DOCSLIB.ORG

Chester Creek, University Lake, and Westchester Lagoon, Anchorage, Alaska

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chester Creek, University Lake, and Westchester Lagoon, Anchorage, Alaska Total Maximum Daily Load for Fecal Coliform in Chester Creek, University Lake, and Westchester Lagoon, Anchorage, Alaska FINAL Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 555 Cordova Street Anchorage , Alaska 99501 May 2005 This page is intentionally left blank Fecal Coliform TMDL Chester Creek Watershed CONTENTS Executive Summary.....................................................................................................................................ix 1.0 Description of the Watershed and Waterbodies................................................................................1 1.1 Location.......................................................................................................................................1 1.2 Population....................................................................................................................................3 1.3 Topography..................................................................................................................................4 1.4 Land Cover..................................................................................................................................4 1.5 Climate ........................................................................................................................................8 1.6 Hydrology....................................................................................................................................9 2.0 Water Quality Standards, TMDL Target and Area of Coverage ....................................................11 2.1 Applicable Water Quality Standards .........................................................................................11 2.2 Designated Use Impacts ............................................................................................................12 2.3 Area of Coverage.......................................................................................................................12 3.0 Data Analysis..................................................................................................................................13 3.1 Previous Studies........................................................................................................................13 3.2 Data Inventory...........................................................................................................................14 3.3 Data Analysis.............................................................................................................................14 3.3.1 Station CH11, South Fork Chester Creek, Upper Chester Creek Subwatershed ..................17 3.3.2 Station CH9, South Fork Chester Creek, Upper Chester Creek Subwatershed ....................18 3.3.3 Station ULI (inlet to University Lake), South Fork Chester Creek, Upper Chester Creek Subwatershed ........................................................................................................................20 3.3.4 Station ULO (outlet of University Lake), South Fork Chester Creek, Upper Chester Creek Subwatershed ........................................................................................................................21 3.3.5 Station CH6, Downstream of Station ULO, South Fork Chester Creek, Upper Chester Creek Subwatershed ........................................................................................................................23 3.3.6 Station CH7A, Middle Fork Chester Creek, Upper Chester Creek Subwatershed ...............24 3.3.7 Station CH7, Downstream of Station CH7A, Middle Fork Chester Creek, Upper Chester Creek Subwatershed..............................................................................................................26 3.3.8 Station CH10, North Fork Chester Creek, Lower Chester Creek Subwatershed..................27 3.3.9 Station CH2, Chester Creek, Lower Chester Creek Subwatershed.......................................29 3.3.10 Station CL3, Near Inlet from Chester Creek to Westchester Lagoon...................................30 3.3.11 Station CL2, Near Outlet into Cook Inlet .............................................................................32 4.0 Pollutant Sources ............................................................................................................................35 4.1 Point Sources, Nonpoint Sources, and Natural Sources ............................................................35 5.0 Technical Approach ........................................................................................................................37 5.1 Modeling Approach...................................................................................................................37 5.2 Model Configuration .................................................................................................................38 5.2.1 Watershed Subdivision..........................................................................................................38 5.2.2 Watershed Parameters...........................................................................................................38 5.2.3 Meteorological Data..............................................................................................................43 5.3 Model Calibration......................................................................................................................43 5.3.1 Hydrologic Calibration..........................................................................................................43 5.3.2 Water Quality Calibration .....................................................................................................43 5.4 Model Application.....................................................................................................................44 6.0 Chester Creek Allocation Analysis.................................................................................................46 6.1 Identification of Loading Capacity............................................................................................46 6.2 Load Allocation.........................................................................................................................53 6.3 Wasteload Allocation................................................................................................................53 6.4 Margin of Safety........................................................................................................................56 6.5 Seasonal Variation.....................................................................................................................56 Final i Chester Creek Watershed Fecal Coliform TMDL 6.6 Implementation Scenarios.........................................................................................................56 7.0 University Lake Allocation Analysis..............................................................................................73 7.1 Identification of Allowable Loads.............................................................................................73 7.2 Load Allocation.........................................................................................................................76 7.3 Wasteload Allocation................................................................................................................76 7.4 Implementation Scenarios.........................................................................................................78 8.0 Westchester Lagoons Allocation Analysis......................................................................................85 8.1 Identification of Allowable Loads.............................................................................................85 8.2 Load Allocation.........................................................................................................................88 8.3 Wasteload Allocation................................................................................................................88 8.4 Implementation Scenarios.........................................................................................................90 9.0 Implementation ...............................................................................................................................97 10.0 Monitoring ....................................................................................................................................100 11.0 Public Comments and Responsiveness Summary.........................................................................101 12.0 References.....................................................................................................................................103 Appendix A: SWMM Calibration.............................................................................................................A-1 Appendix B: Annual Average Subbasin Fecal Coliform Loads ..............................................................B-1 ii Final Fecal Coliform TMDL Chester Creek Watershed TABLES Table 1-1. Major subwatersheds and drainage within the Chester Creek watershed. ..............................2 Table 1-2. The Municipality of Anchorage land cover classification system ..........................................5 Table 1-3. Land cover within the Chester Creek watershed.....................................................................5 Table 1-4. Land cover within the major subwatersheds
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Recommendations
    RECOMMENDATIONS . 7-1 Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan 7-2 . A Call to Action . 7-3 Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan 7-4 7-5 Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan 7-6 Roads Scoring Points Criterion 0 1 3 5 Some preliminary Final engineering design and/or ROW purchased; Project readiness No work started completed or environmental ready to construct nearing completion work complete Needed in short Needed in short term (2011- term—helps to Can wait until Long-term need 2023)— addresses Timing of need complete grid beyond 2035 (2023-2035) major system or improves safety/capacity facility to standards needs Next logical or final Logical sequencing N/A New project N/A phase of an existing road Functional classification Local Collector Arterial/expressway Freeway Number of modes (automobile, pedestrian, bike, transit, freight Single Two Three Four or more or intermodal) 1st quartile Cost/length/AADT 4th quartile 3rd quartile 2nd quartile (highest score) AADT = Annual Average Daily Traffic N/A = not applicable 7-7 Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan 7-8 Criterion Scoring Points 2010 Cost Cost/ Project Project Timing of Logical Functional Multi-modal Project Name Project Location Estimate Length/ Total Number Readiness Need Sequencing Classification Function ($ million) AADT Seward Hwy - Dimond Blvd Dimond Blvd to Dowling 101
    [Show full text]
  • Chester Creek Watershed Plan (Draft)
    Prepared for: The Municipal Planning Department and Watershed Management Services 1 Prepared by: Anchorage Waterways Council Rev. 4, September 2014 (Draft) Table of Contents Executive Summary...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Importance of Watershed Planning .................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Regulations and Plans ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 2 Creation of the Plan................................................................................................................................................................................................ 10 History of the Plan and Participants ...............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1964 Great Alaska Earthquake—A Photographic Tour of Anchorage, Alaska
    1964 Great Alaska Earthquake—A Photographic Tour of Anchorage, Alaska Open-File Report 2014–1086 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover: Comparison photographs taken from the same location on 4th Avenue looking east through the intersection with C Street, Anchorage, Alaska. (Top photograph taken by U.S. Army, 1964; bottom photograph taken by Robert G. McGimsey, 2013) 1964 Great Alaska Earthquake—A Photographic Tour of Anchorage, Alaska By Evan E. Thoms, Peter J. Haeussler, Rebecca D. Anderson, and Robert G. McGimsey Open-File Report 2014–1086 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2014 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Suggested citation: Thoms, E.E., Haeussler, P.J., Anderson, R.D., and McGimsey, R.G., 2014, 1964 Great Alaska Earthquake—A photographic tour of Anchorage, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2014-1086, 48 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20141086. ISSN 2331-1258 (online) Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Stream Temperature Monitoring Network for Cook Inlet Salmon Streams 2008 - 2012
    STREAM TEMPERATURE MONITORING NETWORK FOR COOK INLET SALMON STREAMS 2008 - 2012 SYNTHESIS REPORT By COOK INLETKEEPER This document serves as a final project report for: Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ACWA 13-01) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (F12AC01078) Prepared by: Sue Mauger Cook Inletkeeper 3734 Ben Walters Lane Homer, AK 99603 (907) 235-4068 [email protected] www.inletkeeper.org October 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements Executive Summary ___________________________________________ 1 Background ___________________________________________ 2 Project Goals and Objectives _______________________________ 2 Methods ___________________________________________ 3 Sampling Design Temperature Data Collection Watershed Characteristics Temperature Metrics Models Climate Change Analysis Results _________________________________________________ 12 Water and Air Temperature (2008-2012) Models Climate Change Implications Discussion ___________________________________________ 24 Citations ___________________________________________ 28 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This 5-year synthesis would not have been possible without the contributions of Dr. Dan Rinella and Becky Shaftel with the University of Alaska Anchorage – Alaska Natural Heritage Program, Jason Leppi with The Wilderness Society, and Branden Bornemann with the Kenai Watershed Forum. Their insights, time and talents were invaluable. Special thanks to Marcus Geist, The Nature Conservancy of Alaska; Robert Ruffner, Kenai Watershed Forum; Jeff and Gay Davis, Aquatic Restoration
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4 Hazards in Anchorage
    Anchorage All-Hazard Mitigation Plan October 2004 CHAPTER 4 HAZARDS IN ANCHORAGE One of the requirements of a hazard mitigation plan is that is describes the hazards that affect a jurisdiction. This chapter profiles the hazards that occur in Anchorage by identifying each hazard’s location, extent, previous occurrences, and the probability of future events. Hazard mitigation plans are also required to summarize the vulnerability to the hazards. The vulnerability information was calculated by identifying the parcels that intersect each of the hazard zones. Some notes about this method are: • Not all the hazard GIS layers used to perform this analysis cover the entire MOA. Most only include a portion of the Municipality. (Parcels could be at risk but the risk area has not been mapped and included in the GIS yet.) • The taxable value is based on 2003 MOA tax assessor data • Using the taxable Value underestimates the vulnerability because: - Some parcels, such as schools, are not taxed and therefore do not have a taxable value. - Some parcels are treated as economic units (separate parcels that are treated as 1 for tax purposes) and do not have taxable values listed. - Taxable value does not consider the value of the contents. - The taxable value is the sum on the land and building taxable values. This is different from the total taxable value listed in the tax assessor’s file because tax exemptions have been applied to those totals. • If a parcel was in multiple risk areas, the entire parcel was considered to be in the highest risk area (i.e., no partial parcels).
    [Show full text]
  • Transport on Trails: a Cyclist Typology Study of Anchorage’S Greenbelt Trails
    TRANSPORT ON TRAILS: A CYCLIST TYPOLOGY STUDY OF ANCHORAGE’S GREENBELT TRAILS Supervised Research Project Report Submitted in partial fulfillment of the Master of Urban Planning degree Submitted by: Nicolette Dent Supervised by: Ahmed El-Geneidy School of Urban Planning, McGill University May 15, 2020 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project was made possible through support from the Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). Special thanks to Barrett Hedges and the Eco-Counter Montreal team for the training on counter data and project inspiration. I am grateful to the Anchorage Park Foundation, the Municipality of Anchorage Parks and Recreation and Traffic departments, and Bike Anchorage for their support of the project and assistance distributing the survey. And thank you to the enthusiastic group of Anchorage cyclists who donated their time to answer the survey questions. Many thanks to Professor Ahmed El-Geneidy, whose communication and supervision never wavered even during the most unprecedented situation. To Gladys Chan, thank you for never missing a beat. Finally, endless gratitude to my family and friends for their emotional support from all corners of the continent. 2 POLICY BRIEF THE ISSUE value the social aspects of cycling and are concerned The Municipality of Anchorage, Alaska and many local about secure bicycle parking. The typology results confirm partner organizations share a goal to increase transport the mixed utilitarian and recreational patterns seen from cycling rates in order to improve quality of life and
    [Show full text]
  • Earthquake Alaska Are We Prepared?
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY EARTHQUAKE ALASKA ARE WE PREPARED? Edited by Rodney Combellick1 Roger Head2 RandaU Updike3 Open-File Report 94-218 Prepared in cooperation with ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF GEOLOGICAL & GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS Alaska Division of Geological & 2Alaska Department of Transportation & 3U.S. Geological Survey Geophysical Surveys Public Facilities Reston, Virginia Fairbanks, Alaska Anchorage, Alaska 1994 EARTHQUAKE ALASKA ARE WE PREPARED? A conference on the status of knowledge and preparedness for earthquake hazards in Alaska November 19-20,1992 Anchorage, Alaska SPONSORED BY: U.S. Geological Survey Federal Emergency Management Agency Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities Alaska Division of Emergency Services Municipality of Anchorage ORGANIZING COMMITTEE: Roger Head (Conference Chair), Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities Rodney Combellick, Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys Mike Webb, Alaska Division of Emergency Services John Aho,CH2M Hill David Cole, DOWL Engineers Robert Steward, Municipality of Anchorage EDITORS Rodney A. Combellick, Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys Roger D. Head, Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities Randall G. Updike, U.S. Geological Survey Front Cover: View of Anchorage looking east soon after the great Alaska earthquake of March 27,1964. Many homes in the Turnagain heights subdivision were destroyed
    [Show full text]
  • Water-Quality Conditions of Chester Creek, Anchorage, Alaska, 1998 2001
    Prepared as part of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program Water-Quality Conditions of Chester Creek, Anchorage, Alaska, 1998 2001 Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5229 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover Photograph. Chester Creek at Arctic Boulevard looking upstream (east), May 21, 2003. Photograph taken by Janet P. Curran, U.S. Geological Survey. Water-Quality Conditions of Chester Creek, Anchorage, Alaska, 1998–2001 By Roy L. Glass and Robert T. Ourso Prepared as part of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5229 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2006 For Additional Information: U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Science Center, Chief Water Resources Office, 4230 University Dr., Suite 201, Anchor- age, AK 99508-4664. Information regarding the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program is available on the Internet via the World Wide Web: http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/ For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1–888–ASK–USGS Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Glass, Roy L., and Ourso, Robert T., 2006, Water-Quality Conditions of Chester Creek, Anchorage, Alaska, 1998–2001; U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Centennial Edition 1913 - 2013
    Key to Political Party Affiliation Designations (AIP) Alaskan Independence (L) Libertarian (D) Democrat (NP) No Party (HR) Home Rule (P) Progressive (I) Independent (PD) Progressive Democrat (ID) Independent Democrat (PHR) Progressive Home Rule (IR) Independent Republican (R) Republican Published by: The Legislative Affairs Agency State Capitol, Room 3 Juneau, AK 99801 (907) 465-3800 This publication is also available online at: http://w3.legis.state.ak.us/pubs/pubs.php ALASKA LEGISLATURE ROSTER OF MEMBERS CENTENNIAL EDITION 1913 - 2013 Also includes Delegates to and Officers of the Alaska Constitutional Convention (1955-56), Governors, and Alaska Congressional Representatives since 1913 2013 In 2012, the Alaska Legislative Celebration Commission was created when the Legislature passed Senate Concurrent Resolution 24. Seven Alaskans were named to the Commission which organized events to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the First Territorial Legislature: two senators, two representatives and three members of the public. In addition, the Commission includes two alternate members, one from the Senate and another from the House of Representatives. The Alaska Legislative Centennial Commission consists of the following members: Senator Gary Stevens, Chair Senator Lyman Hoffman Representative Mike Chenault Representative Bill Stoltze Member Member Member Terrence Cole Rick Halford Clem V. Tillion Public Member Public Member Public Member Senator Anna Fairclough Representative Cathy Muñoz Alternate Member Alternate Member FORWARD Many staff and Legislators have been involved in creating this Centennial Edition of our annual Roster of Members. I want to thank all of them for their hard work and willingness to go beyond expectations. We have had nearly 800 individual Legislators in the past 100 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Acknowledging Landscape: Walking Paths Towards Indigenous Urbanism
    Acknowledging Landscape: Walking Paths Towards Indigenous Urbanism Melanie M Hess A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Landscape Architecture University of Washington 2021 Committee: Jeffrey Hou Nancy Rottle Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Department of Landscape Architecture ©Copyright 2021 University of Washington Melanie M. Hess Abstract Acknowledging Landscape: Walking Paths Towards Indigenous Urbanism Melanie M. Hess Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Jeffrey Hou Department of Landscape Architecture In North America, all cities have beneath them Indigenous land and are set within Indigenous landscapes, and yet this connection is rarely explicit in the physical environment. Much of urban development has been constructed as part of the settler colonial project that has sought to replace Indigenous land tenure through destruction of Indigenous lifeways on the landscape, in order to build something new as settler colonialism has always destroyed to replace (Wolfe 2006). But the lands on which cities reside continue to remain Indigenous lands so long as Indigenous people continue to relate to them. Landscape architecture as a field and discipline works with the land as its medium, and yet the discipline has yet to truly acknowledge the implications of Indigenous tenure on the lands on which they work and shape in North America, and have failed to examine the discipline’s role in the settler colonial project. As a student of landscape architecture and an Indigenous person, I have sought to first situate myself in the lands I live in as a visitor as a first step in acknowledgement of Indigenous lands and people of Dgheyey Kaq’ as a means to interrupt the dominant narratives of the history of our cities.
    [Show full text]
  • HHH Collections Management Database V8.0
    LANIE FLEISCHER CHESTER CREEK TRAIL HALS AK-8 (Chester Creek Trail) HALS AK-8 The Lanie Fleischer Chester Creek Trail follows the course of Chester Creek for four miles between Westchester Lagoon and Goose Lake Park. The area is generally bounded by 15 th Avenue to the north, Bragaw Street to the east, Northern Lights Boulevard to the south, and the Alaska Railroad tracks to the west. Anchorage Anchorage Alaska WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA HISTORIC AMERICAN LANDSCAPES SURVEY National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior 1849 C Street NW Washington, DC 20240-0001 HISTORIC AMERICAN LANDSCAPES SURVEY LANIE FLEISCHER CHESTER CREEK TRAIL (Chester Creek Trail) HALS NO. AK-8 Location: The Lanie Fleischer Chester Creek Trail follows the course of Chester Creek for four miles between Westchester Lagoon and Goose Lake Park. The area is generally bounded by 15th Avenue to the north, Bragaw Street to the east, Northern Lights Boulevard to the south, and the Alaska Railroad tracks to the west. Municipality of Anchorage, Alaska The trail passes through Margaret Egan Sullivan Park, Valley of the Moon Park, Mulcahy Park, Charles Smith Memorial Park, Eastchester Park, Tikishla Park, and Goose Lake Park, a nearly continuous string of parks comprising the Chester Creek Greenbelt. Chester Creek is the southern boundary of the Historic Preservation Plan for Anchorage’s Original Four Neighborhoods, adopted by the Anchorage Assembly on February 12, 2013. Latitude: 61.208611, Longitude: -149.9225 (west end of trail at Westchester Lagoon, Google Earth, Simple Cylindrical Projection, WGS84). Latitude: 61.196944, Longitude: -149.821389 (east end of trail at Goose Lake Park, Google Earth, Simple Cylindrical Projection, WGS84).
    [Show full text]
  • The Alaska Earthquake, March 27, 1964
    Lessons and GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 546 This page intentionally left blank The Alaska Earthquake March 27, 1964: Lessons and Conclusions By EDWIN B. ECKEL A summary of what was learned from a great earthquake about the bearing of geologic and hydrologic conditions on its effects, and about the scientific investigations needed to prepare for future earthquakes GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 546 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. A. Radlinski, Acting Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 70-604792 First printing 1970 Second printing 1971 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON 1970 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 75 cents (paper cover) FOREWORD Few of the effects of the Alaska earthquake of March 27, 1964, on earth processes and on the works of man were new to science, but never had so many effects been accessible for study over so great an area. This earthquake has received more intensive study from all scientific disciplines and specialties than any single previous natural disaster. In a series of six Professional Papers, the U.S. Geological Survey has published the results of a comprehensive geologic study that began, as a reconnaissance survey, within 24 hours after the event and extended, as detailed investigations, through several field seasons. Professional Paper 541 de­ scribed early field investigations and reconstruction efforts; 542, in seven parts, the effects of the earthquake on Alaskan communities; 543, in 10 parts, the regional geologic effects; 544, in five parts, the worldwide effects on the earth's hydro­ logic regimen; 545, in four parts, the effects on Alaska's transportation, communications, and utilities.
    [Show full text]