Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-05-2017 Item 01 - Stormwater Resource Plan and Stormwater Program Update Meeting Date: 7/5/2017 FROM: Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager Prepared By: Freddy Otte, City Biologist SUBJECT: STORMWATER RESOURCE PLAN AND STORMWATER PROGRAM UPDATE RECOMMENDATION 1. Approve a resolution (Attachment A) adopting the San Luis Obispo Creek Stormwater Resource Plan (Council Reading File B); and 2. Receive an update presentation regarding the current status of the City’s Stormwater Program and provide direction to staff regarding future opportunities and constraints. REPORT-IN-BRIEF The City of San Luis Obispo maintains a team-based Stormwater Program. The program was developed beginning in 2007 and began formal implementation in 2009 to provide a decentralized, inter-departmental approach to the objectives outlined in the City’s permits required by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Contemporary municipal stormwater management entails objectives such as water quality protection, groundwater percolation and recharge, community education, construction site management, clean up and abatement of illicit discharges, and continual program assessment and improvement. An accretion of state and federal mandates over the years has resulted in increased work demands that have and continue to be absorbed by the existing staff that have stormwater functions tied to their job. This includes daily inspections of sites or facilities, ensuring post construction stormwater features are functioning as designed, inspection of the storm drain system from inlet to outlet, controlling trash across the landscape and attending to water quality impairments in locations such as Mission Plaza. The City’s stormwater team is constantly working to maintain compliance and is in regular communication with Water Board staff; however, program audits have shown areas where the City will need to continue to make improvements to protect water quality. City and Cal Poly staff with the assistance of a consultant team from Stillwater Sciences, Inc. have recently completed a Stormwater Resource Plan (SRP) that identifies and maps sub- watershed “catchment” areas, identifies problem spots, and prioritizes stormwater infrastructure projects and techniques that address those problem spots. The SRP will allow the City to be eligible to apply for funding under the Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014, or California Proposition 1 (“Prop 1”) to help pay for some these priority projects. The SRP also helps lay the groundwork for a rebranding effort of the Stormwater Program under a new “Healthy Watershed” campaign. Packet Pg 9 1 DISCUSSION Brief Overview of the History of Water Quality Protection The contemporary water quality movement started along with the larger environmental movement in the late 1960’s and was catalyzed when the Cuyahoga River in Ohio caught on fire in 1969. It wasn’t the first time it had caught fire but the source of the pollution that caused the fire was easily identified. “Point source” pollution became a strong focus for state and federal agencies to address and eliminate. Large industrial facilities located along waterways traditionally discharged polluted effluent into that waterway from an obvious pipe that allowed the discharge to be easily traced back to the source. Today, stricter laws and regulations have drastically reduced point source pollution. “Non-point source” pollution, in the watershed context (it can also refer to air pollution), is the comingling of rainwater and pollutants that rainwater encounters as it flows across the landscape. Stormwater runoff pollution is a type of non-point source pollution. This means that the pollution cannot be traced back to a specific source, but instead comes from many different sources throughout the environment. Non-point source pollution is the primary cause of watershed pollution today. In 1966, The Department of Fish and Game published a report about San Luis Obispo Creek that identified substantial point source and non-point sources of pollution (see Council Reading File C). “San Luis Obispo Creek was an aesthetically disgusting experience…” and “…trash in the creek seems to be the rule rather than the exception in City limits…” are quotes from the report. The assessment of fish populations in San Luis Obispo Creek in that report was not comprehensive, but indicated that all five native fish species known from our watershed were accounted for despite deplorable conditions. Steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) were used as a proxy for water quality. When test fish were exposed to the creek below the City’s sewage treatment plant (as it was known as that time), all 30 died violently within ten minutes. This was a local example of toxic water quality with an attributed point source of pollution. In 1972, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948 was expanded and updated to become the Clean Water Act (“CWA”). The CWA outlines a federal framework with water quality objectives and regulates discharges into surface water and the environment. The National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) was created by the CWA to regulate water quality pollution and today includes numerous program areas, such as: agriculture, industrial and municipal wastewater, and stormwater. Under the CWA, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) authorizes the NPDES permit program at the state level, enabling them to perform many of the permitting, administrative, and enforcement aspects of the NPDES program. The NPDES stormwater program regulates stormwater discharges from three potential sources: (1) municipal separate storm sewer systems (“MS4s”); (2) construction activities; and (3) industrial activities. Operators of these sources are now required to obtain a NPDES permit before they can discharge stormwater. This permitting mechanism is designed to prevent stormwater runoff from washing harmful pollutants into local surface waters, with the expected benefits being: (1) protection of wetlands and aquatic ecosystems; (2) improved quality of receiving waterbodies; (3) conservation of water resources; (4) protection of public health; and, Packet Pg 10 1 (5) flood control (EPA, 2017). In California, NPDES requirements are carried out by the State Water Resources Control Board and, in San Luis Obispo, by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. Permit requirements for MS4 operators are tiered based on the size of the municipality. Phase I cities (Salinas, Los Angeles) have a population over 100,000 people and the regulations they must follow were established in 1990. Phase II cities (San Luis Obispo, Paso Robles) have a population less than 100,000 and the regulations we must follow were established in 2003. Permits are issued on five-year terms and contain progressively more stringent water quality protection requirements. Contemporary water quality standards have addressed many of the significant point source pollution facilities, but non-point source pollution continues to be the primary target for Phase II municipalities like San Luis Obispo. The City of San Luis Obispo’s Stormwater Program Background In 2007, the City began development of the Stormwater Program and in 2009 implementation of the mandated, regulatory program was launched. At this same time, the City’s Natural Resources Program was asked to step forward to take leadership of the program. Being in the City Administration Department, a main objective of the Natural Resources Program is water quality protection and since this program requires participation of staff from every department, it was a logical structure and one that responded to the financial constraints of the City. A Steering Committee of Department Heads was established to provide direction and guidance to the Technical Team, which is comprised of managers from each department, from key programs or divisions. The de-centralized, cross-department, team based program was developed at the onset of the program and continues today. The main program elements are: (1) public education and outreach; (2) construction site management; (3) municipal operations improvements; (4) storm drain inspections and cleaning; and, (5) Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)1 monitoring and implementation. Many of the requirements in the 2009 permit were activities City staff were already doing, while other areas required new training and commitment to implementation. To capture these commitments while utilizing the de-centralized approach, an inter-departmental Memorandum of Understanding was signed by each department within the City. Current Status of the Stormwater Program The status of the Stormwater Program is currently in flux. The Technical Team is diligently working to maintain compliance. The decentralized approach is still the recommended course of action because this program cannot be run by one program or division due to the comprehensive nature of the requirements and the diverse skill sets needed to address technical requirements. Staff across all departments are effectively in charge of controlling pollutants coming from sidewalks, gutters, streets, industrial facilities, buildings, construction sites, the storm drain system, parks, and anywhere else pollution may be coming from. For this comprehensive effort, the community needs to be better integrated into this program 1 Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) is a regulatory term in the Clean Water Act describing a plan for restoring impaired waters that identifies the maximum amount of a pollutant that a body of water can receive while still meeting water quality standards. Packet Pg 11 1 since the health of San Luis Obispo Creek should be viewed as a community asset. With the Utilities Department adopting the One Water philosophy, everyone needs to be engaged and supportive to ensure the creek is protected. Healthy Watersheds is one of the primary focal points of the One Water initiative. Stormwater starts as rainwater, but as it flows across the developed landscape from the top of the watershed, pollutants are picked up and transported directly into the creek system. Expanding the public/private partnership with the community is the only way total water quality protection can be achieved. Traditional stormwater infrastructure like stormdrain inlet filters, improving social norms like owners picking up after their dog, continual outreach and partnering with the development community and collaborating with other organizations, non-profits, and Cal Poly are some of the major efforts City staff are putting into place to maintain compliance with the program. As was first identified in the 1966 stream survey, the characteristics of the tunnel under downtown that carries San Luis Obispo Creek lends itself to being a significant source of pollution. At the current time, pigeons and other wildlife, direct urban run-off, and transients collectively create a significant water quality impairment in Mission Plaza. This has resulted in San Luis Obispo Creek being listed for a TMDL for pathogens (e.g. fecal coliform). Staff continues to expand partnerships with Downtown SLO (formerly the Downtown Association) and individual businesses to leverage resources to address the TMDL and restore some of the ecological functions the creek has lost from years of alteration. Lastly, the City, County, and Cal Poly stormwater staff collaborate as often as possible to focus on protection of our watershed and have consolidated efforts to help address the TMDL, as well. The City’s current State Water Resources Control Board permit requirements are as follows: (1) Water Quality Order No. 2013-0001-DWQ, NPDES General Permit No. CAS000004; (2) Water Code Section 13267 Technical Order (the “13267 Letter”); and, (3) Water Code Section 13383 Technical Order (the “13383 Letter”). Major expansions in the past few years of the program under this permit regime have included: (1) Post-Construction Requirements (PCRs); (2) monitoring of storm drain outfalls; and (3) a Program Effectiveness Assessment and Improvement Plan (PEAIP). The 13267 Letter involves spatial analysis and prioritization of problem spots, and the City is now working through the beginning elements of this Order. The 13383 Letter is also known as the “trash policy” and the City is now working to better understand and develop an appropriate program for our watershed under this very recent Order dated as of June 1, 2017 (see Council Reading Files D-F). Stormwater Resource Plan On June 21, 2016, the City Council authorized the issuance of a Request for Proposals to prepare a Stormwater Resource Plan (SRP). Stillwater Sciences was selected to complete the plan, together with significant input and collaboration from staff at Cal Poly, the Central Coast Low Impact Development Initiative, and the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. The four key areas of the SRP to improve watershed processes are: (1) identifying types and locations of Low Impact Development (LID) projects; (2) criteria for ranking project types for specific water quality improvements; (3) connecting efforts in the 13267 Letter to current and future project designs; and, (4) a screening and ranking matrix for project prioritization. An additional and important value of having an approved SRP is that it makes the City eligible for Packet Pg 12 1 Prop 1 project implementation funding. The priorities of the SRP are to integrate the concepts embodied in the General Permit but with a focus on the creek and the ecological functions present and how to ensure long term protection of the creek and the underlying groundwater basin; in this regard, projects that accrue multiple benefits are prioritized. The SRP document also lays the groundwork for an opportunity to rebrand the current Stormwater Program as part of a new, forthcoming “Healthy Watershed” campaign. In addition to the functional elements, it is also important for the City to show its commitment to stormwater protection through adoption of the SRP, which will ultimately be considered for approval by the State Water Resources Control Board. Future Stormwater Program Opportunities and Constraints Funding the City’s Stormwater Program continues to be challenging in consideration of the current financial position the City is in and how the Stormwater Program relates to other internal City needs and external decisions that require immediate attention. Staffing resources have remained constant over the years since program inception, yet program requirements have increased. An emerging opportunity to address this situation is Senate Bill 231, which would re- define stormwater as a resource that should be captured, treated and reused because of the value lost as it runs off the landscape and carries significant amounts of pollutants into our waterways. Specifically, SB 231 is in further response to the case of Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Ass’n v. City of Salinas (2002) 98 Cal.App.4th 1351, which determined that fees imposed for stormwater drainage services are not considered to be “water, sewer, or refuse collection” thus requiring voter approval via election. SB 231 has been approved by the Senate and is now in the Assembly for consideration. This bill would clarify that fees associated with stormwater fall under the same class as fees associated with water, sewer or refuse collection which may be imposed subject to certain procedural requirements and the right for the public to submit a protest vote (see Council Reading File G). Prop 1, as mentioned earlier, identifies funding for stormwater infrastructure improvements and once the City’s SRP is approved, staff can apply for grant funds to design and implement LID projects. Lastly, consideration of the cost of service to implement the requirements of the Stormwater Program related to private development or industrial operations have been and will continue to be considered in the context of cost of service fees. Council Discussion Points Staff would benefit from receiving feedback from the City Council on items including, but not limited to, the following: 1. What questions does the City Council have about the program? Does the City Council have additional information requests? 2. What ideas does the City Council have that would assist outreach to the community about the vital importance of healthy creeks and clean water? 3. Does the Council wish to direct staff to continue to research external funding options? Packet Pg 13 1 CONCURRENCES The City Engineer has reviewed the SRP and has provided his concurrence and recommendation. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Adoption of the Stormwater Resource Plan is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section §15262, Feasibility and Planning Studies, and categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section §15306, Information Collection, because the Project includes the process to gather data and create a planning document and would not include major disturbance to an environmental resource, and Section §15307, Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment. Additionally, the resulting Plan would provide support to better enable entities to comply with applicable total maximum daily load implementation plans, national pollutant discharge elimination system permits, and waste discharge permits. While the creation of a plan is exempt from CEQA, any specific recommendations included in the SRP that promote the undertaking of future projects such as, but not limited to, construction activities, would be subject to future evaluation under CEQA as provided in Section §15307. FISCAL IMPACT The adoption of the SRP does not have a fiscal impact in and of itself. It will, however, provide priorities and guidance for future funding requests presented to the City Council and other funding partners. Ongoing administration of the Stormwater Program will have new, ad ditional fiscal impacts in the future as implementation of the 13267 and 13383 Letters go into effect over the next few years. Staff will come back to Council as these costs and requirements become better understood. ALTERNATIVES 1. The City Council could direct staff to provide additional information or clarification in support of its recommendation. 2. The City Council could choose not to adopt the City of San Luis Obispo Stormwater Resource Plan. This is not recommended because the objectives laid out in the plan will accrue multiple benefits to the creek and watershed and will also position the City for additional funding opportunities. Packet Pg 14 1 Attachments: a - Resolution b - Council Reading File - San Luis Obispo Creek Stormwater Resource Plan - External Review Draft c - Council Reading File - 1966 CDFW SLO Creek Survey d - Council Reading File - 2013 SWRCB General Permit e - Council Reading File - 13267 Letter f - Council Reading File - 13383 Letter g - Council Reading File - SB 231 CASQA Fact Sheet Packet Pg 15 1 R ______ RESOLUTION NO. ________ (2017 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CREEK STORMWATER RESOURCE PLAN WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo has adopted policies for protection, management, and regulation of stormwater throughout the city; and WHEREAS, contemporary stormwater management entails objectives such as water quality protection, groundwater percolation and recharge, community education, construction site management, clean up and abatement of illicit discharges, and continual program assessment and improvement; and WHEREAS, a Stormwater Resource Plan (“SRP”) has been prepared as part of a Council-approved process, and staff has considered and incorporated comments of key stakeholders where appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Adopt the San Luis Obispo Creek Stormwater Resources Plan. The City Council does hereby adopt The San Luis Obispo Creek Stormwater Resource Plan, an official copy of which shall be kept on record with the City Clerk, based on the following findings: a. The San Luis Obispo Creek Stormwater Resource Plan is consistent with the Ahwahnee Water Principles outlined as Policy 10.2.2 in the Conservation and Open Space Element of the City’s General Plan; and b. The San Luis Obispo Creek Stormwater Resource Plan is consistent with the City’s municipal code chapter 12.08, Urban Storm Water Quality Management and Discharge Control; and c. The San Luis Obispo Creek Stormwater Resource Plan is in furtherance of the City’s adherence to its State Water Resources Control Board, Water Quality Order No. 2013-0001-DWQ, NPDES General Permit No. CAS000004 and subsequent Water Code Section 13267 and 13383 Technical Orders. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The City Council hereby finds that adoption of The San Luis Obispo Creek Stormwater Resource Plan is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section §15262, Feasibility and Planning Studies, and categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section §15306, Information Collection, because the Project includes the process to gather data and create a planning document and would not include major disturbance to an environmental resource, and Section §15307, Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment. Additionally, the resulting Plan would provide support to better enable entities to comply with applicable total maximum daily load implementation plans, national pollutant discharge elimination system Packet Pg 16 1 Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 2 R ______ permits, and waste discharge permits. While the creation of a plan is exempt from CEQA, any specific recommendations included in the SRP that promote the undertaking of future projects such as, but not limited to, construction activities, would be subject to future evaluation under CEQA as provided in Section §15307. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2017. ____________________________________ Mayor Heidi Harmon ATTEST: ____________________________________ Carrie Gallagher City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________. ____________________________________ Carrie Gallagher City Clerk Packet Pg 17 1 Page intentionally left blank. Packet Pg 18 1