The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02/06/1990, C-4 - REQUEST FOR STATE URBAN STREAMS RESTORATION GRANT 1�� lu'�� MffnNG DATE: 411 QJIIu�'NI II city O f San LUIS OBI SPO February 6, 1990 Eft COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT FROM: David Romero, Public Works Director L SUBJECT: !'- Request for State Urban Streams Restoration Grant CAO RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution co-sponsoring application for grant BACKGROUND: For the past several years, the San Luis Obispo County Land Conservancy and the City of San Luis Obispo have co-sponsored grant requests for State Urban Streams Restoration Program funds to stabilize and beautify portions of the creek system within the City of San Luis Obispo. The first project was stabilization of the bank below the Murray adobe in Mission Plaza. It is now time to apply for the next round of grant funding. The Conservancy has picked as a project this year the vegetation of gabions we are proposing to construct this spring in Old Garden Creek below Center Street, and the vegetation of two other gabion projects, one near California Boulevard and one near Nipomo Street, which have been constructed in past years. It is our hope that this work will not only stabilize and beautify the gabions, but will provide critical background experience and information needed by the staff in developing future attractive flood control projects within the city. DISCUSSION: The staff is very much supportive of the Land Conservancy's efforts in stabilizing and beautifying the creeks within San Luis Obispo. We work very closely with them and believe these projects are very much to our mutual advantage. The resolution calls for certain environmental determinations. Because the application was received by the City so late, too late to obtain an environmental determination prior to the agenda close, that determination is in the process of being made. We anticipate the project will be categorically exempt. FISCAL IMPACT: No direct expense to the City. Funds are solely administered by the Land Conservancy, however, there is substantial City benefit in creeklprotection, beautification, and information. �►� ��118� i �N city of san tuts osIspo 11111090 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Land Conservancy Page Two L RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City once again co-sponsor this application with the Land Conservancy. Attachments: Resolution Land Conservancy Letter of 1/19/90 Grant Application Note: Other background information related to the grant will be available in the Council reading file lndcon/dfr#19 I ` v RESOLUTION NO. (1990 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL ENDORSING APPLICATION FOR AN URBAN STREAM RESTORATION GRANT AND DETERMINING APPROPRIATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ` DOCUMENT, CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTING GRANT IF OFFERED, AND DESIGNATING CONTRACT MANAGER AND FISCAL AGENT - WHEREAS, the California Department of Water Resources, Division of Local Assistance, Urban Stream Restoration Program has announced the availability of funds for grants; and WHEREAS, said grants are intended to help solve flooding and erosion problems in a way that provides environmental enhancement; and WHEREAS, the San Luis Obispo Land Conservancy has proposed to co-sponsor a grant application with the City of San Luis Obispo; and WHEREAS, we have concluded the project proposed for funding with the grant funds would be environmentally-beneficial and categorically-exempt from requirements for environmental document preparation under one or all of the following exemptions: Class 1,2,4, 6,7, or 8; and WHEREAS, we consider the prospects of receiving such a grant to be reasonably likely. NOW THEREFORE', BE IT RESOLVED we the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approve the joint application with the San Luis Obispo Land Conservancy for an Urban Stream Restoration Program grant. Resolution No. (1990 Series) t If offered such a grant, we authorize John B. Ashbaugh to accept the grant., develop a work plan for the project, and sign any contract for administration of the grant funds and designate John B. Ashbaugh to submit invoices to the Department of Water Resources .for activities carried out under the work plan for the grant contract. City of San Luis Obispo MAYOR RON DUNIN ATTEST: _ CITY CLERK PAMELA VOGES APPRO City A ini t ti e officer .aper.:✓No.-+,...� Community Deve went Director Public Works Director reslnd/dfr#19 San Luis Obispo County LAND CONSERVANCY 19 January 1990 j To: Mayor Ron .Dunin and Council Members Ken Hampion, Assistant City Administrator Via: Dave Romero, Public Works Director From: John B. Ashbaugh, Executive Director ' San Luis Obispo County Land Conservan ' As you know, our organization and the City have teamed up suc- cessfully to obtain grant funding under the State Urban Streams Restoration Program for each of the last three rounds of grant assistance. The program requires a unique partnership arrange- ment between a public agency and a citizens group. Under the joint auspices of the Land Conservancy and the City, we have obtained about $65, 000 in three separate grants since 1986, most of which has been applied to projects such as the Mission Plaza revegetation and our upcoming work in the Prefumo Creek section. It is now time to apply for this year's round of grant funding. A draft of our proposal is attached for your review. After consultation with the City Public Works staff, we have elected to focus our 1990 grant request on three items: First, we propose to assist with specifications and installation of vegetated gabions in the Old Garden Creek section between Center and Mountain View. This project is almost ready-to-go, but the first round of contractor bids appeared to be more costly than original estimates, due perhaps to the proposed use of vegetated gabions-- a first for this City. As a result, we propose to augment the City's funds (which are derived the County's Zone 9 Flood Control budget) , and provide in-house staff time to assist in the background research and preparaton of specs for the vegetated gabion concept. Our second funding component is a proposal to experiment with various ways to "retrofit" steep gabion walls in two other sections of the creek, on Stenner Creek near Nipomo Street and on a section of the main stem of SLO Creek above California Boulevard. We have only a preliminary concept of how this project might .be achieved, but we think that we may be "breaking new ground" for stream restoration if we succeed in improving the aesthetic and biological characteristics of these two walled streamsides. Finally, we propose to augment our current year's work on Prefumo Creek by $erforming additional design and revegetation work for the straight, graded section of that stream just upstream of Los Osos Valley Road. This work may be confined to design-only for this year, and funded for implementation in 1991. C11 P.O. Box 12206 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 (805) 594-9096 Each of these projects will also be accompanied by a monitoring program to assure appropriate follow-up to any .actual construc- tion or revegetation work. We think that each one is highly } eligible under the guidelines for the grant program, which are also attached for your reference. In order to meet the requirements of the grant program, we will need a resolution of support from the Council endorsing this ap- plication to accompany our proposal to Sacramento. A sample res- olution for this purpose is attached, following our draft pro- posal, for your consideration. If necessary, we would be happy to help fill in the blanks. The proposals. are due to be mailed. to Sacramento by January 31, and therefore we ask that this item be included on your earliest possible Council agenda. If the resolution cannot .be drawn up before January 31, it is acceptable for a letter of support to be included with our proposal, until the resolution can be submit- ted. This letter should be signed by Mayor Dunin, and may be very brief. We will also need a signature of the City Adinnis- trator under item B on the facing page for the proposal (see highlighting) . We welcome any questions that you or your staff may have about our proposal. Please advise us as to when the item is to be scheduled so. that we may appear, if necessary. Thank you in ad- vance for your assistance on this proposal! J a Grant Application Proposal Number 1990 California Department of Water Resources Division of Loc=al Assistance Stream Restoration Program Project Identification Information This identification information section will be removed when the Grant Review Team does its assessment of the grant proposal to assure an impartial and objective evaluation. The proposals will be identified by a number. Agencies, city councils, boards of directors,districts,or nonprofit groups or organizations can submit an application. See brochure, Grants, the Urban Streams Restoration Program, for detailed instructions for completing this application. I. Project Applicant and Endorser A. Organization or government agency submitting the application: Tohld Ash 6att2.1I da-4 LvI's D6s ,� Coup7ty L4kd ConServa.a Name of project manager Organization or Agency t3tJ Lu,s 06. saa Sa„r L�fs Ob, sao City County P. o. 336x / Z7- p (c 73406 goy - 51f4 - 909to Street address Zip Area Code/Telephone Name of official representing the agency or organization Signature Date B. Organization or government agency cosponsoring this application: y �t/ JC4 teorrrie—rc, CIt—T. c F 5,7" Luts Clot Contact name Organization or Agency C/ Ss— Mor>"o St, S 3cfL,) t Fos- • 7L/0 Street address Zip Area Code/Telephone Name of official representing the agency or organization Signature Date C. If the applicant Is an unincorporated citizens group and using a nonprofit organization as fiscal agent to submit the application, Indicate the following: Contact name representing private citizens group Name of Group z Street address Zip Area Code/Telephone Contact name representing nonprofit organization Name of Organization acting as fiscal agent Street address Zip Area Code/Telephone D. List Other Project Endorsers and Participants (please attach letters from the individuals or organizations rJ�(Ili12olisted here): / v7� ENVI' Center' bp jQ� L / � S 0t, 4'-Sil ECDSLo) 1 II. What is/are the name(s) of the stream(s) or creeks(s) you are planning to restore? In what city or unincorporated area annd+ county is your project located? Name of Stream(s) _VCLn/ Le,cf.S C.r-e�- k City sZ•4 Lu,s Ob,"sled County _Q�n4 L t t%s G L s p p r: III. Please provide a map locating your project site that includes the regional context and local access to the site. If your project is not in an area already developed for residential, commercial or industrial use, is it designated for such develepment in an adopted general plan? Total Project Budget $ 73. Qi0 Proposal Number _ Total Grant Request $ . r. e. Grant Application 1990 California Department of Water Resources Division of Local Assistance Stream , Restoration. Program F C) Page I of 7 I Q � Project Description Except for maps, design specifications, or existing reports you may have, please confine your information to the space provided on this application. t. Summary Statement Describe the purpose of your proposed project. How will your project help contribute to the reduction of property damage from floods or bank failure or contribute to stabilizing the stream system and watershed? This set of 3 projects includes new construction of vegetated gabions, retro-fitting of older unvegetated gabions, and design work for a degraded section of the stream. In each project, we will be stabilizing a section of the stream that is already, or potentially may be,, subject to degrada- tion from flood control projects based on a traditional design. The work may be summarized as follows: 1. Old Garden Creek: We propose to assist the City with creating con- struction specifications, and with partial installation of, vegetated gabions in a 250 ' section of Old Garden Creek between Center and Mountain View. This project is almost ready-to-go, but the first round of contractor bids appeared to .be more costly than original estimates, due perhaps to the proposed use of vegetated gabions--a first for this City. As a result, we propose.to augment the City's funds (which are derived the County's Zone 9 Flood Control budget) , .and provide- in-house staff time to assist in the background research and preparaton of specs for the vegetated gabion concept. See Exhibit A, which includes the initial design (City Plan J-14H) , the construction specifications, the initial environmental study, and a status report in the form of a memo to the Council regarding the bidding process. 2 . Gabion wall Retrofit: Our second proposal is to experiment with vari- ous ways to "retrofit" steep gabion walls in two .other sections of the creek, on Stenner Creek near Nipomo Street and on a section of the main stem of SLO Creek above California Boulevard. We have only a preliminary concept of how this project might be achieved, based on a design for one of these sections (see Exhibit B) . This proposal is designed to improve the aesthetic. and biological characteristics of these two walled streamsides. 3 . Prefumo Creek Revegetation Desian II: Finally, we propose to augment our current year's work on Prefumo Creek by performing additional revegeta- tion design work for the straight, graded section of that stream just up- stream of Los Osos Valley Road, and below our current year's project site. This work will be confined to design only for this year, and we intend to propose it fora implementation funding in 1991. See Exhibit C for location. Page 2 of 7 2. Please describe the stream restoration or watershed management techniques you will use. How will these techniques or management measures stabilize the watershed and how will they restore or enhance or preserve a riparian environment? Attach design specifications, management plans, Environmental Impact C- Reports, or other documents that may help describe the nroiect. Component 1, the Old Garden Creek project, will utilize vegetated gabions, based on a specification to be prepared with the project funds. We will also assist in implementing the proposed gabions with CCC crews trained in gabion construction and re-vegetation techniques. This part of the work will be very labor-intensive, and will proceed only after the iniial contractor has completed the heavier phases of the work. Use of vegetated gabions will provide improved riparian habitat as well as aesthetic functions for the creek. Component 2, the gabion wall retrofit, will utilize techniques of landscaping along the top of the existing walls, using native plants that will overhang and tie into the wall structure. Again, labor-intensive techniques will be emphasized; we intend to advertise to obtain volunteers for much of this work, because it would appear to be appropriate in this instance; as a back-up alternative, we propose to utilize CCC Crews again. Component 3 , the design work for revegetation and re-contouring of Prefumo Creek, is intended to select the most appropriate type of revegetatioh for this particular type of stream section. We would prefer very low-tech, non-irrigated solutions for planting plans, but it would also appear that some excavation and fill will be required in order to achieve a more natural stream gradient and profile. The subject stream section is highly unnatural, having been created in the 1960 's when Prefumo Creek was diverted toward Laguna Lake as. the Laguna Lake neighborhood was being created. 3. Is this project a supplement to or being planned in lieu of a local or cooperative local-federal flood control project? If it is, please describe the agencies and organizations involved, the stage of the planning process, and the currently proposed plans. i i 3. Relationship to local flood control projects The first component, Old Garden Creek, is funded jointly by the City and Zone 9 of the County's Flood Control and Water Conservation District. It is also consistent with the overall flood management policy of the City of San Luis Obispo. At this time, that policy is concentrated upon removal of the most serious areas of deficiency in flood capacity. This section of the creek is deficient for flood flows currently because of a "hump" in the stream profile in the upper reaches, which causes deposition of silt and debris in the channel . The intent of the gabion construction is to stabilize the banks downstream of the area of this hump, since the new stream profile will result in accellerated stream flows and potentially scouring action to destabilize the banks. i I C Pagc 3 of 7 4. Please describe the project's use or public.participation in the planning, design and/or implementation or the project. What citizen organizations are sponsoring or supporting this project? U This project was subject to a public hearing in September, 1989 at which point represgntatives of the Land Conservancy, Environmental Center of San. Luis Obispo, 'and Stream Consciousness all commented. Neighbors of the project site had previously been approached by City staff, and easements and agreements had been negotiated with each individual property owner. With respect to the other components (gabion wall retrofitting and the Prefumo Creek design work) , there has been no public participation to date. We will, however, take responsibility for notifying neighbors of these two project areas to alert them to the work being performed. In addition, all necessary permits will be obtained for the gabion wall retrofit from the City (no Army Corps or Department of Fish and Game permits are anticipated) . The design work for the Prefumo Creek section will include consultation with Fish and Game and with Army Corps representatives, and permits will obtained if necessary before the design work is completed. The Land Conservancy is sponsoring the grant. The Environmental Center is supporting it, and no known opposition to it has been presented. 5. What educational benefits will be derived for the public and what technical contributions to the problem of stream restoration or stream corridor management might this project provide? The Land Conservancy has emphasized the educational benefits of each of its stream improvement projects through two means: First, we put out press releases and spend substantial time with media representatives to educate them about the intent and methods we are utilizing. Second, we utilize an increasing number and variety of volunteers to perform the work that is appropriate for them, and train them in the proper methods for planting and erosion control techniques. We would provide the same type of educational benefits for this program, too. Page 4 of 7 6411_i� 6. What will you submit to the Department of Water Resources that describes the methods and results of your project? The minimum required is completing a survey questionnaire and submitting before.and after photos of the project. We will provide a completion report to DWR that includes the following items for each component of our proposal: 1 - Old Garden Creek: Before and after photos, as-built drawings, and a memo summarizing our view of the success of our methods in the use of vegetated gabions. 2 - Gabion Wall Retrofit: Before and after photos, and a completion report summarizing the design, implementation, and monitoring process. 3 - Prefumo Creek Revegetation Design: A set of completed plans, approved by the City and other regulatory agencies as necessary, and ready for cost estimating for the 1991 grant cycle. Note: Lone-semi opermion and maintenance of the proiect site is the responsibiliry of the errant recipient. 7. What are your plans for loaf;-term management or maintenance of the stream(s) you are managing or restoring? In 1987, we completed the San Luis Obispo Creek Restoration Plan which included a commitment to monitoring the health and restoration progress for the entire stream. Together with the City and local citizens, the Land Conservancy is constantly involved in stream management issues and mitigation programs, and we monitor the success of our on-going restoration projects on a regular basis. t C Pagc 5 of 7 A. If you do not receive your grant request,what other options do you have to meet your project objectives' If your grant proposal was selected for partial funding, what components of your project would you choose for priority funding? Should DWR finding not be available, we have few other options for z achieving the objectives we have set out. We would choose to concentrate on Components 1 and 3 if we had to choose a "favorite". among the three. 9. The legislation authorizing this program requires that the applicant provide a local contribution to the costs of the project. 'Chis contribution can be monetary, materials, labor, volunteer labor, staff time, or land easements. Please state how you will meet this requirement. The City and the Zone 9 Flood Control district is already providing at least $40, 000 toward the construction in Old Garden Creek. In addition, easements underlying the older gabion walls will be contributed for access by the Conservancy and our volunteers and/or CCC crews for the retrofit program. Page 6 of 7 10.. Please outline your proposed budget. Quantify,when possible,the components of your planning or design G process, and the areal (lateral and linear) extent of restoration work, labor materials, and equipment requirements. Indicate portions to be funded by DWR and by other sources. Designate the dates you plan to begin and finish the work. z 10. Budget Component #1: Old Garden Creek Base funding from City of San Luis Obispo (5 40,000) Other contribution/CCC Crews, 3. weeks @ $1500/wk = ( 3,500) Supplemental cost (to be funded by DWR) for use of vegetated gabions = $ 14.400 Breakdown: Land Conservancy staff time (220 hours * $30) : $ 6,600 Land Conservancy overhead @ 35% 2,300 Gabion construction, supplemental material 2,500 CCC re-imbursement 2,800 Miscellaneous reserve 200 Total: $14,400 NOTE: Length of stream to be subject to gabion work = 250' x 40' Component #2 Gabion Wall Retrofit Base funding from Land Conservancy sources = ($ 1,000) Other contributions, 12 volunteers @ $50/Day, 3 days ($ 1,800) Supplemental cost (to be funded by DWR) for plant materials, equipment, volunteer coordination) _ $ 3.500 Breakdown: Land Conservancy staff time (40 hours @ $30) $1,200 C Land Conservancy overhead ($1,200 * 1.35) 400 Plant Materials 1,100 Equipment rental 400 Miscellaneous planting support products 400 Total: $3,500 NOTE: Length of stream affected by retrofit = approx. 200' Component #3: Prefumo Creek Reveaetation Design Base funding from Land Conservancy = ($ 500) Supplemental Cost, to funded by DWR for Coordination/Professional Design Fees= $ 9,200 Breakdown: Restoration specialists, design fees = $5,000 Land Conservancy staff, 60 hours @ $30 = 1,800 Land Conservancy overhead @ 35% = 2.400 Total: $9,200 GRAND TOTAL = $ 27,100 TOTAL LOCAL MATCH = $46,800 Have all of the questions been answered? An incomplete application will be disquali ted. C Pagc 7 of 7 California Department of Water Resources Division of Local Assistance Stream Restoration Program P.O. Box 942836 L Sacramento, California 94236-0001 i