HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/06/2005, BOS 4 - LAGUNA LAKE DREDGING: FURTHER REVIEW OF ""INCREMENTAL"" OPTIONS AND DIRECTION, SPECIFICATION NO. 9911" council D� 9/6/05
j acEnba nEpont 14
CITY OF SAN LU"IS OBISPO
FROM: Jay D. Walter,Director of Public Workss9vJ
Prepared By: Barbara Lynch.City Engineer
SUBJECT: LAGUNA LAKE DREDGING: FURTHER REVIEW OF
"INCREMENTAL" OPTIONS AND DIRECTION,
SPECIFICATION NO. 99110
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Continue to pursue a possible Laguna Lake dredging project by:
1. Directing staff to work with the consultant to complete the environmental review of a
conceptual ongoing project, as outlined in the Discussion section of this report; and
2. Further developing the incrementaloptions, including more detailed cost and funding options
in time for consideration during the 2007-09 Financial Plan.goal setting process.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
At the request of the City Council at their last study session for Laguna Lake, staff has further
examined several additional aspects relating to a, possible Laguna Lake Dredging project. Staff
has prepared discussion on incremental dredging operations, disposal options, how the water
clarity (or turbidity) relates to the depth of the lake, the infill rate and public support for
dredging. (Dredging options are not easy to describe in narrative form, but staff will develop
some visuals for the Council presentation.) Related items discussed are aeration, upstream
sediment control and storm drainage in the north Oceanaire neighborhood.
If increasing the depth of the lake by removing several feet of accumulated sediments and
increasing recreation opportunities is the goal, then dredging still remains the solution. While
funding is not available and continues to pose a large obstacle to initiating a program, staff is
recommending the Council support the completion of an environmental document for dredging.
Completion of this document will reveal impacts and mitigation requirements and possibly assist
the City in obtaining grant funding. It will also help us better define a detailed strategy and the
necessary resources to implement it.
More detailed discussions on funding mechanisms and dredging would occur with 2007-09
Financial Plan goal setting. At that time, the environmental document would be complete and
the City will have a much better understanding of its financial status, perhaps including the
outcome of a November 2006 sales tax measure. Even with the passage of such a measure,
however, funding will be challenging — especially in light of polling results which didnot
indicate that Laguna Lake dredging was among the community's highest priorities.
Nevertheless, completing the environmental work can be accomplished within existing resources
and will help us make final decisions in the future.
y-/
i
Laguna Lake Dredging Page 2
DISCUSSION
In February 2005 the City Council reviewed the information provided in the three reports
prepared by the City's consultants for the Laguna Lake Dredging project. Council also received
input from the Parks and Recreation Commission and the public. The staff report from that
meeting is provided as Attachment 1.
After hearing testimony and having Council discussion, staff was directed to return with
additional information on options and related issues.
Background
It is appropriate at this point to just briefly review the reasons we want to dredge, and based on
Council and public input, our interests fall into two main categories. The first is the fear that the
lake will gradually fill in because of sediment deposited by Prefumo Creek, and the second is the
desire that the lake be available for recreation.
The management plan developed in the 1980's developed the following objectives which
dredging could assist in achieving 1) increase the depth so that in dry weather, water would
remain in the lake; 2) reduce aquatic weeds; 3) prevent sediment from reaching the lake, and 4)
preserve the characteristics of the lake which are important to wildlife, flood protection and
recreational opportunities.
The driving force for this project's resurrection in the 1980's was the drought, which dried the
lake. All in all, it would appear that current desires are similar to those of 20 years ago.
Follow-Up
At the close of the _February 2005 study session, the Council asked staff to return with added
information on the following issues:
1. Dredging options that can be implemented more incrementally
2. Disposal options
3. Lake depth vs. turbidity
4. Lake infill rate and historical depth
5. Public support for dredging via a survey question
6. Aeration as a way to improve the lake environment
7. Upstream sediment control
8. North Oceanaire.area drainage improvements
The balance of this report addresses each of these issues in turn.
Incremental Dredging: _Dredge Ogeration_Using City Staff
This proposal is one in which the City would purchase a dredge and then proceed, on an
incremental basis, to dredge the lake using City staff. This is essentially the proposal the City
has had on the books since the 1980's study work. In our review, the good news is that as a
method of lake preservation, we believe this "slow, but sure" approach is feasible. The bad news
y -a .
r 4
Laguna Lake Dredging Page 3
is that a project of long duration has not received positive reviews by the adjacent residents or
the Parks and Recreation Commission. However, it may be the only way to approach this project
given our limited financial resource — but even so, the annual cost will be daunting, especially
given other unmet service needs in the community.
With respect to the methodology, the purchased dredge would likely be a small suction dredge.
This type of dredge would operate remotely using a cable system. That means, whenever we are
actively doing the dredging work, the lake would be crossed by a cable to direct the path of the
dredge. The slurry would be pumped to the shore where a system of drying ponds would have to
be set up. The slurry would be retained long enough in the pond system to allow the solids to
drop out and the water to flow off. The water would have to be sampled and tested prior to
returning it to the lake. This would require at least a two person operation, with significant
oversight, given the complexity and regulatory issues involved.
In terms of staffing, the dredge would be operated by the Public Works Parks Maintenance staff.
Either existing or newly hired staff would have to be trained to construct and operate the
dredging and sludge drying operation. If we use existing staff, then other staff will need to be
hired to assume their prior duties. Either way, it is clear that new maintenance staff will be
needed.
The Parks and Urban Forest Supervisor currently manages between 10 and 12 temporary staff
people in addition to the 12 regular parks maintenance and urban forest staff. To add the
proposed dredging operation, purchase equipment, hire and train two more staff to work on it
will put a large burden on this Manager. One possibility that could be considered is the creation
of.a "Lake Manager" position within Public Works. This position could take on the entire
responsibility for the dredging equipment and operation, including construction and maintenance
of the drying beds, purchase of equipment, locating and arranging for disposal of the solids and
the hiring of temporary help as-needed to assist them with the operation of the dredge and drying
facility. In addition to the dredging, they would take on the other activities and duties at the lake
such as working with County staff on mosquito abatement and dealing with lake water quality
issues and algae bloom.
The first year's expenses would be the highest, including salary costs, materials needed for the
construction of the drying beds, and the acquisition of earth moving and dredging equipment.
Additionally, the City would have to maintain this new piece of equipment and equipment
operated in aquatic environments generally require higher levels of maintenance than regular
vehicles.
With a City staffed operation, activity would occur every year until the work was completed.
Based on use of 5 acres of the Nature Preserve for drying beds, drying time and seasonal
constraints, it would take approximately 10 years to remove the sediment that has accumulated in
the lake to date. However, assuming a ten year program, we would have accumulated another"5
years" worth of sediment. The dredging operation would essentially become a permanent annual
program.
Ll
I
Laguna Lake Dredging Page 4
The initial cost to construct the drying beds, drains and purchase equipment is estimated at
$550,000. An additional $150,000 would be needed on an annual basis to fund the newly
created Lake Manager position, provide temporary help, fund operation costs and furid
equipment maintenance and replacement costs. A dredge that would be able to work
independently (off the cable)would cost and additional $150,000 to $300,000*. It would also be
a larger and more powerful dredge to accelerate the operation and could do reed removal. The
public has expressed a strong desire to have the reeds removed because of the potential for
mosquito breeding. *(These cost estimates do not include disposal costs which are covered in
more detail below.)
Incremental Dredging: "Shin Dry" method using a Contractor
The other option for an incremental operation would be via a dredging contractor. A recent field
trip to a dredging operation in Oxnard allowed staff the opportunity to see one of the dredge and
dry operations which appears would_have limited impact on the lake environment. This type of
operation is what staff has referred to as the "spin dry" approach in previous presentations. The
material is dredged with an electric dredge similar to what we would purchase. This operation is
not audible even when you are immediately adjacent to it. The slurry is pumped back to a
mechanical device on shore which removes the water and leaves the sediment. This equipment
does produce some noise; however, in Oxnard, the equipment was parked directly across the
street from residences., After going through the spin dry, the material was wet in appearance and
clumped together when squeezed; but water was not dripping out of it. The removed water
appeared absolutely clear. The "Spin Dry"equipment is proprietary in nature, thus not available
for purchase and use by the City.
This kind of operation would keep the City out of the dredge ownership and operation business
and would probably not be that intrusive to the surrounding residences. No siltation structures
would have to be built on the Nature Preserve and it is not particularly noisy. When the City had .
enough funds, a dredging project could be permitted and advertised. in this way we could make
a start at the lake when economic times are better and begin to remove some of the sediment.
Contracted dredging would not be proposed by staff to occur on an annual basis, but rather a
periodic basis. The reason for this is that, each time the contractor sets up to do the work, a
mobilization cost is incurred. If for example,. assume $500,000 was set aside each year for
dredging and $50,000 is the cost for the contractor to mobilize. An annual project, over a 5 year
period,would spend $250,000 on mobilization (5 x $50;000)and $2,250,000 on dredging. Using
the same assumptions for set asides and mobilization costs, but completing only one project at
the end of 5 years, $50,000 would be spent on mobilization and $2,450,000 would be spent to
dredge, a difference of$200,000.
If the full project was completed in one or two years, it would take about 20 years for sediment
levels to return to their current elevation. This is a more expensive option that the use of City
staff, whether temporary or regular, and it should'be noted that the dredging in Oxnard is funded
by an assessment district composed of homeowners who benefit from the inland waterways.
�u
Laguna Lake Dredging _ Page-6
10 Year cost summary for full lake dredging:
Method _ Frequency - Annual Cost Total Cost
City Staffed Annual project Dredge, w/Piping& Cabling: $200,000 $ 550,000
for 10 years Loader& Pickup: $ 100,000 (1)
Pond Construction Costs: $ 250,000 (1)
Annual Staffing & Operation: $ 150,000 $ 1,500,000
$2,050,000(2)
Contract 2 projects- Annual set aside amount: $620,000 $ 6,200,000
7-7
1 every 5 years
71)First year only costs
(2)Does not include disposal costs—see below
In summary, on an annual basis, assuming a worst case for disposal costs as outlined in the next
section, dredging the lake could cost up to an estimated $705,000 to $1,120,000 per year over a
ten year period. (Total Cost above plus $5,000,000 disposal discussed below, divided by 10
years.)
Disposal Options
In addition to the costs to complete the dredging and drying operation, the material must be
disposed of. The consultant discussed several options in their report for the disposal of the
material. To recap, these are; 1) send the material to the landfill 2) barge the material out into
the ocean dispose of it there, 3) deposit it on land, either a parcel leased or owned by the City,
including the park property or 4) deposit it back into the lake to create wetlands and islands.
Disposal costs are a significant part of the overall costs and it could be cost effective to.purchase
property for the disposal and sell it after the work is complete. The other option relating to land
disposal is to have a dredging contractor be responsible to locate a disposal site and haul it. The
availability of property for the contractor's disposal would make the cost of dredging difficult to
predict-. Costs would range up to $5,000,000 for disposal of the current accumulation in the lake
in addition to the other costs outlined to complete dredging. This cost assumes disposal at the
landfill.
The active park can accept approximately 10-20% of the total amount estimated to be dredged.
These would appear as two mounds of approximately 12 feet in height relative to the
surrounding area and would be located adjacent to the memorial grove and to the playground.
(Attachment 2) Drainage facilities would have to be included in at least one of these areas as it
is a natural drainage swale that we would fill. The mounds would need to be amended to some
degree and planted to prevent erosion and blend them better into the park.
Lake Depth versus Turbidity
To date, none of the studies have covered the relationship between the lake depth and the
turbidity. As we see from the material in the Prefumo Arm, this area serves the City well to
remove the larger material, such as sands and gravels. The fine clay remains suspended in the
water and moves out into the lake. It will remain suspended as long as the lake is turbulent.
y --5
r
Laguna.Lake Dredging Page 6
There has been testimony.from the public indicating that in the early days of the lake (I 960's)
the water was clearer. Using the historical information on the lake, and the above testimony, a
bottom depth of about 9 feet should reduce the muddy appearance. The area of the lake nearest
Madonna Road is the closest to that, ranging from 8 to 9 feet depth when the lake is full with the
central portion of the lake ranging from 6 to 8 feet deep. It should be noted that the lake near
Madonna Road is currently at about 5 feet deep.
Lake infill rate review.and historical depth
Using 1957; 1977, 1992 and 2001 lake bottom surveys, staff reviewed historical data to take
another look at the rate of sedimentation accumulation in the lake. The rates are higher near the
delta at Prefumo Creek and lower in the northern reaches. Using average rates of fill since
1957, and assuming no filling occurred until 1964 when Prefumo Creek was rerouted into the
lake, it would take between 40 and 180 years to fill the lake depending upon the location in the
lake. Taking the highest rate of sedimentation between the various surveys, again depending
upon the;location in the lake, it would take between 20 and 100 years to fill.
Public Sunnort for Dredging
This spring the City conducted a survey to gage support for a revenue measure. In response to
Council direction;one of the questions dealt with Laguna Lake Dredging and was phrased as
follows:
Here are some statements that have been made by people who support a ballot
measure to increase revenue for the.City. After hearing each statement, please
tell me if it makes you more inclined to vote Yes to support the measure. If you
do not believe the statement, or if it has no effect on your thinking one way or
the other,please tell.me that, too.
Funds from this measure will be used to dredge and clean Laguna Lake which is
turning into a marsh because the City does not have the money to take care of it.
The summary of responses is as follows:
Much more inclined- 21% Don't believe statement- 9%
Somewhat more inclined-23% No effect- 31%
No opinion- 6% Less inclined - 10%
In summary; the survey would indicate about.44% of the citizens may be supportive of spending
some new revenue on a dredging project. However, in comparision to all the possible service
issues presented to survey respondents, Laguna Lake dredging rated at or near the bottom of
interest, and for this reason the City's survey and ballot measure analysts do not feel that it is a
compelling issue that would be supported community-wide, if it.meant added taxes.
Aeration
Aeration is a process by which air is introduced to the lake to increase the level of dissolved
oxygen in the water. A secondary result can be mixing of the water which reduces temperature
differences in the water, ie warm at the top, cool at the bottorn.
y -c�
Laguna Lake Dredging Page 7
The value in introducing oxygen is to assist with the breakdown of organic material. If the
volume of organic material is great enough, it will tend to use up the available oxygen and then
the process slows or stops. The result is turbidity and lack of oxygen for fish. Oxygen in the
bottom water of the lake also reduces the release of elements such as iron and manganese from
the sediments.
The City does not have data on the volume of organic sediments in the lake. However, studies
were completed in previous years to determine the levels of dissolved oxygen. Due to the wind
that whips the lake, typically most afternoons, the lake generally has oxygen throughout its
depth. There may be a few of the deepest areas that do not. The wind also blends the lake
temperature and so there is 'little differential in lake temperatures. There can be low levels of
oxygen in the morning, both because plants do not generate oxygen at night and because the
water is calm. This is relieved by both the wind and rainy weather which increase the oxygen in
the lake. Aquatic weeds, noted as a problem in the 1980's studies have not been a problem in
recent years and the City has taken no action in that area since halting the weed harvesting
program and does not receive complaints regarding weeds.
The primary issue at the lake, besides mosquitoes, for which the City staff takes complaints, is
the algae bloom which occurs in mid to late summer. Algae are a part of a normal lake
environment and provide food and energy for other animals. When algae grow rapidly it is
referred to as an algae "bloom" Blooms are typically a result of high levels of nutrients,
particularly nitrogen and phosphorus. These nutrients can come from a variety of sources. The
most likely sources for this lake are the birds and storm water runoff carrying detergents,
fertilizers and organic debris. An active public information program as part of our efforts to
reduce pollutants in the storm water is probably one of the best actions we can take against this
particular problem. We may also want to discourage feeding of birds by the public. Other
options include chemical treatment which causes the precipitation of the phosphorus in the water.
The estimated cost for solar aeration units is $150,000. The current condition of the lake does
not appear to warrant the expense of aeration, primarily because of the wind action which
provides this activity free of charge most afternoons. If the lake is dredged, it is possible
aeration.may be need if the wind action does not allow the lower depths to be stirred up.
Upstream Sediment Control
The watershed for Preftuno Creek includes the Irish Hills area in addition to some residential
tracts. This area is steep and sparsely vegetated. Water can be observed running down cuts in
the slopes along Prefiuno Canyon Road. In a nutshell, the potential for sediment is very high.
There is not one particular spot that is responsible for the debris found.in the Prefumo Arm of the
lake. This makes control in the watershed difficult.
One option for sediment control was discussed in the 1982 Laguna Lake Management Plan and
that is to dredge the arm much deeper. The creek would then encounter an area of open water in
the Arm prior to entering the lake. The slower open water area would be more likely to cause the
creek to give up its fine sediments at this point in addition to the heavy material it now yields.
Laguna Lake Dredging Page 8
Dredging the arm deeply is no small task. It is a restricted area with considerable vegetation. To
date, the regulatory agencies have been anxious that.we keep the upper vegetation. At least some
of this would have to go in order to establish stable banks as we went deeper. We could no
longer dredge with earth moving equipment as we do now because we would be working in'a
wet environment. Sediment removal would have to be done regularly with a dredge or we
would return to the situation we have now. This returns us to the issue of the need for dredging_
equipment and dealing with dewatering dredging slurry.
Another option is establishing sedimentation basins upstream. The only property controlled by
the City upstream is the Laguna Lake Golf Course. Such basins would impact the course and are
probably not desirable.
The Master Plan for flood control and drainage in the watershed that was completed in the late
1970's discussed the use of a debris dam on Prefumo Creek. The dam was proposed to be 20
feet high and sized to hold 100,000 cubic yards of material. The estimated cost of construction
at that time was about $0.5 million. This study wascompleted for the purpose of proposing
flood protection improvements. The dam was not recommended for flood protection because of
the low cost-benefit ratio. Building the dam at this time would be very difficult due to
development that has occurred near the recommended area for the dam, environmental issues
associated with dams and a most certain higher cost.
North Oceanaire Area Drainage Improvements
The north Oceanace area is subject to flooding due to its low elevation in relation to the lake.
The storm drain system for this area is very simple. It accepts street water and pipes it directly to
the lake. Once the lake is full, that system backs up and no longer drains the streets. The
subdivision was designed with the street system as the backup to the pipe system, allowing the
water to inundate the streets but not the homes. Staff was asked to look at the possibility of
collecting the water from the north Oceanaire neighborhood and carrying it, via pipe, to below
the outlet of the lake on the southerly side of Madonna Road. See Attachment 3.
Assuming a design for a 10-year storm capacity, a 42" pipeline would have to be installed the
length of Oceanaire Drive. Due to the distance to reach the outlet of the lake culverts on the
southerly side of Oceanaire Drive, the resulting depth is such that a lift station would be required
to bring it above the creek waters. After including needed manholes in the system and upgrading
the inlets for increased capture ability, this project is estimated to cost $2.2 million. The area
would still flood in heavier storms.
Where do we go from here?
The current environmental study and project development phase is partially complete. In order
to complete the environmental document, the project must be described. The goal of the study
sessions with the Council have been to determine what the project is going to be. From there the
environmental document would follow. The Council, the Parks and Recreation Commission,
staff and the public have all struggled with this issue. This is primarily because the desire to
dredge the lake is there, but the method and the means of financing it remains elusive. While a
funding mechanism may not be.apparent to us at this time, staff believes the time has come to
decide on a project and at least move forward to complete the environmental document.
Laguna Lake Dredging Page 9
Staff is recommending the project description take in a variety of the options to have the broadest
use. This is not intended as an endorsement for any particular project, recognizing that much
further work remains to define any final strategy. Rather it is a way to accomplish some forward
movement and retain flexibility by including a wide variety of options in the final study. With
those caveats in mind, staff is recommending the project description be as follows 1)the use of a
suction dredge operating over a period of several years, 2) use of 5 acres of the Nature Preserve
for settling and drying operations, 3) disposing of a portion of the material on the active portion
of the park and 4) disposal of the material at off site areas including the impact of trucking. This
description is broad enough to allow us to go either way with an incremental project and identify
potential issues that the regulatory agencies would be interested in.
So why spend any more money to complete the environmental document if we don't have
money to dredge?
The City has a consultant on board to complete the work and approximately $30,000 remains in
their budget, which staff believes is an adequate amount to finish the work. Completion of the
environmental document will provide us with a more complete picture of what the project might
entail. At this point, we have not made final determinations on mitigation requirements. Also,
possession of a completed environmental document is sometimes required in grant applications
and so may assist us in obtaining grants. While this work is proceeding, staff can further develop
cost information and.flesh out other issues of interest to the Council.
If, in the end, we opt to proceed differently, the document can be amended to reflect any
changes, versus having to start. from scratch to write the. environmental document completely:
Environmental documents do have a "shelf life." However, just as in the case of a modified
project,the environmental document can be reviewed and updated as needed.
Once the environmental document is complete, staff will discuss with the Council through the
goal setting process, how they would like to deal with the project in the 2007-09 budget. By that
time, the City will know better its financial status in terms of funds coming from the State and
any revenue measures approved.
Other opportunities
The Consultants were hired for and looked at dredging possibilities. As we have seen from their
work, dredging is expensive and will impact the area. Michael McGee, a resident of San Luis
Obispo and long time aeration specialist has come forward to offer his services in conjunction
with Cal Poly students to more fully explore the conditions of the lake. The goal would be to
make some improvement in the lake without dredging.
As mentioned above, the algae bloom we experience every year is related to the nutrient level in
the lake. We do not have current information on the nutrient level. It would also be helpful to
update information on oxygen levels in the lake and what volume of organic material we may
have in the lake. Staff believes this effort should be supported. This is work the City should do
anyway, and this offer of support provides a way to do it at little if any cost to the City. This
research would be coordinate with our Natural Resources staff.
Laguna Lake Dredging Page 10_
It should be noted, while these efforts may lead to some alternatives to dredging that would
improve the condition of the lake, they will not have the same affect as removing several feet of
accumulated silt.
CONCURRENCES
At this time staff is not recommending a specific project and so no additional input has been
solicited from the Parks and Recreation Commission beyond that done prior to the Council's last
study session. As the project description became clearer and actual dredging came closer, staff
would return to the Commission for specific input. Notification to the Laguna Lake
neighborhood regarding this report has been made via letters to residents of the area, sent on
August 24'h.
FISCAL IMPACT
The 1982 Management Plan recognized the need for other sources of revenue to finance
dredging due to the high costs and this continues to be a reality. As the Council is well aware,
after the recent budget hearings, the City is not in a good financial position to address the
dredging of the lake. Both financial and staff resources are limited. The consultants have
developed a range of estimates between $4,000,000 to $9,000,000 for a contract operation to
dredge the lake and dispose of the material. Clearly funding is the key issue for this project. The
current budget does not provide any resources for the purchase of a dredge and staff to operate it,
or for a contract to dredge.
Therefore, we are still a long ways from being ready to move forward on actual dredging. Staff
has explored conceptual ideas for funding the project, but there are no easy answers. One way is
to set aside money from the General Fund on a regular basis, such as is done for vehicle
replacement, and begin to collect the necessary funding for the dredging. Dredging could then
take place periodically as a sufficient amount of money wascollected. On the other hand, at a
time where resources are limited and other high priority needs are unfunded, it is difficult to
justify setting aside funds for a potential project in the future. This "savings account" could help
obtain a grant should such an opportunity arise, and grant opportunities will always be
considered by staff as they become available. However, grants typically require a match of
agency funding, often up to 50% and given the fiscal limitations at the Federal and State levels
for the foreseeable future, grants should not be relied upon as the sole source of funding.
As noted in this report, to proceed with dredging "a little at a time" will still require the City to
set aside up to $750,000 to $1,120,000 annually over a ten year period, in order to make a
meaningful impact. Setting this amount of money aside for one project will not be easy, and
there would, of course,be impact to other essential infrastructure maintenance. Even with the
approval of a new revenue measure, Council would have to consider how important initiating a
general fund supported dredging operation would be in comparison to other needs, many of
which seem to be of higher priority to the community. Prioritization will need to be sorted out
during the 2007-09 Financial Plan goal setting process.
—�0
Laguna Lake Dredging_ Page 11
Another option would be for the City to consider forming an assessment district. Out of fairness,
the City should plan to participate as a lake front property owner, along with the other property
owners. However, assessments can only be allocated based on a detailed analysis of benefits and
district formation would require majority property owner support.
ALTERNATIVES
The alternative to completing the environmental document is to terminate the Consultant's
contract and discontinue work on the project until adequate funds are available to pursue actual
dredging and the project has been clearly defined. Other options were detailed in the attached
February 2005 report; and remain available to the Council.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 - 2/05 Council Agenda Report
Attachment 2 Active Park Disposal Mound Locations
Attachment 3 - North Oceanaire neighborhood storm drain
AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE
Technical Reports prepared by LFR Levine-Fricke:
1. Ecological Resources and Potential Impacts of Dredging Operations at Laguna Lake.
2. Characterization of Sediment and Water at Laguna Lake
3. Engineering Analysis of Dredging-and Disposal Alternatives at Laguna Lake
g:\_asrerd projettslperks-Ianduaping1997701�uria_leke dredge\doament517stalf repOrtel45-05 ac stuCy kh.doc
Shonan m Ldrive
council �D 2/l/05
j agenba uEpout ,®N
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBIS' PO
FROM-. Jay D. Walter, Director of Public Works
Prepared By: Barbara.Lynch, Supervising Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: LAGUNA LAKE DREDGING STUDY SESSION
CAO RECOMMENDATION
I. Receive the results of the Consultant studies for the Laguna Lake Dredging.
2. Receive the input of the Parks and Recreation Commission regarding the dredging
prof ect.
3. Provide direction to staff on issues to be further discussed.and any additional information
desired when this item returns to the Council in several months.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
Laguna Lake dredging has been discussed for many years. The main purpose of the dredging is
to increase the depth of the lake to improve recreational opportunities and.general health of the
lake. The consultants hired several years ago to study the lake and dredging options have
prepared three studies for the City Council to consider when making their decision regarding the
dredging. The following will need to be considered if the City desires to move forward with the
dredging: how much of the lake will be dredged, how the material will be removed and dried,
where the material will be disposed of and the impacts, costs and duration of work resulting from
the project. The estimated cost to complete some type of dredging project is between $4 and $9
million..
The Parks and Recreation Commission has heard this item at three of their meetings, received
public input and discussed the issues. The Commission has expressed some mixed feelings
about the dredging, mainly due to cost considerations and impacts to the park, although
neighborhood support has generally been positive.
Attachment 1 provides additional information regarding the background of dredging.
Attachment 2 provides a summary of the three technical reports prepared by the Consultant.
(The complete technical reports are in the Council Reading File.) Attachment 3 includes the
minutes from the three Parks and Recreation Commission meetings where the dredging was
discussed.
This report sets forth several options developed by the consultant, along with added options
developed by staff. For a variety of reasons discussed in the report, none of these options are
easy.
r�"f'factkn�u-wt /
Laguna Lake Dredging _Page 2
DISCUSSION
Introductory Comments From the CAO
The good news is that the format for this agenda item is a study session, and thus the Council is
not being asked to make any final decisions on this very complex matter. The bad news is, this
is an enormously complex matter and there are no easy answers. Thus, we are attempting to
break our decision-making process into more "digestible" parts, and this first session is really
intended to bring everyone up-to-date on the latest information and the nature of our options.
Since 2000, added studies regarding the lake and dredging options havebeen completed and the
results of these studies will be reviewed for the Council and public during the study session. The
Parks and Recreation Commission dicussion over the course of three meetings will also be
shared, and the Parks and Recreation Commission Chair, Pete Dunan, will be present to better
describe the Commission's conversation and "straw polls" on various lake and dredging
considerations. Staff will also sunmmarize added options and considerations.
The truth is that Laguna Lake is a body of water that is slowly filling in to become more of a
marsh/meadow. It is estimated that this process will take in the neighborhood of 100 years.
Options for "intervening" in this process to preserve the lake are varied, each with their own set
of complications and challenges — environmental, fiscal, noise and disruption, and so on. Staff
and the consultant will summarize these options and issues during the study session.
Among the many challenges associated with dredging, perhaps the most daunting is cost. Given
the way local government is funded today (or, perhaps more accurately, not funded), a
jurisdiction today would be unlikely to accept responsibility for a feature like Laguna Lake
without a special funding mechanism to support its maintenance. A likely mechanism would be
a benefit assessment district. Such a district might be structured to assess all residents for some
portion of lake maintenance responsibility (since the lake does provide overall community
benefits) in combination with"extra" assessments on properties in proximity to the lake, because
of the "extra"benefit these properties gain from the lake.
However, the City(in other words, the community as a whole) accepted lake responsibility many
years ago, prior to Proposition 13 and several other "assaults" on the General Fund, like State
raids and various revenue restraining ballot measures. As a result of these assaults, the General
Fund has been stretched and strained for years, and is presently under great stress. To be blunt,
the General Fund is presently in absolutely no condition to take on virtually any of the major
dredging options. This is unfortunate, but as Steve Covey says in his book, The Seven Habits...,
good decision-making requires that we `-`discuss the undiscussables". And there is at least one
more...
.... which is the option of allowing the lake to fill in and become more of a marsh or meadow
area. This is a most difficult consideration for obvious reasons, but it an option that should at
least be discussed in the coming months (but it certainly does not need to be decided at this stage
in the process).
y -r3
Laguna Lake Dredging Page 3
Another matter that could come up during the study session—but is not a study session topic—is
the problem of mosquitoes. Staff would like to point out that a Mid-Year budget request will be
coming forth later in February to support the County's short term abatement efforts at the lake.
The longer term solution, as Council has previously agreed, is the formation of a countywide
vector control district. By the time the Council holds this study session, the Board of
Supervisors may have already taken action to place district formation oil a ballot for voter
consideration.
With this introduction completed, the report will now shift more toward the study results and
major alternatives. Again, while decisions are not requested at this stage, we are hopeful that a
direction as to our next steps will evolve from this study session and our conversation.
History
It appears to staff, after reviewing historical records, that Laguna Lake is a natural formation.
Aerial photos taken in the 1950's show the lake in the same basic layout as exists today; in a
natural low spot between the Irish Hills and Cerro San Luis. However,the lake collects sediment
from the surrounding watershed and that of Prefumo Creek and is now engaged in the natural
evolution of lakes. Through the years, they begin to fill with silt and eventually become marshes
and then meadows. When the area adjacent to the lake, the Oceanaire neighborhood, developed
in the 1960's the lake was turned over to the City for public use. Prefumo Creek was also routed
through the lake near this time. Since the construction of the Oceanaire neighborhood, concerns
have been expressed by neighbors and the community at large about issues such as insect control
and the need to dredge the lake to retain its recreational benefits.
Dredging of the lake was considered in the original Laguna Lake Management Plan adopted in
1982. Dredging was not specifically part of the initial recommended management strategy, but
rather something for the City to consider in the future to increase the depth of the lake.
In 1991, the City Council gave direction to proceed with environmental studies for a large scale
dredging project. In 1993 the City adopted the Laguna Lake Park MasterPlan, which effectively
eliminated using the area identified for dredge spoils by the 1982 Plan. The park master plan
identified the proposed disposal area as a nature preserve. The findings of the biological and
vegetation studies confirmed that designation because of the plant and animal life in the area.
In March of 1999, the City Council held a study session to answer the question,"Should the City
pursue some form of dredging project or let the lake become a marsh/meadow over time?". The
consensus was to pursue some form of dredging project to maintain the lake as a recreational
facility. In December of 1999, the City Council authorized the advertising for a consultant to
complete additional studies of the lake and to prepare the environmental document and bid
documents for dredging. That work began in late 2000. Given the lack of funding available for
a dredging project, these studies were not on the "front burner", and have taken several years to
bring forward to Council.
A detailed summary of the history of the lake is included as Attachment 1.
y -78
i
Laguna Lake Dredging Page 4
What are the goals for the lake?
This question drives much of the discussion that surrounds the lake. In the Laguna Lake Park
Management Plan the goals are listed as Wildlife Preservation, Recreation Enhancement,
Shoreline Home Protection and Agricultural Preservation.
Comments from the public vary and include concerns about mosquitoes, smell, flooding,
recreation uses and, particularly when the lake dries out during droughts, the subject of dredging
the lake comes up.
Consultant Work Complete
The consultant has now completed three reports to assist the City in evaluating the dredging
project. The three reports cover the ecological resources, the characteristics of the sediment and
water of the lake and an analysis of dredging and disposal alternatives. These reports are
available in their entirety in the Council Office and a summary is included in this report as
Attachment 2.
What dredging will do
The dredging will maintain the lake as a recreational facility for the community. Parks and
Recreation is even considering the possibility of stocking the lake for fishing. The lake will also
be more conducive to wind surfing and boating. The completion of the dredging will result in
deeper open water habitat, less subject to roiling by the wind, which should reduce the turbidity
that currently exists at the lake. The deeper, cooler water may also discourage the growth of
certain weeds, which need sunlight to grow, and possibly the algae.
Finally, increasing the depth of the lake by dredging will increase the likelihood that there will
be water in the lake during drought years.
What dredging will not do
Dredging Laguna Lake is not a storm water management activity. Water remains in the lake
during the summer months. This is because the lake bottom is lower than the outlets. Because
that water level is relatively constant, the lake can not take in significant amounts of storm water
in the winter from the adjacent residential area. Once the lake is full, water begins to back up in
the system and flooding occurs. The lake would have to be emptied prior to winter rains to
provide any significant flood protection.
Dredging the lake will not take care of the reeds and associated mosquito problem along the
shore line. Recommendations for dredging areclear that dredging should not start closer than 50
feet from the shore line. The reason for this is to prevent destabilizing the shore. Dredging too
close to the shore could result in excessive shore line erosion or collapse.
Dredging Components
An understanding of the various methods for removal, the options for disposal and the final
outcome is necessary to sift through the options and.agree upon an alternative that maximizes the
things the City wants to achieve for the lake, while minimizing the negative impacts to the
community, both human and otherwise..
_Laguna Lake Dredging Page 5
There are seven basic components to the dredging project:
I. How much of the lake is dredged(quantity)
2. Material removal technique
3. Material drying technique
4. Material disposal/placement
5. Environmental Impacts
6.. Cost
7. Duration
L. Ouantity
How much of the lake we dredge will clearly have an impact on cost: Alternatives 5 and 6 have
proposed a reduced dredging area. In general, this approach looks at dredging the lake from
above the inlet at Prefumo Creek, to Madonna Road. The other alternatives take the dredging
clear out to the northern end of the lake.
The delta which has formed at the mouth of the Prefumo Arm has grown to such.a size that it
now serves as a wildlife habitat.and consulting biologists have recommended that it be left in
place. There has been interest expressed in removing it to allow deeper dredging in the Pref nno
Ann and reestablishing open water in that area. Based on biological studies, it may be difficult
to get approval to do so from regulatory agencies. The City should continue its practice of
routine dredging in the arm .to remove the collection of material. This helps to control what
reaches the lake.
2. Material Removal Technique
The material will either be scooped or pumped out. Once the material is manageable, it can be
placed at the park or hauled away. The scooping methods reduce the amount of water that is
taken with the iriate_rial: This shortens the drying time. Pumping is accomplished by mixing
Water with the material at the lake bottom and pumping it to shore. The water content can be as
high as 90 percent.
3. Material Drvina_Technique
There are two basic drying techniques. The first method is to use nature to do the work. The
material is set out and allowed to drain and dry. The second is a mechanical means. Specialized
equipment processes the material through something equating to the spin cycle on a washing
machine. The effectiveness can be heightened with additives to-absorb water. This equipment is
proprietary and can add cost, but the trade off is avoiding the need to find areas large enough to
construct drying beds without impacting sensitive species.
4. Material Disposal/Placement
Disposal of dredge materials is a significant portion of the cost to complete the dredging. If a
location can be found for disposal on the lake property; it would reduce the cost. The Nature-
Preserve portion of the park is home to various protected plants and wildlife. Portions of the
front of the park are dedicated to the memorial grove, with the rest of the park considered the
"active" park: There are areas within the active park were spoils could be placed, changing the
ffYfr�.c.hnu..��- d
Laguna Lake Dredging Page 0
contours of the park. This might not be enough to handle all of the spoils but would still reduce
the cost of the project.
Off-site disposal is an unknown cost. It could be very costly or relatively inexpensive. It relies
on available uses at the time the material is removed. In the past, on small dredging projects, the
City has left disposal to the contractor. If we complete the dredging in a short period of time,
finding a single location in need of that much material could be difficult. If a site adjacent to the
lake could be found and the material used to re-contour the ground, it would be relatively
inexpensive. Sometimes use can be made of this type of material at landfills for cover. Probably
the worst situation is that the City will have to pay to place it at the landfill as waste.
While it seems extremely odd to put the material back in the lake; that is an option, Alternative 4
proposes that the material would be used to create islands or fill in the edges of the lake to create
.a different type of habitat from that of open water. The areas would be bermed with rock
structures below the water to prevent the material from drifting.
Metals in the sediment are not found in extreme amounts and are most likely of natural origins.
This finding is based on a review of surrounding rock formations and their makeup. However, if
for any reason, the sediment was determined to be "regulated," and require special handling and
disposal, the project costs would increase dramatically. Based on the information collected to
date and as explained in the Consultant's report, this problem isnot anticipated.
5._Environmental Impacts
In the short term, the project has the potential for noise, both from the dredging equipment and
the hauling of material. This noise could be constant at times. There is the potential for odors
and unsightliness if the material is dried at the site. Disruption to plants and wildlife is to be
expected primarily as a xesult of a decreased water surface elevation as water gets removed with
sediment. Also placement of the spoils at the park and / or hauling activities can disrupt plant
and wildlife as well as park activities.
6. Cost
Costs to complete the project have been estimated in the $4,000,000 to $9,000,000 range.
7.. Duration
The alternatives described in the report vary from 1 to 3 summers, working with aggressive.
schedules. Less aggressive approaches could easily extend the duration for many years.
Dredging and Disposal Alternatives
The alternatives presented by the consultant in the Engineering Analysis are a mix of quantity,
technique, drying and disposal, giving resulting impacts, cost and duration. The alternatives are
presented in the Engineering Analysis as a way of looking at the project, but are by no means the
only permutations available.
�I _1-
Laguna LakeDredging- Page 7
Alternative.l__Full-scale dredging with near-shore placement and habitat restoration
This alteriiative -uses a closed clamshell to stoop the materialfrom the bottom. The closed
clain-shell minimizes fall back of material into the lake in comparison to aai open loader such as
those we might use in the street. The material is placed on barges and taken to shore.
At the shore, the material is dried and left in place on a large area of the park. The area
proposed is a 25 acre site in the Nature Preserve which, while dominated by non-native grasses,
is also home to several sensitive botanical species- Significant impact can be expected. The
alternative would then include the importation of topsoil for plant reestablishment.
Estimated,duration- 12 moriths.* Restoration would take several years.
Estimated cost- $6.9 Million
Alternative 2–Dredainp,with off-site commercial or awicultural beneficial reuse
A special hydraulic dredging and dewatering device is used. for this alternative. This is the "spin
cycle" method described previously. The electric remote ability allows 24 hour dredging. The
material processed by this method is dry enough to be trucked from the,site without separate
drying beds. The number of trucks to remove the material is estimated at 30 trucks a day. There
is a high probability for concerns resulting from the noise and disruption of the trucking
activities. The City will need to locate a receiving site where the material could be used.
If the City were able to acquire rights to dispose of the material on one of the agricultural sites
that already abuts the lake, the material could be-removed directly to the agricultural area and
trucking from the park would not be required.
Estimated duration - 4 months to perform the dredging with continued hauling for 8 months to
dispose of the material.
Estimatedcost- $6.2 Million plus any costs for reuse site
Alternative 3 —Dredging with off-site landfill disposal
The material would be removed as in Alternative 2. The difference is in how the material is
disposed of. In this alternative, the material is taken to the land fill to be used as cover or paid
for as waste.
Estimated duration - 4 months to perform the dredging with continued hauling for 8 months to
dispose of the material.
Estimated cost-$7.5 Million
Alternative 4--Dredging with combined on-site island and,wetland creation
The material is removed as-in Alternative I with the closed clam shell. The material is I dried on a
4 to 10 acre area of the park. Special berms are constructed in the take and the material
reintroduced to the lake to form an island. A portion of the material can be directly
rectly deposited
back in the lake without drying to create Wetlands. Some existing wetlands will be lost if
LI—/1K
Laguna Lake Dredging Page-8
expansion of the existing peninsula is done, but new wetlands would be created in the upper area
ofthe lake.
Estimated duration - 12 months
Estimated cost $8.6 Million plus any costs to acquire rights to deposit material in privately
owned portions of the lake
Alternative 5—Limited dredging,with near-shore placemen_ t and habitat restoration
This alternative is a reduced version of alternative l or 2. It requires an on shore area of 10 to 15
acres combined drying and fill area.
Estimated duration—8 months
Estimated cost- $3.9 Million plus land cost if placement occurs off park property
Alternative 6—Limited dredging with expanded wetland creation
Alternative 6 is a reduced Alternative 4 with wetland creation, but no island creation. This
eliminates the need to dry the material if it is to be used for wetlands.
Estimated duration—6 months
Estimated cost- $6.3 Million
Timing
Dredging of the lake will require permits from regulatory agencies such as the Army Corps of
Engineers. While permitting is rarely easy, we do not foresee that it will impossible as dredging
is routinely done in harbors under Corps jurisdiction. The degree of difficulty to obtain permits
will depend on the alternative the City chooses. The project will be more heavily scrutinized and
possibly rejected if we negatively impact sensitive species. The greater,the impact; the more
mitigation will be required,which in turn will increase the costs.
If the City Council provides direction to proceed with a specific project this spring, it will
probably take at least a year to prepare the environmental document and the bid documents and
obtain permits. That moves the project to summer 2006,which is in thesecond year of the 2005-
07 Financial Plan. Obviously, for the reasons stated by the CAO in his introductory comments,
such timing would be extraordinarily difficult from a fiscal standpoint.
Parks and Recreation Commission Review
Staff presented the project to the Parks and Recreation Commission on June 2nd; October 6`h and
November 3 of last year. The minutes of those meetings are included as Attachment 3. The
Commission took testimony during the first meeting, but did not discuss it.
For the second and third meetings, staff presented the following six questions to help focus the
discussion of this complex issue and gage the Commissions feelings about the project. The
Laguna Lake Dredging Page 9
Commission created a seventh question themselves. The results of the straw polls at these two
meetings are shown after each question.
1. Does the Commission agree dredging of Laguna Lake is an important Parks and Recreation
goal? October 4 Yes,3 No/November 3 Yes, 4 No
2. Does the Commission agree dredging of the lake is more important than other improvements
in City parks such as upgrades and expansions if limited funds are available? October 0
Yes, 7 No/November 0 Yes, 7 No
3. Does the Commission support dredging a portion of the lake, in lieu of the entire lake, as a
reasonable alternative to reduce project costs? October 4 Yes, 3 No / November 0 Yes, 7
No
4. Does the Commission support use of portions of the park for deposition of dredged material,
and if so,where? October 6 Yes, 1 No/November 4 Yes,3 No
(The Commission was clear that disposal was in the Active Park area not the Nature
Preserve. It would be reasonable to assume before the park was used to accommodate
dredging spoils, they would want to see a specific plan of the disposal proposal.)
5. Does the Commission support creation of islands or wetlands in the lake using the dredged
material? October 1 Yes,5 No, l Undecided/November 0 Yes,7 No
6. Does the Commission support a long term (over 10 years) project if necessary as a
reasonable alternative to reduce project costs. October 2 Yes, 4 No, 1 Undecided ]
November 0 Yes, 7 No
7. Does the Commission support buying adjacent land for deposition of dredged material
disposal? October 6 Yes, 1 No/November 3 Yes,4 No
The change in the results of the two polls could be attributed to additional time for the
commissioners to consider the questions or it could have resulted from the testimony of the
public at the second meeting.
The Commission expressed mixed feelings about dredging. They are concerned about the cost
and understand that the cost will just continue to rise if the project gets put off. However, they
are also very concerned about the impact of dredging on the surrounding community and
activities at the lake.
One clear message from the Commissioners was the unanimous agreement that dredging should
not come before other Parks and Recreation needs when funding is limited.
Public Input
At the goal setting session on January 12, 2005;the Council heard similar input to what staff has
received to date. Of the few citizens that have attended meetings to date, the majority speak in
favor of dredging. There appears to still be some misconceptions that dredging will take care of
mosquito problems or flooding,which it will not.
The preference of citizens speaking out appears to be to dredge the entire lake in a relatively
short period of time, removing the spoils from the park. This would correspond to Alternative 2
or 3. The creation of islands or wetlands has not been well "received because it reduces the
amount of open water, and concern that it would increase the breeding grounds for mosquitoes.
Laguna Lake Dredging
It should also be noted that the majority of citizens who have expressed their opinions in favor of
dredging are residents that live on or very near the lake.
Staff Discussions and Alternatives
The City's Natural Resource staff has been helpful in working with Public Works on the project
and has not identified any fatal flaws in a dredging project including possible placement of
material in the lake.
Because of the high cost of any of the dredging alternatives, staff has engaged in considerable
internal discussion of the project. While only a full scale dredging project appears to respond to
public input, the costs are considerable and can not be ignored. From a. public satisfaction
standpoint, Alternative 2 is the best project. The lake is fully dredged and the material removed
to another site at a cost of about $6 million..
Because cost issues are very real, staff has discussed options that would reduce the impact to the
budget. These are not alternatives that will likely have much appeal to those members of the
public interested in a large dredging project.
A. Staff's original proposal years ago was for a small scale, long term, 20 year, project that
would be paid for incrementally. This approach can make headway against the
sedimentation because of the slow rate of sedimentation. The environmental work and
agency clearances would still be required. Staff anticipates the permit process would have to
be gone through more than once, as conditions and regulations change. The regulatory
agencies would want the enviromnental work updated periodically..
The original proposal made in the mid 1980's was to purchase dredging equipment and hire a
temporary staff person to operate it during the summer months. That proposal also proposed
using the park for all the material. We could still operate the dredge, but only some of the
material'could be disposed of at the park and arrangements would have to be made with a
disposal site for the rest. A long term project will still impact the park, depending on the
quantity of material dredged each year and how it is handled and disposed of Staff
previously estimated the cost at about $200,000 per year with ad additional upfront cost of
$150,000 for the purchase of a dredge. The annual dollars spent would dictate the amount of
material removed each year and so the length of the project. '
Staff has not developed any detailed budget for this project, but could do so if the Council
directed staff spend time to do so.
B. Another option for dredging would be to complete work the next time the lake dries out
adequately due to drought. This approach would still be expensive and some funding
mechanism would have to be in place in advance of proceeding. All environmental work and
design would have to be completed in advance and be waiting for the occasion that the lake
dried up. If a drought did not occur in the next few years, the environmental work now
completed would have to be updated. This is estimated to cost $150,000 based on the
existing contract. If a drought did not occur for many .years, the cost is unknown as
regulations both on material removal and disposal, could change.
Laguna-Lake Dredging Page 11_
C. The City's current financial situation may speak to simply postponing consideration of a
dredging,project at this time. The consultant's reports would be accepted and the completion
of the environmental document and dredging specifications would be put off until such time
as a funding for dredging is available. Based on the current expenditures, approximately
$30,000 of already budgeted consultant costs would be saved.,
D. Council could decide that the City will never be able to afford a large-scale dredging project
and allow the lake to eventually become a meadow.
FISCAL IMPACT
The consultants have developed a range of estimates between $4,000,000 to $9,000,000 to
dredge the lake and dispose of the material. The current Financial Plan does not allocate any
funds for dredging. During the preparation of the last budget, it was decided that the project
description was still too tenuous, and the costs too high, to dedicate scarce funding to it. Even
the 1982 Management Plan recognized the need for other sources of revenue to finance dredging.
Assuming we could qualify for some kind of.grant, a review of available grants found that the,
typical match is 50% agency funds. Another option would. be to place a measure on the ballot
for approval of a funding mechanism, other than use of the General Fund, for the dredging.
However, a single purpose measure would require a 2/3 vote and the project would have to be
perceived as the City's most pressing community priority.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment I - Project History Summary
Attachment 2 - Project Report Summaries
Attachment 3 - Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes for June 2, 2004, October
6, 2004 and November 3, 2004.
AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE
Technical Reports prepared by LFR Levine-Fricke:
Ecological Resources and Potential Impacts of Dredging Operations at Laguna Lake
Characterization of Sediment and Water at Laguna Lake
Engineering Analysis of Dredging and Disposal Alternatives at Laguna Lake
a�_ am easwanw�»oV016take ao �m�i aart eDo ts12-t-0s a ease snxfy sesslan.obe
Shor=on Ldrive - -
� �aa
16D <2P
Pty
/ '�'••:• � _ \ � ..
n'` t ♦t O ALT' - �� r
rp..-..y c��. fir` \\ t. _ f• 1 � t \' i 'j
.-{y-a� i ) ty ,�,Y•�."c�¢/�.0 r��� f� � ♦ E. ) p � ��7.(�5�p� v� 4n �irtr
.t _ q 4 J i � "�''� 'i�• I•�+yr L Q L�Si rIr _ \ � ` 'y^
'`�"`rY i�'r M1�"�, �j 8.�•.K �. - l�p� u 1-��j�•, �f+ \\ /«- y A4-
��1y r
c Y �• a
(' ( Ns
�t}��^ ♦ s� '�wJ-' � �-� �V �`/�f III �
Y (�
�
r.. is r. yi' �"�!• '-
O.F M1jV! ,] _r{ � - --- 1 V`'ti rf`Y�1•'` � lel �':�
j'�`•-iJj-, '"♦� ,�.r gyp,
h � `
i c
.�� c`�u -n",10.. i" rl t• :
r ♦ bj ' j.
rl
td
�:,�
✓1 �� ]
1
�Z
111.E
PAP
1 �
p
alb/05
My name is Dave Dawson and I have been a resident of 1192 Vista Del Lago for about 10 years. My
property is adjacent to the creek that feeds Laguna Lake.
My main concern is the threat of flooding. I heard the city engineer indicate at a previous meeting that
flooding was not an issue at the Lake. But flooding is an issue along the creek. The overgrowth of
willows and other vegetation is very extensive along the creek, starting less than 100 yards north from
Los Osos Valley Road. I believe we are only a heavy rain or two away from having fast moving water
diverted into properties adjoining the creek by downed trees and debris. There would be major property
damage in this event.
This tributary is the main source of new water for the lake. It is carrying a large amount of silt that is
filling the lake up. I believe the first priority of any dredging operation should be to attack the major
sources of sediment.
[c]
have distributed a handout that shows the area in question. Figure 1 is the overall lot site plan. Figure 2
S
the entire Lake area, with Figures 3 and.4 looking at the creek area. Figure 5 is a photo taken
om my backyard on Dec. 31, 2004 showing the creek after a heavy rain. In this photo, the creek is
ose to flowing into the Oceanaire neighborhood.
Years ago, I had the chance to talk to a member of the Council over this issue. He told me that the City's
hands were tied because it could not get the appropriate permits from the controlling Federal agency
(Fish & Game?Army Corp. of Engineers?). This Council member basically told me the City could not
be of help.
I am asking the Council for the help now. The annual clearing that is done on the creek stops well short
of the heavy brush and trees. The natural channel that carries the flow of water is filling up.
The next winter's rains are coming. I urge the Council to begin the permit process immediately Ito clear a
channel all the way from Los Osos Valley Road to the lake. This will help with the sediment problem
and lower the threat of property damage to homeowners along the creek.
, S Jl 3 3 I RR 77 7 5ry _j �
mike.3
�r "37r ixa D^ if ,3 7 7 t7 � 053313,ixL3 x r 5��� 6G a�i !73
is
s Sswr-
ti .. 5 i 7 7 7 3f i it'7 3
r]3
'; .
_ g 3
.: •
41:1 �t p34
=44, 7CG"4'Sa i9:tlgg '� �a C'iF9"y�wL lrGr.�''' S�yG , '�� +77th f:.,•3e
'33 Y3] 63 fr` '�V 7G�yA��a64'Tj93 tai;°,�u` ;G:il?�C73^�6•iitt•aau' G t 3 7. .� 3
t3 [
7;tl7• �sd 7[ii z3 f .ai,
x
i79i3�03 a7 x:zi" 7 6'a" �•»,:� S3::i3.._3;.;:
a•.od ?'. »f x3 iG7r"o;33:.3•`:.::;
7u 3 7, 7 7 tii�ab,•57�y
�za 3 7 3�d7.9tl�a 3133^3o�a3 3 °7 5Gi n a5 pg1333p.33:;:;zi,y i z
4d3 1 tlp.3 9 axxxt 6 ..��;:zya7 a zi 5 G3a.r;••,z. ,
Q 5�- °39 3a 3; t33 37; a3?,t33g66s�i
� �°•° t 3 a a76
p., { r � x _ I Y .' a�3tl33 7axiazsi3G5 T'1 i
f .s„ " -•nn ?r SL x 'rI �, !� F r ' I Ir t4A' x u,l V} I �. s _
4 nH Itlk! fx.P r L iC• I y... -i _
� W
I
,� C 4' ..k a< 'I' u''I � " Ir r h11 �PI 1 Il it � r 'w•1 {-I t-
rr Int w n �" d t IIF � t! it.�lil, V I ,t A.�: 61 I I�.•,',
... J r ... �•` 'rr t�S�I NII v � , � Yr I J l�lt��{� rl I'll ul I�u ly t
4
F h I q Y
_ y ,
II r:x ''5 nt 1 d 4Rjly I n yl I rl 1 II iI ly rh
r! , a Irr A,Q1 ' a'alh pyrf« 1pl. I I 'III ,rl�III,U 11 111 lilgrl,rj1 bII��1�I I„I
I la III . 1 9 I w 1
t" I •rr ...'a_. y l... r.w,�l�f i .r I Jill
' i I
F M 1 I I J
f } .I1 i _.a C 9'r�I G41 f tl 11 I drtN n tir>`111�i"eU
V
Y
9• ` 1! Y 1 � Nil N 1 NI i"
Yhm i t�� n 3W`�1 pYp eph x111 tY I�`y1 Ir hgl� i�,:
i„ 'iaztl
y6� x�' N ly ll v l rxy�,l 111 "I II� I'] r I u1�yC�
5y x r5 37 t q 3l C_ t I
x5IN.
n x N VI Ipl�I P i ° +7r1 r
a ,S7 �Yy.�.�x7p,. a2°a5 Er��y.."3 ,y7• .. p Y .r I .Ill:r' 1
7
E40,ck
0 p 7 3 p aby4�EAy,4 7 I',/I�I�'hv lu aLIll e N o ilr y
9 a u3��ntC .i3 i ea ! � a qp ygdp L d I n Y f Iris fI a I n
nE����d3 1,% ➢A�+a,7�� aa, ���3ip�a �O�Af��91t ti41rM1"°l �V� �pl�I �Il pl YI I.�I�yw,
Y �Ly4 7,iC 3 ��wa�^pri 51. itl p fab 7 7 L[�""G a v t 9I` III INlln l' n,n ' -
CG
p 3 v
x�?��a�'i 5,�7 3 7jG6c9� » .d6j ��, x d�» r �y l 1 , I I 1 � I ?� I •
z 7 r."3 6 d9 nn A 6U i m I;I'
7
JJ g �ppp(JI; 11 11 1' I VAI ,I
q... p y tl,,, II 36 ���i rr I 1 llr �II' I' I I 1 IM y ��('I '• i�i ,� I'N�
$il'I It' 1 111 r 1 Il I 1p� ' I rIgII ;I ' I Iq�l� 'i, I i h •
i h
'I',1 r� I 1{ I, r1114i1 r , i w � I � 111 i i IAV A"t1 Il�y �� 41111,
I I 31 �I Ii .1�I�1 r r .1 I it rlp Ii LN�
g � k I
1' x l l lrN a 11 ll I!
j
�I�lI
II
I IIL
I,
Y
{ Y
_, ra
x
2
S
_ � f
4• 1
J
`S
I 1
r
r .
AFIF
T `
i { �«, ♦ N � �� 1.
�r � 4t, W• .' � � f Wil- � C� n
, r r
AtNN
� ��� �� -c•� ! � � tis♦ ywl , 1�° 6 �� '".d/ � � ^��
���� Ki. �i�,�,e �h y ..♦ p �/�.O^
Prt� � �• •i o, \1�„ ��� •'7i�� 'tea °o 'j � .
K Y ,
00� "meq J` v 'y .
AO ! .
AT
qC�„"� '�C ;�Ca.'j''77,�G" � � o "� '� �� � Q��1►,. l�o � e ..,i;, o �
4W i @_ v.+ v .•�, 'I
kll
� �?� � � . ,/mss - '•4- `+ ��'��•• ;,�s.
pis
> •Y,a. +d " i 'r r •�r A -"� .+ a� r _ - _ _ _ At
�: N•`t"y'MC1A'1�'•� .,,..��� f - ;iia .:_ 'S. `'1' ,j,_II•Q� I t �,�'I � M1 eV' .1
F'_'.. .� �(✓'r <'1lICY"'M1` �-, F6 < .i r f: J't .I< t I I� y�j
r.s..:wr+u�tX ti �`" oraoelv`� • � 1 .+\ ^v w��.l.�M�1C'Q(/�.
..whit w ♦ � ♦ a,p'�, Ob
•^' f �..
o ,j} a 1
4 K21
�r�•~�
��.� _ ••�Jw. .�ya•L +& }�vy5x i/:.� py� .. yew �t °''� �'��� i
sir �.•Or•�'`�^ '`�'` Z' g ::s'I,v { { T - r :m ✓+}W �ay�: '.� .7��"q�y.,�x?.-
' .-SIC*♦•-C' _ •�jnc w!'.. . wT - y. ��� { �.t�-i'. '.'.'tw. "a`��ti,^�..s ,�as�r �!`~: /� '4�A�•..
'�� '►• � f y:: • Q3 -- �t9I Hr",:5 `� Jf'i�.+ c r. {.P\' � Y'Y��� 7P'r.e�'..
/ �,- a• !v' i 4 ,�''-•. �� ),� 111 f �� �� 54 ,� 11 r� ♦. 1 1� n .»��' J r t �'���.~!
�' V�V�, R'�'1'� vyr�(t/��� ((�`3''' `� , ��•••a t.l` t � �_' �_A'+� r _7. i_ .�r 7
> r- -�_ r \ qt i;v /.' 1 i IL Tr '►. a1 r _ C\ F1
'. �`. ; �� '� �♦ � ��\•_. �-� /J���Jw f�r�"_` J I �tis Ti• � ''�''/ _ r `r ♦•"•
\\ \s0p'a.a-•i"`r.. d 5 � � ms )+ ��r f/ 7: 11' •
T \♦) ♦« / sr
s•3\ 'S7 _��i�=ii�. •. :r'1��:l• 3'� � '' -'��I �' ,I - ' � 11 " �.i
�. ` 1I'_,fl r/� f• �•V�;l�.b �l ��pV1 j•. - ` �I
AllowW
3 _�-
s i
on
t'� � �t 1r_ '• 0 •���1 ��-�'�� � � X ` `. w d: o , act..,;+
\`J�� .fes .♦_t ^ .+ w 'lt• � q\. „r + s' v?��
r � .. mss••... i,��ll, rt .i'ti �, _ .tom, ��A ay_�ti•'�P�'�'r/^
r .,f la�'f. I �ti ■ ..�I�� � \ /4�. 'fit /7► f' e � i`,�1� YQy\ I �,�• ..-�
Vii,//Afir
\SF�1't
J
' -»
. �
Lei- ,� �trx `.'�;";• I �{ � F`.;v. - - _
C C C 0 LLeLc-Lf- Page 1 of 1
�a0
�owE�
Allen Settle ,cFpp�,Ei2
From: <gkucer@charter.net>
To.: <asetde@slocity.org>
Date:. 9%6/2005 6:13 PM
Hi,
I am unable to obtain tonights meeting on the dredging of the lake.There were several of our Laguna Neighbor
Association members who were unable to attend, including .myself.
I want to express that I think it is vitally important to dredge the lake for the vitality of the city. I am more than willing to
help out in any way I can.
Thank you for your consideration. Garry Kucer, Laguna Neighbor.President.
Garry Kucer
Keller Williams Realty Central Coast
805-249-0022
RECEIVED
theneighborhoodguy.net
YOUR REFERRALS ARE GREATLY APPRECIATED cIc u 0 Yy A65
SLO CITY CLERK
file://C:\Documents%20and%20Sett ngs\slouserU,ocal%20Settings\Temp\GW}000O1.HTM 9/7/2005
Page 1 of 1
SLO Cityeoundl Laguna Lake Dredging project
From: "Brett Cross" <brettcross@chartercnet>
To: "City Council' <slocitycoundl@slodty.org>, <gkucer@charter.net>, "Slosmurf' <Slosmurf@charter.net>
Date: 9/s/no 10:02 PM
Subject: Laguna Lake Dredging project
just a couple.of thoughts regarding tomorrow night's meeting..
1. include removal of the"delta" and the reestablishment of the Perfumo
Arm in the environmental analysis. This will prompt a response from the
lead agencies and provide information regarding the feasibility of doing 7REED
mitigation.
2. Consideration needs to be given to the feasibility of dredging the lake M5
from the shoreline, using a crane and clam shell or dragline. Leave the LERK
center alone and assume that the material in center sloughs off into the
deeper area along the shoreline.
3. Give direction to staff to explore different funding scenarios, included
dedicated sales tax.measure, assessment district; or other private/public
funding sources:
Sincerely,
Brett Cross
K COUNCIL �J CDD DIP
CAO ,F IN DIg RED FILE
`,-AC4O =IRE CHIEF MEETING AGENDA
ATTORNEY '� °W DIR
CLCRK ORIG z POLICE CHF DATE ITEM # C�u s
DEPT HEADS L RCC DIP
f�J_2 UTIL DIR
HR DIP•
file://C:\Documents%20and%2OSettings\slouser\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}OOOO1.HTM 9/6/2005
Page 1 of 1
SLO Citycouncil Laguna Lake Dredging
From: "Kerryi Kent or Patrick Taylor"<kkot3 @ sbcglobal.net>
To: <slocitycouncil@slocity.org>
Date.
8/27/2005 8:58 AM
Subject: Laguna.Lake Dredging
Dear Mayor Romero and Councilrnembers,
1 understand that you will again take up the issue of dredging Laguna Lake at your Sept.6th meeting. I hope you will take steps to
protect the-long ierm health 61 the lake,. I realize that dredging is expensive. I would support the creation of a benefit assessment
district so that Property owners in the vicinity of the lake would help pay for the cost,of maintaining the lake. I live a block away from the
fake and would be willing to pay for a share-of the cost.
Thank you for your consideration.
Kent Taylor -
1295 Descanso St.
San LuisObispo,CA 93405 RECEIVED
AUG 3 01005
S-LO I CITY CLERKXj COUNCIL -9 CDD DIR
0 DIR RED FILE
1-�E ACAO 15 FIRE CHIEF MEETING AGENDA
w�-ATT OFINEY 'E FrW DIR
iG- CLE9KIORIG iE PbLICE CHF DATE 91&116ITEM #_aU5
E71 DEPT:HEADS 7n RE-C DID
16� UTiL DIF),
-*-M- SL)—AA6—
file://C:\I)ocuments%20and%2OSettinRs\sloluser\]Local%20S,ettings\Temp\GWI0000I.HTM 8/30/2005
Page 1 of 1
SLO Citycouncil-laguna dredging
From: 'Paul Bonjour"<paulbonjour@msn.com>
To: <slocitycouncil @ slocity.org>
Date: 8/25/2005 10:32 PM
Subject: laguna dredging
Dear Council members,As I am unable to attend.sept 6 1 urge you to consider mayor romeros plan to start small on the dredging on
the lake as we know you don?t have the money to do the whole thing. Another thing that would help the flooding would be to drain
the water from the oceanaire area downstream of the lake instead of into the lake.
Sincerely,
Paul Bonjour
1582 Oce_ana_ire Dr
SLO
RECEIVED
.AUG 3 0 2005
SLO CITY CLERK
4av_�d coo .►1aa.L
C
COUNCIL � CDD DIR
`+J CAO 2 FIN DIR
X� ACAO 9 FIRE CHIEF RED FILE
X ATTORNEY YPW DIR
IW CLER,woRIGPOLICE CHF MEETING AGENDA
❑ DEPT H.EADS 11TiL 2gR_C DIR
— ppTE9 G e�TEM
P—i-8 Gt UR
IR DIR
file://Ci\Documents%20and%20Settings\slouser\Local%2OSettings\Temp\GW}000O1.HTM 8/26/2005