Agenda Item C.1
DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEM
Meeting Date: February 6, 2024
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
SUBMITTED BY: Charles W. Ebeling, Public Works Director
PREPARED BY: Melissa Nelson, Environmental Services Manager
SUBJECT: Goleta Watershed Characterization: Water Quality Program and Trash Removal Updates
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive a presentation regarding the City’s Water Quality Program.
BACKGROUND:
As part of the Creek and Watershed Plan/Program (Action 3.3.3), the City and community desire to protect Goleta’s creeks and water quality, identify activities or areas of the City where further focus is warranted, and work to improve the health of our watersheds now and far into the future. The Goleta creek sampling program started in 2000 and consists of testing the City’s creeks for water quality parameters (i.e., chemical compounds) that can indicate the overall health of the creek. While creek sampling is not currently required by regulations, this effort was a citizen-led initiative to go beyond regulatory compliance to help protect the City’s creeks . This program has utilized the assistance of community volunteers to collect water quality samples and measurem ents from up to 26 creek monitoring sites throughout the City and surrounding watershed areas from 2000 to 2021.
The sampling data provides the City with a better understanding of potential activities and pollutants impacting water quality within City cree ks. This information has been used to guide City decisions, such as recent initiatives to reduce the impacts of trash pollution in our creeks and watersheds. These initiatives have also generated project-specific data for further evaluation.
While the City has used water quality and other data to implement City-wide programs to reduce pollution, the City and community desired a more robust evaluation to further tailor programs on a watershed -basis, prioritize watershed projects, and streamline water quality data evaluation in the future. With over 20 years of analytical data, the City had an opportunity to make the best use of th e ongoing sampling efforts. City staff, along with Geosyntec Consultants and Dudek, conducted a robust review and data analysis of the historical creek monitoring data and trash program data to characterize creek water quality and trash pollution reduction measures, and develop future action.
1 Meeting Date: February 6, 2024
DISCUSSION:
Goleta Watershed Characterization: Water Quality
The historical creek monitoring data was evaluated for statistical changes in water chemistry over time, as well as changes upstream and downstream, and during wet and dry weather, to assess which creeks or locations need additional focus to improve water quality and understa nd seasonal factors that might be affecting changes in water chemistry. Various robust statistical tests were used, as recommended by the consulting team of scientific experts selected for this purpose. These statistical tests include the one- tailed Wilcoxon rank-sum test to understand if creek water quality is improving or declining as it flows through the City , the Mann -Kendall test to understand if water quality is improving or declining at each location over time, and other methods to understand the magnitude of water quality impacts and their relationship to human health, habitats, and more.
The monitoring results indicate that the c oncentrations are typical of urban creeks , with only a few parameters that had a statistically signi ficant change in concentration over time. While most parameters are stable or decreasing from upstream to downstream, E. coli, pH, and temperature are increasing in concentration in some creeks . Creek segments were given a scor e, called a water-quality index score, to prioritize management action. Based on the findings of this evaluation, the following is proposed:
• Develop a comprehensive monitoring program, that includes data regarding stream flow, habitat, and other impairments beyond water chemistry to guide decision making.
• In conjunction with other data and efforts, prioritize watersheds and areas for future project work related to the CWMP and other planned projects. • Consider monitoring additional parameters in some locations to better understand potential sources of pollution.
• Identify sources of water pollution within the City.
• Increase monitoring collaboration with other watershed jurisdictions; and • Develop tools to streamline and automate data analysis in the future, and effectively communicate watershed health to the public.
Trash Removal Assessment
Trash is one of the most pervasive pollutants in the City’s creeks and watersheds. To address trash impacts in creeks , watersheds and across the City, beginning in 2022, Environmental Services (ES) division staff enhanced the street sweeping program to alternate the timing of street sweeping along opposite sides of a street, to include manual litter removal around obstructions, to expand routes, and to conduct targeted cleaning in 2 Meeting Date: February 6, 2024
Old Town Goleta. Also beginning in 2022, the ES division incorporated volunteer clean- up events into the Beautify Goleta program, including neighborhood and coastal cleanup days. Clean up events continue to demonstrate increased trash removal rates, with over 1,800 cubic yards of trash removed through the first 10 months of 2023 . Prior to these programs, the ES division had been conducting City-wide trash assessments by a method called on-land visual trash assessments (OVTA) . Beginning in 2022 with the expanded sweeping program, additional data collection is being performed by street sweeper operators and City staff. Both data collection methods show a strong improvement in trash grades (i.e., less trash) in 2022 and again in 2023 (a 120% increase in the percent of A grades). Through th ese efforts, the City has made steps toward improving watershed health, and collected data to guide decisions. Based on information collected from these efforts, it was identified there are areas of the City that provide the opportunity to design and install trash capture and water filtration devices. The evaluation and planning of these areas could provide significant benefits to Goleta’s watersheds.
GOLETA’S STRATEGIC PLAN
City-Wide Strategy: 1. Support Environmental Vitality.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.
ALTERNATIVES:
There are no alternatives associated with this item.
LEGAL REVIEW BY: Megan Garibaldi, City Attorney
APPROVED BY: Robert Nisbet, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Water Quality Program Update Presentation
3 ATTACHMENT 1
Water Quality Program Update Presentation
4 GOLETA WATERSHED
CHARACTERIZATION:
WATER QUALITY
Goleta City Council
February 6, 2024
5 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Watershed Characterization Goals
• Assess creek water quality
c
onditions per the Creek and
Watershed Management Plan
(Action 3.3.3)
• Enhance creek monitoring program
• Refine existing program and
out
reach strategies
• Prioritize watersheds for future
pr
ojects
6 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Summary of Historical
Creek Monitoring
7 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Original Monitoring Program Objectives
Collect baseline information about the health of the watershed Help identify sources of pollution
Educate and train a force of watershed stewards in the local community 8 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Monitoring Locations and Events
That is over 30,000 monitoring results!
9 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Risk Indicators and Associated Beneficial Use Endpoint
Public health risk during water contact recreation
• E. coli (fresh)
• Enterococcus (slough)
• Total coliform
Aquatic life and habitat risk from biostimulation/eutrophication • Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
• Nitrate (as N), phosphate
• pH, temperature
Crop production risk due to increased salts and general parameters • Conductivity
• DO
• pH
Fish habitat risk from excess suspended sediment and low DO • Turbidity
• DO
10 Water Quality Assessment
Approach
11 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Trends Over Time (Temporal)
• Evaluated the period of record
with the Mann-Kendall test
• Used Sen’s slope to determine
the change in concentration
Assessment Approach
Management Action Prioritization
Spatial
Trends
Temporal
Trends
Water
Quality
Index
Water Quality Index
• Created a single score from:
• Frequency of Exceedances
• Number of Parameters
E
xceeding
• Magnitude of Exceedances
• Based on the Canadian
Council of Ministers of the
Environment
• Calculated for each Risk
Category
Spatial Trends
• Evaluated on paired samples
• Used one-tail Wilcoxon rank-
sum test
• Calculated the percent
change in concentration
12 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Summary of
Findings
In General:
• Concentrations are very typical of urban
cr
eeks
• The risk of recreational illness received
t
he worst water quality index scores
• Only a few parameters had a statistically
s
ignificant change in concentration over
time
• Only concentrations of E. coli, pH, and
t
emperature are typically increasing from
upstream to downstream of the City
13 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Summary of
Findings
During dry weather:
• Most of the creeks have good/fair water
q
uality index scores
• Nearly all the creeks show an improvement or
no c
hange in concentration over time
• Most of the creeks show an improvement or
no c
hange in concentration across the City
During wet weather:
• Nearly all the creeks have good/fair water
q
uality index score
• Nearly all the creeks show an improvement or
no c
hange in concentration over time
• Most of the creeks show an improvement or
no c
hange in concentration across the City
14 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Exceedance Frequency, Temporal Trends, and Spatial Trends Dry Weather – E. coli
Value =
Median
Concentration
15 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Exceedance Frequency, Temporal Trends, and Spatial Trends Dry Weather – Nitrate (as N)
Value =
Median
Concentration
16 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Exceedance Frequency, Temporal Trends, and Spatial Trends Dry Weather – Conductivity
Value =
Median
Concentration
17 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Exceedance Frequency, Temporal Trends, and Spatial Trends Wet Weather – E. coli
Value =
Median
Concentration
18 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Management
Action
Prioritization
High Priority (Investigate Causal Factors,
Address Sources as Warranted)
• Poor or marginal WQI and no
d
ecreasing trends across the City or
over time
Low Priority (Reduce Monitoring)
• Good or fair WQI and no increasing
t
rends across the City or over time
Medium Priority (Enhanced Monitoring,
Investigate as Warranted)
•All other conditions
F
or each creek segment,
weather condition, &
risk
19 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Creek Management Priorities
Dry Weather
20 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Creek Management Priorities
Wet Weather
21 Recommendations
22 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Enhanced Monitoring Program Objectives
Monitor more direct indicators of beneficial use impairments Identify sources of indicator impacts within the City
Continue to track water quality trends
Increase monitoring collaboration with other watershed jurisdictions Effectively communicate watershed health to the public
23 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Enhanced Monitoring Program Objectives
Monitor more direct indicators of beneficial use impairments Identify sources of indicator impacts within the City
Continue to track water quality trends
Increase monitoring collaboration with other watershed jurisdictions Effectively communicate watershed health to the public
24 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Enhanced Monitoring Program Objectives
Monitor more direct indicators of beneficial use impairments Identify sources of indicator impacts within the City
Continue to track water quality trends
Increase monitoring collaboration with other watershed jurisdictions Effectively communicate watershed health to the public
25 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Enhanced Monitoring Program Objectives
Monitor more direct indicators of beneficial use impairments Identify sources of indicator impacts within the City
Continue to track water quality trends
Increase monitoring collaboration with other watershed jurisdictions Effectively communicate watershed health to the public
26 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Enhanced Monitoring Program Objectives
Monitor more direct indicators of beneficial use impairments Identify sources of indicator impacts within the City
Continue to track water quality trends
Increase monitoring collaboration with other watershed jurisdictions Effectively communicate watershed health to the public
27 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
NEXT
STEPS
• Began desktop visual investigation of
c
ausal factors behind high-priority
management action locations.
• Develop comprehensive monitoring
p
rogram, to include flow monitoring,
habitat and wildlife, other creek
impairments and more, to guide
decisions and prioritize work efforts.
• Evaluate funding opportunities to
i
mplement the enhanced monitoring
program.
• Develop tools for streamlined data
e
valuation and stakeholder
communication
28 TRASH REMOVAL ASSESSMENT
Goleta City Council
February 6, 2024
29 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Trash Removal and Monitoring Programs
Enhanced Street Sweeping
Beautify Goleta: Volunteer Cleanup Program
On-land Visual Trash Assessments (OVTA)
30 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Enhanced Street Sweeping
31 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Beautify Goleta: Volunteer Cleanup Program
https://goletapwgis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/414f0bfc86c4440dbe9caa3b86d526d6 32 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
OVTAs
33 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
0 50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Pounds of Trash Removed
Street
Sweeping
Volunteer
Clean Up
*
Program Effectiveness
*Data from November and December is pending, projected values are shown in light blue Program
2022: Revised Sweeping
Program and Beautify
Goleta Cleanups
34 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
52%
22%
39%
72%
86%
94%
35%
57%
46%
28%
14%
6%
12%
20%
15%
2% 0.4%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
OVTA Street
Sweeping
OVTA Street
Sweeping
OVTA Street
Sweeping
OVTA Street
Sweeping
2018 2021 2022 2023
Percent of Grades
A
B
C
D
GRADE
Monitoring Results
35 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Program
Consideration
• Continue to implement volunteer
c
lean up events.
• Evaluate the need for additional
ev
ents; refine the existing program to
target hot spots.
• Incorporate results into design of the
F
ull Trash Capture project.
• Increase stakeholder outreach to
i
mprove trash conditions in creeks.
36 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
EXTRA Slides
37 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Water Quality Index Score by Risk
Dry Weather
Creeks within the City Downstream
WQI Score
Rec Illness Biostim Ag Fish Habitat
Maria Ygnacio Creek MY1 81 62 89 91
San Jose Creek SJ1 61 64 85 98
Las Vegas Creek &
San Pedro Creek SP1 77 74 84 98
Glen Annie Canyon Creek GA1 59 70 88 95
El Encanto Creek DV22 26 71 77 88
Bell Creek BL1 32 48 68 63
Tecolote Creek TC1 52 72 65 61
38 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Water Quality Index Score by Risk
Wet Weather
Creeks within the City Downstream
WQI Score
Rec Illness Biostim Ag Fish Habitat
Maria Ygnacio Creek MY1 7 76 98 98
San Jose Creek SJ1 18 88 95 100
Las Vegas Creek &
San Pedro Creek SP1 15 76 94 100
Glen Annie Canyon Creek GA1 19 70 95 100
El Encanto Creek DV22 15 73 83 100
Bell Creek BL1 22 65 95 94
Tecolote Creek TC1 32 87 62 80
39 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Spatial Trends Summary Table
Dry Weather
Creeks within
the City Upstream Downstream
Percent Change in Median Concentration from Upstream to Downstream E. Coli Enterococcus
Total
Coliform
Dissolved
Oxygen**
Nitrate
(as N) pH Phosphate Temperature Conductivity Turbidity
Maria Ygnacio Creek MY2 MY1 4,133% 1,200%
San Jose Creek SJ2 SJ1 0% 50% 25% -68% 5% 6% 3%
Las Vegas Creek LV1 SP1 -93% 5% 12% -66%
San Pedro Creek SP3 SP1 -54% 49% 17% -68% 2% 13% 7%
Glen Annie Canyon
Creek GA2 GA1 -51% -35% 7% -30% 1% -27% 2% 10%
El Encanto Creek
(East) DV24 DV22 142% 0%* 66% -77% 16% -75% 12% -19% -67% El Encanto Creek
(West) DV25 DV22 815% 233% 160% 4,950% 14% -99% 21% 4% -61% Bell Creek BL2 BL1 -47% 160% 13% -87% 2% 15% 162% 357%
Tecolote Creek TC2 TC1 -1% 56% 137%
Notes:
*Median concentrations of both samples were above the method detection limit **Increasing concentrations is an improvement therefore the color coding was reversed Grey cells indicate creeks that do not have a statistically significant change in concentration 40 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Spatial Trends Summary Table
Wet Weather
Creeks within
the City Upstream Downstream
Percent Change in Median Concentration from Upstream to Downstream E. Coli Enterococcus
Total
Coliform
Dissolved
Oxygen**
Nitrate
(as N) pH Phosphate Temperature** Conductivity Turbidity Maria Ygnacio
Creek MY2 MY1 1083% NS 194% 450% -38%
San Jose Creek SJ2 SJ1 138% NS 26% 3% 0.4% 52%
Las Vegas Creek LV1 SP1 NS -69% -42% 9% -65%
San Pedro Creek SP3 SP1 44% NS 42% 9%
Glen Annie Canyon
Creek GA2 GA1 1% -8% 2.4%
El Encanto Creek
(East) DV24 DV22 111% NS 80% NS 15% NS 5% -57%
El Encanto Creek
(West) DV25 DV22 209% NS 0%* 122% NS 18% NS 15% -45%
Bell Creek BL2 BL1 NS NS 16% 47%
Tecolote Creek TC2 TC1 NS 214% NS 2% 164%
Notes:
*Median concentrations of both samples were above the method detection limit **Increasing concentrations is an improvement therefore the color coding was reversed Blue cells labeled NS indicate creeks with <5 pairs of monitoring samples Grey cells indicate creeks that do not have a statistically significant change in concentration 41 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Temporal Trends Summary Table
Dry Weather
Creeks within
the City Downstream
Percent Change in Concentration per Year
E. Coli Enterococcus
Total
Coliform
Dissolved
Oxygen
Nitrate
(as N) pH Phosphate Temperature Conductivity Turbidity
Maria Ygnacio Creek MY1 1.8%
San Jose Creek SJ1
Las Vegas Creek &
San Pedro Creek SP1 0.1% -0.8%
Glen Annie Canyon
Creek GA1 0.3% -0.6% -1.3%** 0.1% 0.3%
El Encanto Creek DV22 0%* -0.1% 1.8%
Bell Creek BL1 -5.4%** 5.7%**
Tecolote Creek TC1 -0.5%
Notes:
Yellow cells have a statistically significant change in concentration with a percent change <0.5% Grey cells indicate creeks that do not have a statistically significant change in concentration over time *Median concentrations was above the method detection limit **Limited recent data to confirm these trends
42 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Temporal Trends Summary Table
Wet Weather
Creeks within
the City Downstream
Percent Change in Concentration per Year
E. Coli Enterococcus
Total
Coliform
Dissolved
Oxygen
Nitrate
(as N) pH Phosphate Temperature Conductivity Turbidity
Maria Ygnacio Creek MY1 NS 0%* -1.0% 19%
San Jose Creek SJ1 NS 0.5%
Las Vegas Creek &
San Pedro Creek SP1 NS 0%*
Glen Annie Canyon
Creek GA1 NS 0%*
El Encanto Creek DV22 NS 0%* NS NS
Bell Creek BL1 1.2%
Tecolote Creek TC1
Notes:
Yellow cells have a statistically significant change in concentration with a percent change <0.5% Blue cells labeled NS indicate creeks with an insufficient number of monitoring samples (<8) Grey cells indicate creeks that do not have a statistically significant change in concentration over time *Median concentration was above the method detection limit 43 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Glen Annie Creek (GA1) Temperature Time Series
Example of a strong seasonal trends
44 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Prioritization of Management Action
Dry Weather
Creeks within the City Upstream Downstream
Management Priority
Rec Illness Biostim Ag Fish
Habitat
Maria Ygnacio Creek MY2 MY1 Low High Medium Low
San Jose Creek SJ2 SJ1 High Medium Low Low
Las Vegas Creek LV1 SP1 Low Low Low Low
San Pedro Creek SP3 SP1 Low Low Low Low
Glen Annie Canyon
Creek GA2 GA1 Medium Low Low Low
El Encanto Creek (East) DV24 DV22 High Low Low Low
El Encanto Creek (West) DV25 DV22 High Medium Low Medium Bell Creek BL2 BL1 Medium High Medium High
Tecolote Creek TC2 TC1 High Low Medium High
45 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Prioritization of Management Action
Wet Weather
Creeks within the City Upstream Downstream
Management Priority
Rec Illness Biostim Ag Fish
Habitat
Maria Ygnacio Creek MY2 MY1 Medium Medium Low Low
San Jose Creek SJ2 SJ1 Medium Low Low Medium
Las Vegas Creek LV1 SP1 Medium Low Low Low
San Pedro Creek SP3 SP1 Medium Low Low Low
Glen Annie Canyon
Creek GA2 GA1 Medium Low Low Low
El Encanto Creek (East) DV24 DV22 Medium Low Low Low
El Encanto Creek (West) DV25 DV22 Medium Low Low Low
Bell Creek BL2 BL1 Medium High Medium Low
Tecolote Creek TC2 TC1 Medium Low High Low
*Reduced from high priority due to lower exposure rates and illness likelihood during wet weather 46 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS
Translate Monitoring Results into
Communication Dashboards
Field Data
Field Measurements,
OVTA, Street
sweeping
(App-Based Forms)
Lab Analysis
Data
(Lab EDD)
Semi-Automated
Upload with
QC/QA
EQuIS Environmental
Database
(Online SQL Server)
Automated
Data Analysis
(Python)
ArcSDE Geodatabase
(Online SQL Server)
Mirror data
to Goleta
AGOL
Publish
Dashboards
47