel has otherwise been disconnected from the natural floodplain area by the construction of concrete-lined flood control channels or culverting of the channel. Core-Habitat Area A large block of natural habitat supporting suitable living conditions for a genetically diverse population of species. Although this term typically refers to habitat supporting a species, here it applies to a large area that likely serves as habitat for a variety of species. Specifically, this refers to the large area of natural habitats in the Santa Ynez Mountains and Los Padres National Forest, north of the City. Corridor, Riparian A relatively narrow area along creeks that serve as an interface between terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Corridor, Wildlife Linear features that connect larger areas of habitat that more mobile species need to live and move, but that do not necessarily provide sufficient habitat for all life history requirements of a species. Culverts Rectangular or round fully-enclosed conduits of various sizes, generally made of concrete, that provide a route for flow to pass under a road, railroad, urbanized area or other landscape feature.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 234 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Creek Linear natural and adjoining human-made features that direct precipitation to downstream waterbodies (e.g., river, lake, lagoon, ocean); a minor tributary of a river. Also see stream. Development On land, in or under water, the placement or erection of any solid material or structure, discharge or disposal of any dredged material or of any gaseous, liquid, solid, or thermal waste; grading, removing, dredging, mining, or extraction of any materials; change in the density or intensity of use of land, including, but not limited to, subdivision pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, and any other division of land, including lot splits, except where the land division is brought about in connection with the purchase of such land by a public agency for public recreational use, change in the intensity of use of water, or of access thereto; construction, reconstruction, demolition, or alteration of the size of any structure, including any facility of any private, public, or municipal utility; and the removal or harvesting of major vegetation other than for agricultural purposes, kelp harvesting, and timber operations which are in accordance with a timber harvesting plan submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Z’berg-Nejedly Forest Practices Act of 1973. Downcutting An erosive geomorphic process that works to remove sediment materials from channel beds, often during repeated elevated flow events (that may be concentrated and/or larger as a result of land use changes), that results in a lowering of the bed relative to the surrounding landscape and can ultimately result in disconnection of the stream from its natural floodplain. Downcutting and floodplain disconnection in Goleta creeks is widespread. Earthen-engineered Sections of the creek that have been extensively altered either by re- Channels alignment or by changes to cross-sectional geometry, but with bed and banks that remain predominately composed of natural material or compacted fill material. Easement A portion of land created by grant or agreement for specific purpose; an easement is the right, privilege, or interest which one party has in the land of another. Easement, A tool for acquiring open space with less than full-fee purchase, whereby a Conservation public agency buys only certain specific rights from the land owner. These may be positive rights (providing the public with the opportunity to hunt, fish, hike, or ride over the land), or they may be restrictive rights (limiting the uses to which the land owner may devote the land in the future.) Environmentally As defined in the General Plan (CE 1.1), ESHAs shall include, but are not Sensitive Habitat limited to, any areas that through professional biological evaluation are Areas (ESHA) determined to meet the following criteria: a. Any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and that could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments. b. Any area that includes habitat for species and plant communities recognized as threatened or endangered by the state or federal Creek and Watershed Management Plan 235 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

governments; plant communities recognized by the State of California (in the Terrestrial Natural Communities Inventory) as restricted in distribution and very threatened; and those habitat types of limited distribution recognized to be of particular habitat value, including wetlands, riparian vegetation, eucalyptus groves associated with monarch butterfly roosts, oak woodlands, and savannas. c. Any area that has been previously designated as an ESHA by the California Coastal Commission, the California Department of Fish and Game, City of Goleta, or other agency with jurisdiction over the designated area. (Amended by Reso. 09-59, 11/17/09) Erosion, Bank (1) The loosening and transportation of rock and soil debris by wind, rain, or running water. (2) The gradual wearing away of the upper layers of earth. Bank erosion is geomorphic process that works to remove natural sediment material and vegetation from channel banks, often during elevated flow events, that results in widening of the channel relative to previous bank positions. Bank erosion in Goleta creeks is not widespread. Fence Revetment In Goleta creeks, bank revetment consists of extensive (reach-wide) sturdy fencing and wire mesh, with or without rock backfill, installed along channel banks in the mid-1900’s most likely as a combination of protection against bank erosion and as a method of flood control. Fire Hazard Zone An area where, due to slope, fuel, weather, or other fire-related conditions, the potential loss of life and property from a fire necessitates special fire protection measures and planning before development occurs. Floodplain An area of land adjacent to a waterway, which stretches from the top‐of‐bank outward to include any land area susceptible to being inundated by floodwaters. Floodway The channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one foot. Also referred to as “regulatory floodway.” General Plan The City of Goleta General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan. Geomorphic Processes related to the formation and alteration of landforms on the earth’s Processes surface. These include a wide range of physical interactions, such as weathering, mass wasting (e.g., landslides), erosion of surfaces (including stream bed and banks), and the movement and deposition of sediments; these actions are present and active in all watersheds and in all stream channels. Groundwater Water under the earth's surface, often confined to aquifers capable of supplying wells and springs.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 236 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Groundwater The natural process of infiltration and percolation of rainwater from land Recharge areas or streams through permeable soils into water-holding rocks that provide underground storage ("aquifers"). Habitat Linkage An area that possesses sufficient cover, food, water, and/or other essential elements for survival and serves as a movement pathway between two or more large areas of habitat. Habitat Patches A defined area used by species for breeding, socializing, or obtaining resources such as food, water, or shelter. Impervious Surface Surface through which water cannot penetrate, such as roof, road, sidewalk, and paved parking lot. The amount of impervious surface increases with development and establishes the need for drainage facilities to carry the increased runoff. Knickpoint A part of a stream channel where there is an abrupt change in channel slope, typically associated with channel bed erosion, and often caused by concentrated streamflows that induce channel downcutting. Knickpoints may either be stable (a steep drop in the channel downstream of a culvert, for example) or active, with the break in slope migrating upstream as the stream bed continues to erode and downcut. MAP (mean annual The long-term average amount of rainfall that falls per year at a particular precipitation) location. MAP is often quantified either per calendar year (January through December) or by water year (October through the following September). Minimize To reduce or lessen, but not necessarily to eliminate. Mitigate To ameliorate, alleviate, or avoid to the extent reasonably feasible Non-Point Source Pollutants generated over broad areas without a single identifiable discharge Pollutants point to water, such as agricultural and urban land uses. Open Space Natural to semi-natural spaces used by wildlife. These areas support less natural habitat than those characterized in this report as “habitat patches,” but provide space, such as in parks, golf courses, or the sides of roads or highways, that some wildlife can use for various life-history functions. Point Source Pollutants with identifiable discharge points, such as wastewater treatment Pollutants facilities or industrial waste discharges. Rare or Endangered A species of animal or plant listed in: Sections 670.2 or 670.5, Title 14, Species California Administrative Code; or Title 50, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 17.11 or Section 17.2, pursuant to the Federal Endangered Species Act designating species as rare, threatened, or endangered. Regulatory The channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that Floodway must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than a designated height. Riparian Lands Riparian lands are comprised of the vegetative and wildlife areas adjacent to perennial and intermittent streams. Riparian areas are delineated by the existence of plant species normally found near freshwater.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 237 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Runoff That portion of rain or snow that does not percolate into the ground and is discharged into streams instead. Runoff, Storm Surplus surface water generated by rainfall that does not seep into the earth but flows overland to flowing or stagnant bodies of water. Scour Localized erosion of a stream bed or bank caused by concentrated or high velocity flows. Scour often occurs at the downstream end of a concrete-lined or culverted channel where it transitions to a natural channel, or where an in- channel obstruction or constriction directs high-velocity flow toward the channel bed or bank. Setback The horizontal distance between the property line and any structure. Seral Community A plant or vegetation community in an intermediate stage. Stream A flowing body of water, typically smaller than a river. Ephemeral A stream that flows only briefly during and following a period of rainfall. Intermittent A stream that normally flows for at least thirty (30) days after the last major rain of the season and is dry a large part of the year. Perennial A stream that has continuous flow in parts of its stream bed all year-round during years of normal rainfall. Streamside Creek channel, wetlands and/or riparian vegetation related to the creek Protection Area hydrology, and an adjacent upland buffer area. (SPA) Substrate The extent to which coarse substrate (e.g., gravel, cobbles, boulders) are Embeddedness surrounded by fine sediment (e.g., silt, sand, mud). Topography Configuration of a surface, including its relief and the position of natural and human-made features. Top of Bank The line formed by the intersection of the general plane of the sloping side of the watercourse with the general plane of the upper generally level ground along the watercourse; or, if the existing sloping side of the watercourse is steeper than the angle of repose (critical slope) of the soil or geologic structure involved, “top of the bank” shall mean the intersection of a plane beginning at the toe of the bank and sloping at the angle of repose with the generally level ground along the watercourse. The angle of repose is assumed to be 1.5 (horizontal): 1 (vertical) unless otherwise specified by a geologist or soils engineer with knowledge of the soil or geologic structure involved. Watercourse Natural or once natural flowing (perennially or intermittently) water including rivers, streams, and creeks. Includes natural waterways that have been channelized, but does not include manmade channels, ditches, and underground drainage and sewage systems. Watershed The total area above a given point on a watercourse that contributes water to its flow; the entire region drained by a waterway or watercourse that drains into an outflow point, such as a lake, reservoir, or ocean.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 238 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Wetlands Wetlands are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Lands classified as wetlands generally have one or more of the three indicators: 1) a substrate that is predominately undrained hydric soils; 2) a preponderance of plants adapted to moist areas, or hydrophytic plants; or 3) a surface or subsurface water source which is present for sufficient periods of time to promote formation of hydric soils or growth of hydrophytic plant species. Wildlife Corridors Linear features that connect large patches of natural open space and provide avenues for dispersal or migration of animals and dispersal of plants (e.g., via wildlife vectors).

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 239 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 240 October 2020

8 References

Bedsworth, L., D. Cayan, G. Franco, L. Fisher, and S. Ziaja. (California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, California Energy Commission, California Public Utilities Commission). 2018. Statewide Summary Report. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Publication number: SUMCCCA4-2018-013.

Bossard, C.C., J.M. Randall, and M.C. Hoshovsky. 2000. Invasive Plants of California’s Wildlands. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.

Brattstrom, B.H., and M.C. Bondello. 1983. “Effects of Off-Road Vehicle Noise on Desert Vertebrates.” In Environmental Effects of Off-Road Vehicles: Impacts and Management in Arid Regions, ed. R.H. Webb and H.G. Wilshire. New York, New York: Springer-Verlag.

Brooks, M., and M. Lusk. 2008. Fire Management and Invasive Plants: A Handbook. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Arlington Virginia, 27 pp. Accessed July 2020. https://www.fws.gov/invasives/pdfs/usfws_firemgtandinvasivesplants_a_handbook.pdf.

CAL FIRE. 2020. Incident Database. Accessed May 2020. https://www.fire.ca.gov/incidents/ IncidentSearch?q=cave+fire.

Calflora. 2020. The Calflora Database. Web Application. Accessed May 2020. https://www.calflora.org/

Cal-IPC (California Invasive Plant Council). 2020. The Cal-IPC Inventory. Last accessed July 2020. https://www.cal-ipc.org/plants/inventory/.

California Chaparral Institute. 2020. “Type Conversion – The Impact of Excessive Fire Webpage.” Accessed October 2020. https://www.californiachaparral.org/threats/too-much-fire/.

CDFW (Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2020. Special Animals List. California Natural Diversity Database, Biogeographic Data Branch. Accessed July 2020. https://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/list.html.

CDFW and CalFish. 2020. Passage Assessment Database. Accessed July 2020. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/PAD/Default.aspx.

City of Goleta. 2006. General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan. City of Goleta Planning and Environmental Services Department. September 2006.

City of Goleta. 2010. Storm Water Management Plan. City of Goleta Department of Community Services. February 2010.

City of Goleta. 2012. Community Wildfire Protection Plan. Prepared by Geo Elements, LLC. Prepared for the City of Goleta. March 20, 2012.

City of Goleta. 2015. Draft Coastal Hazards Vulnerability Assessment and Fiscal Impact Report. Prepared by the City of Goleta. November 2015.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 241 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

City of Goleta. 2017. Goleta Urban Forest Management Plan. Adopted June 7, 2011; Amended January 26, 2017; Amended and Approved February 21, 2017.

City of Goleta. 2019. Final Ellwood Mesa/Sperling Preserve Open Space Monarch Butterfly Habitat Management Plan. City of Goleta Planning and Environmental Review Department. March.

City of Goleta. 2020a. Parks, Facilities and Playgrounds Master Plan. City of Goleta Neighborhood Services and Public Safety Department. Adopted January 16, 2020.

City of Goleta. 2020b. “Neighborhood Parks and Open Spaces Interactive Map.” Accessed July 2020. https://www.cityofgoleta.org/city-hall/public-works/parks-and-open- space/neighborhood-parks-map.

City of Goleta, County of Santa Barbara, and University of California, Santa Barbara. 2004. Draft Ellwood-Devereux Coast Open Space and Habitat Management Plan. March 22, 2004.

CNPS (California Native Plant Society). 2020. “Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants” (online edition, v8-024). Sacramento, California: California Native Plant Society. Accessed February 2020. https://www.rareplants.cnps.org.

CNRA (California Natural Resources Agency). 2018. Safeguarding California Plan: 2018 Update. California’s Climate Adaptation Strategy. January.

County of Santa Barbara. 2017. Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. County of Santa Barbara Office of Emergency Management. Last Accessed October 2020. http://www.countyofsb.org/ceo/asset.c/3416

County of Santa Barbara. 2019a. 2019 Santa Barbara County Homeless Point-In-Time County and Survey. Last Accessed October 2020. http://countyofsb.org/uploadedFiles/housing/Content/Homeless_Assistance/HomlessAssis tance_Site_Update_2019/2019-Point-In-Time-Count-Report.pdf

County of Santa Barbara. 2019b. Historical Rainfall Data. Last Accessed October 2020. http://countyofsb.org/pwd/monthlyrain.sbc

County of Santa Barbara. 2000. Lake Carneros County Park, Goleta, Santa Barbara County, California 1999 Updated Management Plan. Santa Barbara County Parks Department. Published January 2000.

County of Santa Barbara. 2002. Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual. County of Santa Barbara Planning and Development Department. Published May 1992. Revised October 2002.

County of Santa Barbara. 2020. The Santa Barbara County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Website. http://countyofsb.org/pwd/floodcontrol.sbc

Dagit, R., M.T. Booth, M. Gomez, T. Hovey, S. Howard, S.D. Lewis, S. Jacobson, M. Larson, D. McCanne, and T.H. Robinson. 2020. “Occurrences of Steelhead Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in Southern California, 1994–2018.” California Fish and Wildlife 106(1): 39–58.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 242 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Doherty, T.S., A.S. Glen, D.G. Nimmo, E.G. Ritchie, and C.R. Dickman. 2016. Invasive Predators and Global Biodiversity Loss. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 113: 11261-11265.

Ecology Consultants, Inc. 2004. Santa Barbara County Creeks Bioassessment Program, 2003 Annual Report and Index of Biological Integrity.

Ecology Consultants Inc. 2016. Southern Coastal Santa Barbara Streams and Estuaries Bioassessment Program. 2016 Report. Prepared for the City of Santa Barbara, Creeks Division and County of Santa Barbara, Project Clean Water.

ECORP (ECORP Consulting). 2008. Tidewater Goby and Benthic Macroinvertebrate Results of 2008 Monitoring Surveys for Santa Barbara Airport, Santa Barbara County, California. Prepared for the URS Corporation.

EDC. 2019. Goleta’s Creeks and Watersheds: Opportunities for Enhancement and Restoration. May 22.

EDC. 2020. Goleta’s Creek sand Watersheds: Opportunities for Enhancement and Restoration. 2020 Addendum. June 10.

Edhat. 2019. “Mountain Lion Spotted 3 Times Near UCSB.” September 9, 2019. https://www.edhat.com/news/mountain-lion-spotted-3-times-near-ucsb.

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2017. “Climate Change.” Last updated May 12, 2017. Accessed October 2020. https://archive.epa.gov/epa/climate-change-science/causes- climate-change.html

EPA. 2020. “Movement of Aquatic Trash.” Last accessed June 2020. https://www.epa.gov/trash- free-waters/movement-aquatic-trash#1.

FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2020. The National Flood Hazard Layer. Accessed February 2020.

Frank, R.M. 2012. The Public Trust Doctrine: Assessing Its Recent Past and Charting Its Future. California Environmental Law and Policy Center, University of California, Davis School of Law.

GSMC (The Goleta Slough Management Committee). 2015. Goleta Slough Area Sea Level Rise and Management Plan. Prepared by ESA. Prepared for The Goleta Slough Management Committee. August. http://www.goletaslough.org/committee/2016-goleta-slough-management-plan/.

GWD (Goleta Water District). 2016. Groundwater Management Plan, Goleta Groundwater Basin 2016 Update. Prepared by GSI Water Solutions, Inc. Last Accessed October 2020. https://www.goletawater.com/assets/uploads/documents/groundwater- management/Goleta%20Groundwater%20Management%20Final%202016%20Update_11-8- 2016_WEB.pdf

Holland, R.F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. Nongame-Heritage Program, California Department of Fish and Game. October 1986.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 243 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Jennings, M.R. and M.P. Hayes. 1994. Decline of Native Ranid Frogs in the Desert Southwest. In Herpetology of the North American Deserts. Proceedings of a Symposium. Edited by P.R. Brown and J.W. Wright. October 1994.

Jepson eFlora. 2020. Jespon eFlora. Last Accessed October 2020. https://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/

KPCC Environment and Science. 2017. “The Invasive Flammable Plants Making California’s Wildfires Worse.” December 12, 2017. https://www.scpr.org/news/2017/12/12/78789/ the-invasive-flammable-plants-making-california-s/.

Kus, B., S.L. Hopp, R.R. Johnson, and B.T. Brown. 2020. Bell’s Vireo (Vireo bellii), version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.belvir.01

Lehman, P.E. 2020. The Birds of Santa Barbara County. June. Last Accessed October 2020. http://sbcobirding.com/lehmanbosbc.html

Leydecker, A. 2006. The Goleta Slough Watershed: A Review of Data Collected from October 2005 through September 2006 by the Channelkeeper Goleta Stream-Team. Draft Report. December 15, 2006.

Lovich, J.E., and J.R. Ennen. 2011. “Wildlife Conservation and Solar Energy Development in the Desert Southwest, United States.” BioScience 61(12): 982–992.

Meade, D.E., J. Griffiths, C. van der Heide, F. Villablanca. 2018. Monarch Butterfly Overwintering Sites, Santa Barbara County, California. Althouse and Meade, Inc. Paso Robles, California.

MFWP (Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks). 2012. “A Landowner’s Guide to Wildlife Friendly Fences: How to Build Fence with Wildlife in Mind.” Accessed June 2020. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov /wps/PA_NRCSConsumption/download?cid=nrcseprd1080608&ext=pdf.

Miller, R.L., W.L. Bradford, and N.E. Peters. 1988. Specific Conductance: Theoretical Considerations and Application to Analytical Quality Control. U.S. Geological Survey Water- Supply Paper 2311. http://pubs.usgs.gov/wsp/2311/report.pdf.

Minor, S.A., K.S. Kellogg, R.G. Stanley, L.D. Gurrola, E.A. Keller, and T.R. Brandt. 2009. Geologic Map of the Santa Barbara Coastal Plain Area, Santa Barbara County, California: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3001, scale 1:25,000, 1 sheet, pamphlet, 38 p.

Myers, M.R., D.R. Cayan, S.F. Iacobellis, J.M. Melack, R.E. Beighley, P.L. Barnard, J.E. Dugan, and H.M. Page. 2017. Santa Barbara Area Coastal Ecosystem Vulnerability Assessment. CASG- 17-009

NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2012. Southern California Steelhead Recovery Plan. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Southwest Regional Office, National Marine Fisheries Service, Long Beach, California. January 2012.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 244 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

Noozhawk. 2016. “Black Bear Captured After Wandering Through Western Goleta Neighborhoods.” https://www.noozhawk.com/article/black_bear_spotted_in_western_goleta_neighborhood.

OWEB (Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board). 1999. “Chapter 14: Stream Shade and Canopy Cover Monitoring Methods.” Water Quality Monitoring: Technical Guide Book. Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board. http://www.oregon.gov/ODF/privateforests/docs/ShadeProt.pdf?ga=t.

Radke, L. 2006. “pH of Coastal Waterways.” OzCoasts: Australian Online Coastal Information website. https://ozcoasts.org.au/indicators/biophysical-indicators/ph_coastal_waterways/.

RHJV (Riparian Habitat Joint Venture). 2004. Version 2.0. The Riparian Bird Conservation Plan: A Strategy for Reversing the Decline of Riparian Associated Birds in California. California Partners in Flight. http://www.prbo.org/calpif/pdfs/riparian.v-2.pdf.

Rich, C., and T. Longcore. 2006. Ecological Effects of Artificial Night Lighting. Island Press.

RWQCB (Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board). 2019. Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin, June 2019 Edition. California Environmental Protection Agency.

Sawyer J., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. 1300pp.

SBCCE (Santa Barbara County Cooperating Entities). 2018. Santa Barbara County-Wide Integrated Stormwater Resource Plan. Prepared by Geosyntec with assistance from Dudek. September 2018. Revised in 2019.

SBCK (Santa Barbara Channelkeeper). 2006. The Goleta Slough Watershed. December 15, 2006.

SBCK. 2014. Stream Team Data Report, Goleta Valley Watersheds. Water Year 2014 (October 1, 2013 – September 30, 2014).

SBFCD (Santa Barbara County Flood Control and Water Conservation District). 2017. Flood Control Maintenance in the Goleta Slough. Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2000031092. October. Prepared by Padre Associates.

Schirmer, A.E., C. Gallemore, T. Liu, S. Magle, E. DiNello, H. Ahmed, and T. Gilday. 2019. “Mapping Behaviorally Relevant Light Pollution Levels to Improve Urban Habitat Planning.” Scientific Reports 9:11925.

Smith, C.F. 1998. A Flora of the Santa Barbara Region, California. Second Edition. Santa Barbara Botanic Gardens & Capra Press

Stoecker, M.W., and Conception Coast Project. 2002. Steelhead Assessment and Recovery Opportunities in Southern Santa Barbara County, California. June 2002.

StreamStats. 2020. StreamStats: Streamflow Statistics and Spatial Analysis Tools for Water- Resources Applications. U.S. Geological Survey. Last Accessed October 20202. https://www.usgs.gov/mission-areas/water-resources/science/streamstats-streamflow- statistics-and-spatial-analysis-tools?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 245 October 2020 CITY OF GOLETA

SWAMP (Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program). 2020. Clean Water Team Citizen Monitoring Program: Guidance Compendium for Watershed Monitoring and Assessment.

Twedt, B. 1993. A comparative ecology of Rana aurora Baird and Girard and Rana catesbeiana Shaw at Freshwater Lagoon, Humboldt County, California. Master’s Thesis, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California. 53 pp. plus appendix

UC Davis (University of California, Davis). 2017. Tricolored Blackbird Portal: Where to see Tricolors. Last Accessed October 2020. https://tricolor.ice.ucdavis.edu/

USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 2020. Fact Sheets and Plant Guides. Last Accessed October 2020. https://plants.usda.gov/java/factSheet

USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2002. Recovery Plan for the California Red-Legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii). Region 1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. May 28.

USFWS. 2020. Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC). Accessed February 2020. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/.

USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2020a. Geospatial Multi-Agency Coordination (GeoMAC) Wildland Fire Support Tool. Accessed January 2020. https://www.geomac.gov/.

USGS. 2020b. National Water Information System: Web Interface. Last Accessed October 2020. https://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis

Walsh, J., D. Wuebbles, K. Hayhoe, J. Kossin, K. Kunkel, G. Stephens, P. Thorne, R. Vose, M. Wehner, J. Willis, D. Anderson, S. Doney, R. Feely, P. Hennon, V. Kharin, T. Knutson, F. Landerer, T. Lenton, J. Kennedy, and R. Somerville, 2014: Ch. 2: Our Changing Climate. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research Program, 19-67. doi:10.7930/J0KW5CXT.

Wetzel, R.G. 2001. Limnology: Lake and River Ecosystems (3rd ed.). San Diego: Academic Press.

Wilcove, D.S., C.H. McLellan, and A.P. Dobson. 1986. “Habitat Fragmentation in the Temperate Zone.” In Conservation Biology: The Science of Scarcity and Diversity, edited by M.E. Soulé, 237–256. Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer Associates Inc.

Wilcox, B., and D. Murphy. 1985. “Conservation Strategy: The Effects of Fragmentation on Extinction.” The American Naturalist 125:879–887.

Xerces. 2020. “Find an Overwintering Site.” https://www.westernmonarchcount.org/find-an- overwintering-site-near-you/.

Creek and Watershed Management Plan 246 October 2020