1 Tres Rios del Norte Feasibility Study Santa Cruz River Pima County, Arizona February 2011
2 Study Area: 18 Miles of Santa Cruz River (Prince to Sanders), portions of City of Tucson, Town of Marana, and unincorporated Pima County.
3 Tres Rios del Norte Feasibility Study Study Purpose: Evaluate problems, opportunities and potential solutions, evaluate effects, and recommend a plan for implementation. Focus: Ecosystem Restoration, Flood Risk Management, Water Supply (recharge), and Recreation. Feasibility Report: Presents results and findings, compliance with applicable statutes and policies, provide decision makers and public a basis to judge recommended solutions. Schedule: Draft Report for technical/policy review March Draft Report/DEIS for public review August 2011.
4 Identified Problems Degradation and loss of riparian habitat. Rapid growth and development. Loss of environmental values. Limited water availability. Groundwater overdraft. Limited recreation facilities. Bank instability at confluence area.
5 Study Components Ecosystem Restoration: Restore riparian and adjacent habitats along river corridor. Flood Risk Management: Evaluating flood and associated erosion risks throughout study area. Includes measures to stabilize river channel and banks. Groundwater Recharge: Evaluating opportunities to provide constructed recharge within the study area. Draft plan being currently being finalized. Recreation: Plan provides pedestrian and equestrian trail heads, crossings, interpretive signage and facilities. Links to other recreational facilities to provide opportunities for local and regional users.
6 National Ecosystem Restoration (NER) Plan Plan that meets objectives and constraints, and reasonably maximizes environmental benefits while passing tests of cost effectiveness. Policy requires identification of NER Plan for comparison. Draft Report will compare NER Plan to other alternatives. Will undergo Public, Technical, and Policy Review. Plan may be refined based upon reviews. Non-Federal partners currently support Draft NER Plan.
7 Draft National Ecosystem Restoration Plan New Acres Cottonwood/willow: 78 Mesquite: 694 Riparian Scrub: 558 River bottom (wet): 72
8 Water Assumptions Future discharge to river significantly reduced. Estimate 26,980 AF to maintain Status Quo. Includes 25,430 AF in channel losses and 1,550 AF in consumptive use Multiple sources of project water, most likely sources identified in report. Restoration will be designed to utilize storm runoff. Evaluating opportunities for additional recharge in conjunction with restoration. Restoration Plan Water Requirement (approximate) 8,800 AF/yr 5 yrs. (plant establishment) 5,500 AF/year - after 5 yrs. (Support in-channel cottonwood and wetlands) Recent Approximate Effluent Entitlements, Based on 70,000 AF.
9 Groundwater Recharge Initial array of 15 constructed recharge measures. T-berms Multiple channels Off-channel basins Rubber dam Assume SAWRSA Effluent Recharged (USBR Collaboration). Benefits based on net increase in recharge compared to no action plan. Dollar value for benefits based on marginal cost of additional supply.* $305 acre foot CAGRD Rate Schedule Possible to formulate combined Recharge/Restoration Plan. *USACE Planning Guidance, ER
10 Recreation and Flood Risk Management Recreation Plan - Pedestrian and equestrian trail heads, crossings, interpretive signage and facilities. Links to other recreational facilities to provide opportunities for local and regional users. $13,000,000, 50/50 Cost Shared Flood Risks - Due to limited development in flood prone areas there was minimal reach-wide justification for structural measures. Focus on bank stability in confluence area. 6,500 feet of bank stabilization proposed. Included in Restoration costs.
11 Key Study Milestones Milestone Date Initiate Study 09/2001 Public Scoping Meeting 10/2001 Feasibility Scoping Meeting (Problems and opportunities, forecast conditions) 07/2002 Alternative Review Conference (Range of alternative plans) 11/2003 Alternative Formulation Briefing (Comparison of plans, Draft plan) 06/2004 Draft Report (Public review of draft plan) 8/2011 Final Public Meeting (Presentation of NER Plan) 8/2011 Feasibility Review Conference (policy compliance review) 9/2011 Final Report 9/2011 Civil Works Review Board (Corps Headquarters Approval) 10/2011 Chief of Engineers Report (Recommendation) 2/2012 Design Agreement 2012 Congressional Project Authorization (Water Resource Development Act) 2012
12 Long Term Goals Rio Salado 2003 Restore regionally, and nationally significant riparian habitat. Reduce risk of flood damages. Rio Salado 2005 Provide groundwater recharge opportunities. Increase local and regional recreation opportunities in conjunction with restoration. Rio Salado 2007
13 Questions Kim M. Gavigan, P.E., CFM Chief, Water Resources Planning Section C U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-Los Angeles District 3636 N. Central Ave, Suite 900 Phoenix, AZ Phone:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District SKAGIT RIVER FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION FEASIBILITY STUDY SKAGIT COUNTY, WASHINGTON Feasibility Scoping Meeting Read Ahead Report August
GUIDELINES Flood System Repair Project Authorized Under the Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006 (Proposition 1E), and the Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of
Go to the Table of Contents INVENTORY OF FLOOD CONTROL AGENCIES Prepared By: Performance Review Unit California Department Of Finance November 1997 PREFACE During late December 1996 and early January 1997,
Upper Des Plaines River & Tributaries, IL & WI Feasibility Study Jeffrey Zuercher Project Manager Chicago District February 19, 2014 Study Partnership: US Army Corps of Engineers Agenda Background Study
North Branch Chicago River Watershed-Based Plan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In Lake County, the Lake County Stormwater Management Commission (SMC) is responsible for managing Lake County s water resources. The North
Table of Contents Page Introduction 1 Who is eligible for a grant? 5 Available Grants 5 Criteria for Prioritizing Projects 6 Examples of eligible prioritized projects 7 Procedures 9 Conclusion 10 Appendices
Red River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Framework Red River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Work Group Technical and Scientific Advisory Committee Technical Paper No. 11 Principal Authors: Charles Anderson,
DISCUSSION PAPER March 2011 RFF DP 11-13 Ecosystem Services: Quantification, Policy Applications, and Current Federal Capabilities Lynn Scarlett and James Boyd 1616 P St. NW Washington, DC 20036 202-328-5000
Dungeness River Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan 2009 Clallam County, WA Prepared for Clallam County by the Dungeness Flood Hazard Advisory Committee, a subcommittee of the Dungeness River Management
Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness Tool Exercise with North Hudson Sewerage Authority and New York-New Jersey Harbor Estuary Program Office of Water (4608T) EPA 817-K-12-002 April 2012 www.epa.gov/watersecurity
A SUBSTITUTE ORDINANCE BY CITY UTILITIES COMMITTEE 12-O-1761 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND VARIOUS SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 74, ARTICLE X OF THE CITY OF ATLANTA CODE OF ORDINANCES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROMOTING GREEN
La Salle River Integrated Watershed Management Plan October 2010 1 LA SALLE RIVER INTEGRATED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN October 2010 Prepared and Published by: La Salle River Watershed Planning Authority
State Mitigation Plan Review Guide Released March 2015 Effective March 2016 FP 302-094-2 This page is intentionally blank. Table of Contents List of Acronyms and Abbreviations... iii SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION...
Managing water resources data at a watershed-wide level in a centralized and consistent manner, and providing access to this information to key stakeholders and the public at large is critical to the successful
Governor Gray Davis The Planner s Guide to Specific Plans Governor s Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 445-0613 Steven A. Nissen, Director Terry Roberts, Manager,
Nevada Division of Water Planning A. Flood Management in Nevada Introduction Flooding has been a concern for Nevada communities since the first settlers moved to the territory in the mid-1800 s. Fourteen
UNIFIED FACILITIES CRITERIA (UFC) LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED UNIFIED FACILITIES CRITERIA (UFC) LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT Any copyrighted material included in
PUBLIC NOTICE Trustees Issue Draft Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment On July 1, 2015 the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, on behalf of the Natural Resource Trustees, issued a Draft Restoration
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with CFR PARTS 200 202 [RESERVED] PART 203 EMERGENCY EMPLOY- MENT OF ARMY AND OTHER RE- SOURCES, NATURAL DISASTER PROCEDURES Subpart A Introduction Sec. 203.11 Purpose. 203.12
Guideline: Works that interfere with water in a watercourse watercourse diversions September 2014 This publication has been compiled by the Department of Natural Resources and Mines. State of Queensland,
July 13, 2012 Richard C. Gore, Chief Administrative Officer Delaware River Basin Commission 25 State Police Drive, P.O. Box 7360 West Trenton, NJ 08628 RE: Technical Proposal for Consulting Services to
APPENDIX 1 DISASTER RECOVERY PLANNING FOR CITY COMPUTER FACILITIES March 2008 Auditor General s Office Jeffrey Griffiths, C.A., C.F.E. Auditor General City of Toronto TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...1
United States Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Asset Management for Sewer Collection Systems For wastewater management utilities, asset management can be defined as managing infrastructure capital
Water Security Agency Plan for 2015-16 saskatchewan.ca Statement from the Minister I am pleased to present the Water Security Agency s Plan for 2015-16. The Honourable Scott Moe Minister Responsible for
City of Los Angeles Water IRP 5-Year Review FINAL Documents June 2012 City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works Bureau of Sanitation and Department of Water and Power City of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio
OVERVIEW MIDDLE CREEK FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT October 3, 2012 INTRODUCTION The Middle Creek Flood Damage Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration Project (Project) will eliminate