SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 10 the San Lorenzo Valley Water District presents information on nitrate within those watersheds (Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2018). The following information is from that report, which notes that wastewater contains high concentrations of nutrients and organic carbon. Most nitrogen in wastewater is converted to the nitrate form, which is highly soluble and readily transmitted through the soil to ground or surface waters. Nutrients can stimulate biological productivity in surface waters leading to high concentrations of organic carbon at downstream water intakes. Organic carbon combined with disinfectants used at water treatment plants produces trihalomethanes (THMs), five haloacetic acids (HAA5) and other disinfection byproducts (DBP) which can have long-term health implications. Excessive algal growth, promoted by introducing additional nitrate into a natural system in which phosphorus is widely available, also causes taste and odor problems in drinking water systems. Water purveyors may perform treatment for aesthetics. The City of Santa Cruz spent approximately $60,000/year on treatment when algae blooms (resulting from excess nitrate and nutrients) in its surface water sources were leading to taste and odor problems in the drinking water (Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2018). No other water purveyors have reported any issues related to elevated nitrate.
The potential impacts to residents supplied by groundwater from private domestic wells are not well known due to a lack of publically available data; private well owners are not required to annually test or report the water quality to local or state government. The County of Santa Cruz mandates a one-time testing of nitrate (as well as TDS), chloride, iron and manganese) for all new wells. Voluntary results are sometimes provided when tests are completed by the residents. Any private well that reports amounts in excess of the state MCL will not be approved to serve new development until the contaminants have been addressed to meet applicable drinking water standards. Where an existing private water source is found to exceed the MCL, the property owner is advised of the result and appropriate measures that should be taken.
Figures 1 and 2 presents maps of nitrate sampling results in the region from the USGS and the SWRCB.
The SWRCB map of nitrate-impacted wells shows two locations where the recent detections of nitrate were above the MCL. While it is not possible to fully evaluate the potential impacts to private domestic wells due to the lack of publicly available data, nitrate is not expected to be threat in other areas, based on land use and geologic conditions.
Existing efforts being undertaken in the region to address the impacts:
Public water suppliers treat and/or blend source water from multiple sources to reduce contaminants including, where applicable, nitrate to produce water that meets state and federal drinking water standards. As noted above, additional treatment for aesthetics (taste and odor) may also occur. In addition, the implementation of the County’s Nitrate Management Plan and implementation of the TMDL for the San Lorenzo Watershed will continue to address impacts. Implementing the TMDL provides for enhanced treatment for nitrogen removal for septic systems in sandy soils, and other measures. Santa Cruz County is implementing strict septic system standards in the vicinity of public supply wells, which will help to address nitrate from septic systems. Agricultural operations are implementing the State Regional Water Board Agricultural order to reduce nitrogen discharge. Technical assistance is also provided by the Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County and Agricultural Extension. In the meantime, water supply wells are being managed to meet state drinking water standards in the delivered supply. The region is also implementing the nitrate TMDL for the San Lorenzo River and the nutrient TMDL for the Pajaro River.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 11 Any additional efforts needed to address the impacts:
With respect to groundwater, in 2020, the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board will be offering a free well testing program for residents in Santa Cruz County. Data from this program is anticipated to improve the assessment of groundwater quality in the region and inform future actions.
With respect to the region’s largest surface water source, since the San Lorenzo River water is pumped to Loch Lomond Reservoir, the linkage between nitrate, algae production and the resulting odors and disinfection-by-product precursors will continue to be a challenge, especially for the Santa Cruz Water Department (SCWD) as well as for San Lorenzo Valley Water District (SLVWD) (Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, 2018).
ARSENIC
Arsenic is a naturally occurring trace component present in many rocks and sediments. Arsenic may be released into groundwater aquifers naturally via biogeochemical processes. The USGS identifies human activities that can result in arsenic releases into groundwater include mining, industry activities, animal feed operations, and its use as a wood preservative and pesticide (USGS, 2019). Arsenic poses a risk to drinking water supplies due to its adverse human health effects, it is toxic at low levels and is a known carcinogen.
Due to its potential health risks, arsenic is a regulated trace element. In November 2008, the State of California completed the Revised Drinking Water Standard for Arsenic, and adopted an MCL equivalent to the federal EPA standard of 0.010 mg/l (equivalent to 10 micrograms per liter, μg/L).
Location and extent of contamination in the region:
Arsenic occurs naturally in scattered locations throughout the Region. It is present within the geologic formations (soils, rocks) and is detected in groundwater but typically not in surface waters. Most levels detected within the Santa Cruz region are well below the state drinking water standard. Figure 3 presents well water quality sampling results from the USGS Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Priority Basin Project (GAMA-PBP) of shallow aquifers typically used for private domestic and small system drinking-water supplies1
.
In 2003, Soquel Creek Water District (SqCWD) conducted a special investigation of the low concentrations of arsenic and concluded that the arsenic detections are most likely associated with the natural occurrence of arsenic resulting from the depositional and geochemical conditions in the coastal environment. Within the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin, water quality sampling, generally, shows very low arsenic concentrations near the laboratory detection limit (generally less than 1 μg/L).
Slightly higher arsenic concentrations ranging from 2.0 - 5.5 μg/L are regularly detected at two municipal water supply wells that produce groundwater from the Purisima Formation, near Aptos Village. All concentrations are below the state drinking water standard of 10 μg/L. There have been no increasing concentration arsenic trends in affected wells because the source of arsenic occurs naturally within the sediments and is not being added to from a point source.
Within the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin, samples from the last 3 years have consistently been below 4 mg/L. with the exception of a few wells testing at levels higher than 10 mg/L in 2014. In 2014, following an arsenic detection greater than 10 mg/L in one SLVWD supply well located on Graham Hill Road, blending of groundwater from this source with surrounding supply wells was implemented in order to comply with the arsenic MCL.
1 https://ca.water.usgs.gov/projects/gama/water-quality-results/
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 12 Impacts caused by the contamination to communities within the region:
Public water agencies treat drinking water to reduce or remove arsenic to meet or exceed state drinking water standards. There are economic impacts to agencies and, thus in turn, to consumers as the cost to implement, operate and maintain treatment systems and water quality monitoring are borne by the consumers. As described above, the potential impacts to residents supplied by groundwater from private domestic wells are not well known due to a lack of publically available data; private well owners are not required to annually test or report the water quality to local or state government.
Existing efforts being undertaken in the region to address the impacts:
As a naturally occurring trace element, no efforts are being undertaken to address the source of arsenic.
Public water suppliers operate water treatment plants that reduce the amount of arsenic (and a suite of other contaminants) or blend source water from multiple sources to produce water that achieves state and federal standards for the drinking water. Treatment methods vary but by way of example, Soquel Creek Water District uses treatment technology that is based on oxidation with sodium hypochlorite (chlorine bleach) and ferric chloride to enhance the ability of arsenic to be filtered out through the filter media (anthracite and sand). The District’s two arsenic treatment plants are successful in achieving roughly 50 percent removal of the arsenic content of the raw groundwater, so that drinking water entering the distribution system has arsenic levels target below the detection level for purposes of reporting (DLR). SVWD uses sand and anthracite media as part of its typical treatment train, which reduces (already low levels of) arsenic. SLVWD utilizes source water blending in order to meet the MCL at the entry point to the distribution system.
Any additional efforts needed to address the impacts:
As discussed above, the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board will be offering a free domestic well testing program in Santa Cruz County. The Santa Cruz IRWM Region and the two GSA’s in the region are anticipating collaborating with the Regional Board to inform residents of the testing program.
PERCHLORATE
Perchlorate is a manmade chemical used as a propellant for rockets, missiles, fireworks, and used in the production of other flammable materials and explosives (EPA, 2017). It occurs naturally in arid regions of the southwestern United States. Perchlorate contamination in California has been detected at sites where there was the manufacture, maintenance, use and disposal of ammunition and rocket fuel (SWRCB, 2017a). It is a highly soluble contaminant that may migrate rapidly from soil into groundwater.
Perchlorate contamination exceeding the DLR (4 µg/L) or the state MCL (6 µg/L) is has not been detected in the Region. Routine water quality sampling and monitoring conducted by the public water purveyors will continue to monitor for exceedances.
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM (Chromium VI)
Chromium is a naturally occurring metallic element that can be found naturally in water, soil, and rocks.
It may also occur in groundwater due to industrial contamination. It is also widely present in soil and plants. Sampling of drinking water sources throughout California suggests that hexavalent chromium may occur naturally in groundwater at many locations (SWRCB, 2017b).
Hexavalent Chromium, also referred to as Chromium VI, may pose a potential public health risk even when present at low levels. California has regulated hexavalent chromium in drinking water at 50 ug/L through the total chromium standard since the 1970s. The State MCL specific to hexavalent chromium
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 13 or chromium VI is currently undefined per the SWRCB. This chromium VI-specific MCL was set at 10 µg/L in May 2014. In 2016, the Superior Court of California ruled the State’s newly designated MCL for hexavalent chromium invalid. The Court found the California Department of Public Health (DPH) failed to consider economic feasibility when it set the hexavalent chromium MCL of 10 parts per billion (ppb) (10 µg/L). The lower MCL was withdrawn by the SWRCB, effective September 11, 2017. It is expected that the state will adopt a drinking water standard lower than 50 μg/L in the future. Until a revised MCL is adopted by the SWRCB, the total chromium MCL (50 µg/L) is being used as the drinking water standard.
Location and extent of contamination in the region
Hexavalent chromium is naturally occurring within the geologic formations in the Region – it is not present due to industrial contamination. In the Santa Cruz Mid-County Basin and the Pajaro Basin, chromium VI occurs in the Aromas aquifer ranging between 5 and 40 µg/L (MGA, 2019). In the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin, wells tested for hexavalent chromium in the Scotts Valley Water District do not indicate samples above the DLR.
Impacts caused by the contamination to communities within the region The impacts caused by contamination include both potential health and economic impacts for communities. Depending upon the revised MCL to be set by the SWRCB, it is expected there will be economic impacts to water purveyors and consumers resulting from additional treatment requirements.
Existing efforts being undertaken in the region to address the impacts Soquel Creek Water District, located in the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin, has undertaken a number of efforts related to its system operations and planning related to Chromium VI. The District is entirely dependent upon groundwater. Four of the District’s wells (Altivo, Seascape, San Andreas, and Bonita) have Chromium VI levels above 10 ppb. All wells have total Chromium levels below 50 ppb.
The Altivo Well is generally only used for emergency purposes. The District has conducted several pilot studies including:
• Completing a successful pilot treatment project using strong-base anion exchange with grant funding by the Water Research Foundation from April to August 2013; • Conducting a demonstration treatment using strong-base anion exchange from October 2014 to December 2017, which enabled SqCWD to achieve compliance with the now invalidated MCL; • Completing a demonstration treatment testing using stannous chloride as a reducing agent (to convert Chromium VI to Chromium III) with filtration of the precipitate from January to March 2017.
The District completed environmental permitting for a permanent treatment facility and installed new water transmission mains to treat at a centralized location. The design and installation of a permanent, centralized treatment facility to treat water from Seascape, Bonita and San Andreas wells is currently on hold until the new MCL is established by the State. The District will then identify which wells will require treatment, if any, and which treatment alternative will be able to meet the new standard.
Any additional efforts needed to address the impacts
If a new, lower MCL for chromium VI is established by the State, the Soquel Creek Water District and affected small public water systems will identify which wells will require treatment to meet the MCL, if any, and which treatment alternative will be used to meet the new standard.
Because domestic wells are exempt from annual testing requirements, there is very limited publically available data on the private well water quality in the Region. Elevated chromium would not be
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 14 expected in private wells except those located in the Aromas aquifer. As noted earlier, the County of Santa Cruz mandates a one-time testing of nitrate, total dissolved solids, chloride, iron and manganese for all new wells. In addition, voluntary water quality testing results are sometimes provided by residents. Any private well that report amounts in excess of the state MCL will not be approved to serve new development until the contaminants have been addressed to meet applicable drinking water standards. Where an existing private water source is found to exceed the MCL, the property owner is advised of the result and appropriate measures that should be taken.
Residents that rely upon groundwater from private domestic wells may not test their water and may be uninformed of the quality of their drinking water. It is possible individuals relying upon private wells have groundwater that exceeds state drinking water standards for chromium VI and other contaminants. It can be very costly to treat water from contaminated to meet drinking water. There are potentially significant economic impacts to private wells owners and small water systems, particularly low income and economically disadvantaged households and communities, faced with costly water treatment, well replacement or relocation, or purchasing bottled water.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 15 Table 3-1 (Addendum). Annual Consumer Confidence Reporting (CCR) on Water Quality for AB 1249 Contaminants1, 2 Arsenic
(ppb)
Nitrate
(ppm)
Chrome VI
(ppb)
Perchlorate
(ppb)
Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) 103 104 In Revision5 6 ug/l6 Public Health Goal (PHG) or Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) 0.004 10 0.02 1 ug/l Water System Year Pop.
Served Source7 Range Avg. Range Avg. Range Avg. Range Avg.
SANTA CRUZ WATER DEPARTMENT8 2018 97,767 SW <1.0 - 3.6 <1.0 <0.02 - 0.64 0.26 <0.02 - 0.05 0.03 WATSONVILLE, CITY OF9 2018 65,966 SW 0 - 6.2 ND 0 - 3.7 0.07 SOQUEL CREEK WATER DISTRICT 2018 37,720 GW ND – 2.7 0.44 SAN LORENZO VALLEY WATER DIST 2018 21,145 SW <2‐3.2 <2 <0.4‐2.3 0.8 SCOTTS VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 2018 10,509 GW ND - 8.9 1.88 ND - 0.34 0.07 SLVWD - FELTON WATER SYSTEM 2018 4,340 SW
CENTRAL WATER DISTRICT10 2018 2,700 GW 1.0-4.9 4.9 5 - 12 12 APTOS HIGH SCHOOL11 2018 1,925 GW 1.2 4.5-4.6 4.6
MT. HERMON ASSOCIATION, INC.12 2018 2,400 GW 0.5 0-0.1 0.1 FOREST LAKES MWC 2018 1,200 GW 4.1-6.4 5.2 ND-0.48 0.11 0.1 TROUT GULCH MUTUAL WATER COMPANY 2016 552 GW 2.6
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS 2017 550 GW 0.77
BUENA VISTA MIGRANT CENTER 2017 455 GW 3.2
MISSION SPRINGS CONFERENCE CENTER 2014 400 GW 2.1
SAN ANDREAS MUTUAL WATER CO 2017 350 GW 5.6 - 7.4
LAS CUMBRES MUTUAL WATER CO 2017 337 GU 0.0 - 1.1
KITAYAMA BROTHERS 2017 300 GW 10
RANCHO SAN ANDREAS 2015 200 GW <2.0- 3 <0.1 - <0.4 <0.05 <4.0 MONTE VISTA CHRISTIAN SCHOOL 2016 200 GW 17 0.49
BONNY DOON SCHOOL 2015 160 GW < 2.0 < 0.1 <0.2 < 4.0
SHERIFF'S REHAB 2016 150 GW 0.64
JARDINES DEL VALLE 2015 150 GW <2.0 <0.1 <0.2 <2.0
SANTA CRUZ KOA CAMPGROUNDS 2014 100 GW 14
ST FRANCIS TRACT WATER SYSTEM 2017 90 GW 0.97
FERN GROVE WATER CLUB 2017 65 GW 2.6 0.34 0.45
LAS COLINAS ROAD & WATER ASSN 2017 60 GW 6
ALLAN LANE WATER ASSOCIATION 2017 54 GW 2
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 16 Arsenic
(ppb)
Nitrate
(ppm)
Chrome VI
(ppb)
Perchlorate
(ppb)
Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) 103 104 In Revision5 6 ug/l6 Public Health Goal (PHG) or Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) 0.004 10 0.02 1 ug/l Water System Year Pop.
Served Source7 Range Avg. Range Avg. Range Avg. Range Avg.
RIVER GROVE MUTUAL WATER ASSN 2016 54 SW 4.9
JARVIS MUTUAL WATER SYSTEM 2016 53 GW 0.58
APTOS RIDGE MUTUAL WATER CO 2017 50 GW 4.9
CAMP ST FRANCIS 2017 50 GW 2.3 7.1
Notes:
1. Table presents single year of publically available data from CCR reports and/or data online at: https://sdwis.waterboards.ca.gov
2. Includes systems serving populations of 50 or more.
3. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/gama/docs/coc_arsenic.pdf
4. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/gama/docs/coc_nitrate.pdf
5. Chromium VI MCL is currently in revision by SWRCB, prior to 2014 the Chromium VI MCL was 50 µg/L.
6. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/gama/docs/coc_perchlorate.pdf
7. Source Water Definitions
GU - Groundwater UDI Surface Water – System has a source that provides water under the direct influence of surface water (e.g., unprotected well or springs) and no surface water sources.
GUP - Purchased Groundwater UDI Surface Water – System purchases water that originates from source that provides water under the direct influence of surface water (e.g., unprotected well or springs) and no surface water sources.
GW - Groundwater – System has a groundwater source that is not under the direct influence of surface water (e.g., protected wells) and no surface water or groundwater under the influence of surface water sources.
GWP - Purchased Groundwater – System purchases water that originates from groundwater source that is not under the direct influence of surface water (e.g., protected wells) and no surface water or groundwater under the influence of surface water sources.
SW - Surface Water – System has a surface source (e.g., river, reservoir, intake).
SWP - Purchased Surface Water – System purchases water that originates from a surface source (e.g., river, reservoir, intake).
8. City of Santa Cruz reports treated water average and source water range
9. City of Watsonville is reported for treated groundwater
10. Central Water District reports the highest level detected rather than the average
11. Aptos High School reports the highest level detected rather than the average
12. Mount Hermon Association reports the highest level detected rather than the average
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 17 Figure 3-1 (Addendum). Map of USGS Groundwater Quality Sampling of Nitrate Source:
https://ca.water.usgs.gov/projects/gama/water-quality-results/
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 18 Figure 3-2 (Addendum). Map of Nitrate Impacted Wells with Detections Above the State MCL (SWRCB) Source: https://gispublic.waterboards.ca.gov/portal/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=a884c5cc81844b289b666f15fad3dc7d
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 19 Figure 3-3 (Addendum). Map of USGS Groundwater Quality Sampling of Arsenic Source: https://ca.water.usgs.gov/projects/gama/water-quality-results/
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 20 Figure 3-4 (Addendum). Map of USGS Groundwater Quality Sampling of Perchlorate Source: https://ca.water.usgs.gov/projects/gama/water-quality-results/
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 21 Figure 3-5 (Addendum). Map of USGS Groundwater Quality Sampling of Chromium VI Source: https://ca.water.usgs.gov/projects/gama/water-quality-results/
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 22 CHAPTER 4: GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The 2016 Plan Standards require the Plan Objectives address the following climate change adaptation and mitigation requirements:
• Address adapting to changes in the amount, intensity, timing, quality and variability of runoff and recharge.
• Consider the effects of sea level rise (SLR) on water supply conditions and identify suitable adaptation measures.
• Reduce energy consumption, especially the energy embedded in water use, and ultimately reducing Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions.
• Consider, where practical, the strategies adopted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in its AB 32 Scoping Plan, when evaluating different ways to meeting IRWM plan objectives. • Consider options for carbon sequestration and using renewable energy where such options are integrally tied to supporting IRWM Plan objectives.
The 2014 Plan identifies the IRWM goals and objectives for the region and provide a basis for establishing priorities, identifying strategies, and informing decision making to guide IRWM efforts. These goals and objectives were developed through an iterative and consensus-based process led by a working group of RWMG representatives and stakeholders. That process resulted in the IRWM Conceptual Framework (2012) which directly informed the 2014 IRWM Plan. This framework presents a goal, which is supported by quantifiable objectives and conditional targets that are used to track progress of the IRWM implementation. The development of goals, objectives and strategies considered the effects of climate change on the region, including the effects of sea level rise. The strategies to achieve the goals and objectives of the IRWM Plan encourage and promote projects that implement climate change mitigation and adaptation measures, including water use efficiency, energy efficiency, water recycling, and reuse of urban runoff.
4.5 SANTA CRUZ IRWM PLAN OBJECTIVE
The 2016 Plan Standards require the Plan to: Address adapting to changes in the amount, intensity, timing, quality and variability of runoff and recharge.
Santa Cruz 2014 IRWM Plan Chapter 4 Goal and Objective, Section 4.5 Santa Cruz IRWM Plan Objectives Adapting to changes in runoff and recharge is included within the 2014 IRWM Plan Objectives. Each of four functional areas upon which the Plan framework is structured (Water Supply, Water Quality, Watershed Resources, and Flood/Stormwater Management) includes prioritized strategies (high, moderate) related to changes in the amount, intensity, timing, quality and variability of runoff and recharge.
As such, no additional changes are proposed to further address this in the 2019 Addendum. Since the completion of the 2014 IRWM Plan, with funding support from the State Water Resources Control Board Stormwater Grant Program implementation of Low Impact Development projects were implemented at four sites featuring stormwater capture and groundwater recharge. This work was completed by the County of Santa Cruz, Scotts Valley Water District, the City of Santa Cruz with related technical workshops and trainings, and public education by the Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County have been completed.
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 23 The 2016 Plan Standards require the Plan to: Consider the effects of sea level rise (SLR) on water supply conditions and identify suitable adaptation measures.
Santa Cruz 2014 IRWM Plan Chapter 4 Goal and Objective, Section 4.5 Santa Cruz IRWM Plan Objectives Consideration of the effects of sea level rise on water resources in the region, including water supply conditions, were included in the development of the IRWM Conceptual Framework and are reflected in the 2014 IRMW Plan Objectives. Suitable adaptation measures are incorporated into the prioritized Strategies presented in the 2014 Plan. Specifically, within the Water Supply objective and the associated strategies and adaptation measures to protect against seawater intrusion. The Water Supply objective from the 2014 IRWM Plan is to: ensure a reliable and sustainable local water supply through strategies that diversify the supply portfolio, develop production from alternative/supplemental sources, protect and enhance surface and ground water, protect against seawater intrusion, and maximize efficient delivery and use.
High priority strategies presented in the Plan include:
• Shifting groundwater pumping away from coastal zone;
• Developing production from alternative/supplemental water supply sources. This includes sources that are more climate/drought resilient such as recycled water; and, • Continue implementation of demand management measures (multiple) including: water conservation and irrigation management programs, rebates, and conservation pricing.
These measures aim to reduce groundwater overdraft in the Mid-County Groundwater Basin and raise coastal groundwater elevations to prevent further seawater intrusion into the Basin groundwater supply aquifers.
Chapter 15 – Climate Change presents additional information on suitable adaptation measures.
4.2.4 ADDENDUM - CLIMATE CHANGE
The 2016 Plan Standards require the Plan to: Reducing energy consumption, especially the energy embedded in water use, and ultimately reducing GHG emissions.
Santa Cruz 2014 IRWM Plan Chapter 4 Goal and Objective, Section 4.2.4 Climate Change The strategies identified through the conceptual framework to achieve the goals and objectives of the IRWM Plan encourage and promote projects that implement climate change mitigation and adaptation measures, including water use efficiency, energy efficiency, water recycling, and reuse of urban runoff. The project prioritization process gives preference to projects that can demonstrate climate change mitigation or adaptation measures, and/or reduced GHG emissions compared with project alternatives. 2019 Addendum to the Santa Cruz IRWM Plan: All aspects of water resources management have an impact on GHG emissions, including the distribution, treatment and use of water for domestic, municipal, industrial, and agricultural supply. Water management results in the consumption of significant amounts of energy and the accompanying production of GHG emissions, especially where water must be pumped from long distances, from the ground, or over significant elevations. The objectives and related strategies of the Plan include seeking longterm solutions to reduce energy consumption, especially the energy embedded in water use, with a goal to reducing GHG emissions.
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 24 To address the connection between water resource management and energy, several key strategies and actions described in the Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning (US EPA Region 9 and DWR 2011) can be encouraged by the RWMG through the IRWM planning process. These include the following:
Emissions from Water Supply and Delivery
• Select energy sources with low carbon content, such as Monterey Bay Community Power green electricity purchases
• Prioritize pump and infrastructure upgrades based on energy efficiency • Reduce water use by all sectors of the community through conservation and water efficient irrigation • Install solar PV at remote pump and infrastructure sites and provide incentives for private investment in solar for similar infrastructure
• Schedule pumping to reduce peak hour (Noon - 5:00pm) energy use that has the highest carbon content Staff Fleet
• Invest in energy efficient/low carbon fleet vehicles
OBJECTIVE / RELATED STRATEGY QUALITATIVE MEASUREMENT QUANTITATIVE MEASUREMENT Seek long-term solutions to reduce
energy consumption, especially the
energy embedded in water use, with
a goal to reducing GHG emissions.
List of energy efficiency and
energy conservation strategies,
and related recommendations for
reducing greenhouse gases.
GHG reduction estimates from
implementing energy efficiency
and energy conservation strategies
of projects implemented through
the IRWM Program.
The 2016 Plan Standards require the Plan to: Consider options for carbon sequestration and using renewable energy where such options are integrally tied to supporting IRWM Plan objectives.
Santa Cruz 2014 IRWM Plan Chapter 4 Goal and Objective, Section 4.2.4 Climate Change The strategies identified through the conceptual framework to achieve the goals and objectives of the IRWM Plan encourage and promote projects that implement climate change mitigation and adaptation measures, including water use efficiency, energy efficiency, water recycling, and reuse of urban runoff. The project prioritization process gives preference to projects that can demonstrate climate change mitigation or adaptation measures, and/or reduced GHG emissions compared with project alternatives. 2019 Addendum to the Santa Cruz IRWM Plan: Carbon sequestration and use of renewable energy will be considered where these options are integrally tied to supporting IRWM Plan objectives. To assess progress related to this on future IRWM projects, the number of IRWM funded projects that implement carbon sequestration or utilize renewable energy will be quantified.
Examples of options that may be considered include:
Carbon Sequestration
• New carbon sequestration opportunities including wetland restoration and water treatment residue and bio-char soil amendment opportunities.
• Potential funding mechanisms to support sequestration within proposed IRWM projects or as project mitigation options.
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 25 Renewable Energy Generation
• Incentivizing investment in solar and other renewable energy generation options in water and wastewater facilities
• Consideration of Monterey Bay Community Power efforts to construct local renewable energy infrastructure.
4.8 ADDENDUM - CONSISTENCY WITH CALIFORNIA WATER CODE, STATE AND FEDERAL RESOURCE PLANS:
The 2016 Plan Standards require the Plan to: In evaluating different ways to meet IRWM plan objectives, where practical, consider the strategies adopted by CARB in its AB 32 Scoping Plan.
Santa Cruz 2014 IRWM Plan Chapter 4 Goal and Objective, Section 4.8 Consistency with California Water Code, State and Federal Resource Plans
While the vision, goals, and objectives are specific to the Santa Cruz Region, they were developed with consideration of other resources and planning efforts in mind to ensure consistency, where applicable. 2019 Addendum to the Santa Cruz IRWM Plan: Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill 32):
The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) established a statewide program to limit GHG emissions from all major industries with penalties for noncompliance. AB 32 requires the reporting and verification of statewide GHGs. The initial State goal is to limit GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The initial Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) for implantation of AB 32 included recommendations and actions for reducing GHG emissions statewide. Scoping Plan actions which relate directly to the water sector and to water resource planning and management include (CARB 2008):
• Water use efficiency
• Water recycling
• Water system energy efficiency
• Urban runoff reuse
• Increase renewable energy production, and
• Public goods charge
In 2015, Executive Order B-30-15 established a mid-term GHG reduction target for California of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The CARB was directed to update the AB 32 Scoping Plan to reflect the 2030 target, and is in the project of updating the Scoping Plan. All state agencies with jurisdiction over sources of GHG emissions were directed to implement measures to achieve reductions of GHG emissions to meet the 2030 and 2050 targets. At the state level, many of the GHG reduction measures (e.g., Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Advanced Clean Car standards, and Cap-and-Trade) have been adopted by the state and implementation is underway. At the local level in Santa Cruz County, the County and municipalities are implementing the local Climate Action/Adaption Plans consistent with the statewide program objectives.
AB 32 Goals:
• Develop and support more reliable water supplies for people, agriculture, and the environment, provided by a more resilient, diversified, sustainably managed water resources system with a focus on actions that provide direct GHG reductions.
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 26 • Make conservation a California way of life by using and reusing water more efficiently through greater water conservation, drought tolerant landscaping, stormwater capture, water recycling, and reuse to help meet future water demands and adapt to climate change. • Develop and support programs and projects that increase water sector energy efficiency and reduce GHG emissions through reduced water and energy use.
• Increase the use of renewable energy to pump, convey, treat, and utilize water. • Reduce the carbon footprint of water systems and water uses for both surface and groundwater supplies through integrated strategies that reduce GHG emissions while meeting the needs of a growing population, improving public safety, fostering environmental stewardship, aiding in adaptation to climate change, and supporting a stable economy.
Where practical, the strategies adopted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in its AB 32 Scoping Plan, will be considered in evaluating different ways to meeting Santa Cruz IRWM Plan objectives.
OBJECTIVE / RELATED STRATEGY QUALITATIVE MEASUREMENT QUANTITATIVE MEASUREMENT In considering ways to address
IRWM Plan objectives and
implement the Plan, consider where
practical the strategies adopted by
CARB in its AB 32 Scoping Plan.
List of IRWM Plan projects that
implement strategies adopted by
CARB in its AB 32 Scoping Plan.
Number of implemented IRWM
Plan projects that implement
strategies adopted by CARB in its
AB 32 Scoping Plan, or number of
strategies implemented.
CHAPTER 5: RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
The California Water Plan (CWP) presents Resource Management Strategies (RMSs) that can help meet the water-related resource management needs throughout the state. The CWP Update 2013 (Update 2013) presents 30 RMS. DWR generally describes a RMS as a technique, program, or policy that helps local agencies and governments manage their water and related resources.
The 2016 Plan Standards require the IRWM Plan consider all RMS identified in the CWP Update 2013 and identify the RMS incorporated in the IRWM Plan. There are three RMS that were not considered in the 2014 IRWM Plan that presented in this Addendum.
5.2 ADDENDUM – CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES Santa Cruz 2014 IRWM Plan Chapter 5 Resource Management Strategies, Section 5.2 California Water Plan Resource Management Strategies: The Proposition 84 Guidelines list 29 RMS from the CWP Update 2009.
During the conceptual framework process (described above), the working group considered each of the CWP RMS for its potential to help achieve IRWM Plan objectives, with the intention of diversifying, to the maximum extent possible, the Region’s portfolio of strategies. Many of these strategies are currently being implemented in the Santa Cruz IRWM region. The 2014 Plan briefly describes each RMS and its level of implementation in the Santa Cruz IRWM Plan. Table 5-2 lists the selected resource management strategies for the Region.
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 27 Table 5-2 (Updated from 2014 Plan). Resource Management Strategies Grouped by Management Objectives Reduce Water Demand
• Agricultural Water Use Efficiency
• Urban Water Use Efficiency
Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers
• Conveyance – Regional / Local
• System Reoperation
• Water Transfers
Increase Water Supply
• Conjunctive Management & Groundwater
• Desalination — Brackish & Seawater
• Recycled Municipal Water
• Surface Storage – Regional/Local
Improve Flood Management
• Flood Risk Management
Improve Water Quality
• Drinking Water Treatment & Distribution
• Groundwater / Aquifer Remediation
• Matching Water Quality to Use
• Pollution Prevention
• Salt & Salinity Management
• Urban Stormwater Runoff Management
Practice Resource Stewardship
• Agricultural Land Stewardship
• Ecosystem Restoration
• Forest Management
• Land Use Planning & Management
• Recharge Areas Protection
• Sediment Management*
• Watershed Management
People & Water
• Economic Incentives
(Loans, Grants, & Water Pricing)
• Outreach and Engagement*
• Water and Culture*
• Water-Dependent Recreation
Not selected for the Region:
• Conveyance – Delta
• Precipitation Enhancement
• Surface Storage – CALFED
• Other Strategies: Crop idling, dew
vaporization, fog collection, irrigated
land retirement, rainfed agriculture,
and waterbag transport
2009 California Water Plan RMS addressed in the 2014 IRWM Plan 2019 Addendum to the Santa Cruz IRWM Plan: The 2016 Plan Standards require that all the RMS identified in the 2013 update of the CWP be evaluated. There are three RMS that were added the 2013 CWP that were no evaluated in the Santa Cruz IRWM Plan. These include: sediment management; outreach and engagement; and water and culture. Portions of the descriptions of the RMSs summarized below have been excerpted directly from the California Water Plan Update 2013, Volume 3.
Resource Management Strategies Grouped by Management Objectives Practice Resource Stewardship
• Sediment Management
People & Water
• Outreach and Engagement
• Water and Culture
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 28 The RMSs from the CWP designated under the “Other” category are not in use in the Region. The 2016 Plan Standards require consideration of a new category People & Water, as a result the section numbering in the addendum is different from the 2014 Plan.
5.2.5 ADDENDUM - PRACTICE RESOURCES STEWARDSHIP
Sediment Management: Sediment is an essential natural resource that supports ecosystem function and the storage and transport of sediments is a fundamental element of watershed processes. The aim of sediment management is to minimize or avoid negative impacts that can result from too little or too much sediment interfering with beneficial uses or desired functions. Depending upon a wide array of variables such as the type of the sediment (e.g., fine grained, coarse gravel), quantity, extent of erosion, location the sediments are deposited, duration (e.g., short-term, long-term, chronic erosion, episodic event such as landslide), among many other factors that shape the impacts to human systems (e.g., infrastructure) and natural systems (e.g. aquatic and riparian habitats) there can be both positive and negative impacts.
Sediment transport can provide multiple benefits to maintain high quality aquatic ecosystems, renew stream and riparian habitat, support habitat restoration, renew wetlands and coastal habitats, and nourish beaches, among other environmental benefits. It also provides nutrient-rich fine-grained sediment for fertile farmlands, provides levee maintenance, materials for construction, and other human benefits.
Excess sediment can result in a broad array of negative impacts to natural and human systems – a few examples include degrading water quality, degrading habitat conditions for fish and wildlife, reducing storage capacity in reservoirs, reducing the capacity of stream and flood channels to convey flows. These adversely impact to water supply and flood protection. Sediments may also serve to transport contaminants absorbed to fine grained sediment particulars that are deposited and may impair water quality and adversely impact aquatic ecosystems, fish and wildlife.
Sediment management is principally focused on: the type and source of sediment; the systems transporting sediment; and, the location where sediment deposits. The three primary aspects of sediment management are:
1) Source management to prevent soil loss from land use activities that may, without proper management, cause erosion. 2) Sediment transport management to leverage natural functions that lead to optimal sediment transport. This involves managing the speed and flow of the sediment conveyance and the natural or built structures to achieve a properly distributed balance of sediment types in the habitat. 3) Sediment Deposition Management to achieve optimum benefits from sediment deposits and mitigate negative impacts, principally the siltation of water supply systems and flood infrastructure (reservoirs, dams, floodways) and siltation of stream habitats and wetlands.
Efforts in the Santa Cruz Region
Studies show that roads are the primary source of sediment from human land use in Santa Cruz County, and that sediment has the greatest impact on riparian ecosystems (Santa Cruz County, 2019). Most roads disturb natural drainage patterns, which can lead to surface and gully erosion and slope failures (landslides). Road cuts and fills are also subject to erosion. When culverts fail, erosion and flooding are greatly accelerated. Assessments that evaluated erosion potential along county roads have been completed in Scott, San Lorenzo and Soquel watersheds. The goal of this project is to upgrade or replace cross-culvert on public roads.
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 29 The Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County manages the Rural Roads Erosion Control Assistance Program with funding from the California Coastal Conservancy and the State Water Resources Control Board.
The goal of this program is to improve water quality and fisheries habitat in the San Lorenzo River, Soquel Creek and Aptos/Valencia Creek watersheds by reducing sediment inputs into these streams from private, rural roads.
In September 2015, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) completed the development of the Coastal Regional Sediment Management Plan for the Santa Cruz Littoral Cell. The Plan was developed in collaboration with local jurisdictions and stakeholders, and the State Coastal Sediment Management Workgroup, a task force co-chaired by the USACE and the California Natural Resources Agency. The Santa Cruz Littoral Cell encompasses the 75-mile coastline from Moss Landing to Pillar Point.
As a background, a Coastal Regional Sediment Management Plan is a consensus-driven guidance and policy document for a stretch of the California coast that seeks to present ways to: restore and maintain coastal beaches and other critical areas of sediment deficit; reduce the proliferation of protective shoreline structures; sustain recreation and tourism; enhance public safety and access; and restore coastal sandy habitats. The Plan will compile the best available data on sources of sediment inputs into the cell (e.g. rivers, bluff erosion), sediment sinks (e.g. harbors, submarine canyons), shoreline erosion rates along the cell, threatened infrastructure and erosion hotspots, etc. It will recommend future regional- and site-specific strategies for best managing and responding to these issues to protect coastal resources and infrastructure. It will provide sufficient information for local and regional coastal decision makers to develop policies, pursue sediment management measures, and provide a scientific background to support local coastal planning decisions.
5.2.7 – PEOPLE & WATER2
RMSs for “Economic Incentives” and “Water-Dependent Recreation” were moved from section 5.2.5 - Practice Resources Stewardship to the updated section 5.2.7 “People & Water”.
Outreach and Engagement: The California Water Plan describes outreach and engagement for water management as the “use of tools and practices by water agencies to facilitate contributions by public individuals and groups toward good water management outcomes.” The Santa Cruz IRWM Region considers outreach and engagement to be one of its most essential tool for developing and implementing The 2014 Plan goals, objectives and strategies. Outreach activities have been effectively employed to reduce water demand and usage; increase habitat quality of critical aquatic ecosystems, tidal wetlands and fresh water wetlands; and implement integrated flood management strategies. Education, outreach and engagement has increased the public’s awareness of critical water issues and their understanding of benefits, costs and impacts of water resources management alternatives leading to better engagement and contributing towards improved water management.
The RWMG members conduct extensive public outreach and education related to programs and projects that are aligned with the IRWM planning efforts. The participating agencies regularly conduct outreach with their own boards, councils, commissions, and constituents. Local agencies, organizations, and stakeholders are engaged through meetings, workshops and the broader community informed through boards, advisory groups, meetings and events. As a relatively small IRWM region geographically, there is overlap and commonality 2 New section added, previous section number was assigned to “Other”
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 30 amongst the agencies and organizations participating in IRWM and SGMA, among other efforts. Notable examples of outreach and engagement since the 2014 IRWM Plan include:
• City of Santa Cruz Water Supply Advisory Committee: 2013 – 2015 Extensive public process to educate and engage a 14 member community advisory committee to develop recommendations on water supply and reliability;
• Soquel Creek Water District’s Community Water Plan: 2015, updated 2017 An action-oriented, multifaceted roadmap to achieve water supply sustainability by 2040; • Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) Development: 2016 – 2019 over 150 public meetings, workshops, open house, and related outreach events during the Plan development;
• Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency Groundwater Sustainability Plan Development: June 2017 – ongoing public outreach and educational workshops as part of the initial GSP development for the ; • Water Conservation Coalition of Santa Cruz County: Ongoing partnership between all the larger water agencies in Santa Cruz County as well as the County Environmental Health Department, Ecology Action and other groups to combine efforts and share resources to provide a common message about water conservation issues to residents throughout Santa Cruz County; • Connecting the Drops (2016, 2018) - A biennial outreach event of the RWMF, LAFCO, and RWMG agencies aimed at educating the public about the water and wastewater issues of importance in the community; and
• Water Harvest Festival: 2018, 2019 Family friendly opportunity to learn about water resources, waterwise gardening, groundwater geology, infrastructure, plumbing, water conservation, gardening, watershed protection, ocean and river ecology, animals, pollution prevention, and all things watery.
Water and Culture: The California Water Plan describes water and culture as “the emerging thinking …regarding the importance of linking cultural considerations to water management”. The Water Plan cites various examples of the linkages between water and culture evidenced via subsistence activities, recreation activities, spiritual activities, historic preservation, public art, and lifeways. In the Santa Cruz region, water is an integral part of the culture tied to the local economy, recreation, and lifestyle. For many, the beach, surf and ocean culture invigorates the quality of life. It also fuels tourism, a major economic driver. Fishing and maritime commercial and recreational activities have historically, and continue, to shape the culture of the region. The Amah Mutsun tribal band bring their own cultural insight and perspective into the linkage of water and culture. Water, mild climate and fertile soil support an active and valuable farming culture, particularly in the Pajaro Valley in southern Santa Cruz County. This thriving agriculture is made possible by farmers and farmworkers, many of whom are immigrants (recent and historic), who shape the cultural, ethnic and community characteristics of the region. Santa Cruz County has a well established reputation as an environmentally conscious community. Local government policies and voter approved measures have supported the protection of natural resources and curtailed urban/suburban development for decades. Culture affects water management policies and priorities and is interwoven into all aspects of IRWM planning.
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 31
5.2.8 ADDENDUM – OTHER3
This section includes “other” RMS identified in the State Water Plan. The section number (5.2.8) is updated, no addendum to the content of the 2014 IRWM Plan is required.
5.2.9 – RESOURCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES TO ADAPT TO AND MITIGATE CLIMATE CHANGE4 Table 5-5 (Addendum) identifies the Resource Management Strategies applicable to the Santa Cruz Region that may eliminate or minimize vulnerabilities to climate change impacts and includes the addition of the three new RMSs from the 2016 update.
Table 5-5 (Addendum). RMS Relation to Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation5 California Water Plan
Resource
Management
Strategy
Adapts to or
mitigates
adverse impacts of
changes in
precipitation,
runoff and
recharge
Reduces or
mitigates
impacts of sea
level rise on water
supply conditions
Reduces energy
consumption,
especially the
energy embedded
in water use, and
reduces GHG
emissions
Adapts to or
mitigates
climate
change impacts to
water
infrastructure
systems
Reduce Water Demand
Agricultural Water Use
Efficiency
Urban Water Use
Efficiency
Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers
Conveyance –
Regional/Local
System Reoperation
Water Transfers
Increase Water Supply
Conjunctive
Management &
Groundwater
Desalination -
Brackish & Seawater
Recycled Municipal
Water
Surface Storage –
Regional/Local
Improve Water Quality
Drinking Water
Treatment and
Distribution
3 New section number to accommodate addition of “People & Water” section above. 4 New section to address the 2016 Plan Standards
5 New Table added to address 2016 Plan Standards
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 32 California Water Plan
Resource
Management
Strategy
Adapts to or
mitigates
adverse impacts of
changes in
precipitation,
runoff and
recharge
Reduces or
mitigates
impacts of sea
level rise on water
supply conditions
Reduces energy
consumption,
especially the
energy embedded
in water use, and
reduces GHG
emissions
Adapts to or
mitigates
climate
change impacts to
water
infrastructure
systems
Groundwater /Aquifer
Remediation
Matching Water
Quality to Use
Pollution Prevention
Salt and Salinity
Management
Urban Stormwater
Runoff Management
Practice Resources Stewardship
Agricultural Lands
Stewardship
Ecosystem Restoration
Forest Management
Land Use Planning and
Management
Recharge Area
Protection
Sediment
Management*
Watershed
Management/Planning
People & Water
Economic Incentives
(Loans, Grants, &
Water Pricing)
Outreach and
Engagement*
Water and Culture *
Water-Dependent
Recreation
Improve Flood Management
Flood Risk
Management
CHAPTER 6: PROJECT REVIEW PROCESS AND INTEGRATION
The 2016 IRWM Plan Standards require consideration of a project's contribution to climate change adaptation, as well as, consideration of the contribution of a project in reducing GHGs compared to project alternatives. In 2018, the Santa Cruz Region’s project solicitation questionnaire and review process was modified to address the new requirements.
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 33
6.3.1 ADDENDUM - PROJECT INFORMATION FORM6
For the 2014 Plan, a project template was developed to collect and evaluate relevant project information (2014 Plan Appendix C). Projects were encouraged to input project information directly into a web-based form that was linked the Region’s website (www.SantaCruzIRWMP.org). Information was posted to the website regarding the project submittal process. Contact information for IRWM program staff was provided on the website for any stakeholder that wished to submit a project but could not utilize the online form.
As part of the solicitation for projects for IRWM Implementation funding in 2018 and 2019, a two phase solicitation was conducted using two updated project information forms. Step 1 included a Preliminary Project Information Form (Addendum Appendix F) and Step 2 a more detailed Santa Cruz Supplemental Project Information Form (Addendum Appendix G) in addition to the DWR Project Information Form.
The Project Information Form will be updated, as needed, in the future in response to future project solicitations and funding opportunities.
6.4 ADDENDUM - PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA AND RANKING
Chapter 6 Integration and Project Review Process, section 6.4 Project Evaluation Criteria and Ranking, of the 2014 IRWM plan outlines the criteria developed to guide the evaluation of projects. The criteria is a transparent methodology that is objective and fair, and can be systematically applied to all projects.
In November 2018, the Santa Cruz Region’s Project Solicitation form was updated to include additional questions to address the 2016 Plan Standards. In advance of the Proposition 1 IRWM Implementation Round 3 funding opportunity, the Santa Cruz Region conducted a two-part solicitation that extended from late 2018 into 2019. Step 1, a preliminary phase, was to elicit general interest, provide an opportunity for input from the RWMG and stakeholders, generate a list of potential projects and identify potential opportunities for regional collaboration. Initial screening criteria for IRWM Projects included:
1. Project proponent commitment to participate;
2. CEQA/Permits obtainable within 12 months of DWR’s grant award;
3. Funding availability for the required 50% cost share (waived for economically disadvantaged communities)
4. Project addresses one or more of the most critical needs of the IRWM region
5. Project is consistent with Statewide priorities in the Prop 1 IRWM Guidelines
6. Project’s expected useful life is at least 15 years
For Step 2, as mentioned in Section 6.3.1 Addendum, projects that advanced to the second step of the solicitation process were asked to complete and submit a Project Information Form (based upon DWR guidance) and the Santa Cruz Supplemental Project Information Form (Addendum Appendix G). In accordance with the 2016 IRWM plan standards, the Santa Cruz Supplemental Project Information Form and scoring criteria were updated to include two additional questions related to a: 1) Project's contribution to climate change adaptation and 2) Contribution of project in reducing GHGs compared to project alternatives. 6 Title of section updated to reflect current nomenclature.
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 34 The Santa Cruz IRWM Project Evaluation and Scoring Criteria (Table 6-1 ) includes possible points for Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation and the Santa Cruz Scoring Criteria for the Proposition 1 IRWM Implementation Round 2 also includes points for projects that addresses and/or adapts to the effects of climate change and the climate change vulnerabilities described in the IRWM Plan; final project recommendations for inclusion in an Santa Cruz IRWM Program grant proposal is the based upon the sum of both the 2014 Plan Scoring Criteria and the Scoring Criteria specific to the Proposal Solicitation Package. Draft scores and rankings were circulated to RWMG in August 2019. The Santa Cruz IRWM Region participated in the pre-application workshop with DWR representatives in September 2019.
Table 6-1 (Updated from 2014 Plan). 2019 Scoring Methodology: Part A (50%) + Part B (50%) = 930 points Part A. 2014 IRWM Plan Project Scoring Criteria (465 points possible) - unchanged from 2014 IRWM Plan Category Criterion Max Score Weight
Principles of IRWM Planning and
Integration
Supports high and medium-level priority
objectives identified in the SC IRWM
Conceptual Framework
200 43%
Supports regional partnerships 45 10%
Strategic considerations for IRWM Plan
Implementation 30 6%
Land Use 10 2%
Project Status and Feasibility
Technical Feasibility 60 13%
Economic Feasibility 20 4%
Project Cost 10 2%
Monitoring 10 2%
Status 10 2%
Climate Change Adaptation and
Mitigation
Climate Change Adaptation 15 3%
GHG Reduction 15 3%
Disadvantaged community,
tribal, and environmental justice
considerations
Benefits a disadvantaged (DAC) community 20 4%
Benefits to Native American Tribal Community
Water Issues 10 2%
Environmental Justice 10 2%
TOTAL 465 100%
Santa Cruz IRWM 2019 Proposition 1 Round 1 Implementation Grant Summary & Project Selection Process 35
Part B. 2019 IRWM Round 1 Implementation Solicitation Scoring (465 points possible) Criterion Max Score Weight
Project supports the intent of IRWM; enhances coordination and/or collaboration within and between agencies; provides multiple benefits; leverages resources/funds; promotes efficiencies or mutual solutions to better achieve regional goals and objectives.
90 19%
Project provides safe, clean, affordable and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking and sanitary purposes. 45 10%
Project addresses and/or adapts to the effects of climate change and the climate change vulnerabilities described in the IRWM Plan. 45 10% Project Information Form includes a complete description of all tasks necessary to result in a completed project and identifies the reasonable deliverables. 150 32% Collectively, the Work Plan, Schedule, and Budget in the Project Information Form is thorough, reasonable, and justified; and consistent with each other.
Project is sufficiently justified by the description given in the Project Information Form including any relevant supporting documentation such as models, studies, engineering reports, etc.
Project’s benefits are logical, reasonable, and adequately described/quantified and supported in the Project Information Form. 45 10%
Project is suitable and competitive for the current solicitation: including but not limited to IRWM program funding preferences, project costs and match funding, schedule, CEQA and permit status, availability of project information needed to complete the DWR proposal.
90 19%
TOTAL 465 100%
2016 IRWM Standard: Specific benefits to critical water issues for Native American tribal communities.
The Santa Cruz Region’s Project Evaluation Criteria and Ranking does not consider a project’s specific benefits to critical water issues for Native American tribal communities since there are no state or federal tribal lands within the Santa Cruz Region.
No additional addendum to the 2014 IRWM Plan are required.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 36 CHAPTER 8: PLAN PERFORMANCE AND MONITORING
The 2016 IRWM Plan Standard require that each project in the IRWM Plan is monitored to comply with all applicable rules, laws, and permit requirements.
Santa Cruz 2014 IRWM Plan Chapter 8 Introduction: Plan Performance and Monitoring: The project solicitation conducted as part of the update for this Plan required that project applicants document the status of permits and status related to regulatory feasibility. Any project that is funded through the IRWM Program will be monitored by the project proponent to ensure compliance with all applicable rules, laws, and permit requirements along with any additional performance measures prescribed for the project.
No additional addendum to the 2014 IRWM Plan is required.
8.4 OVERALL IRWM PLAN PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
The 2016 IRWM Plan Standard require the Plan contain policies and procedures that promote adaptive management and, as more effects of Climate Change manifest, new tools are developed, and new information becomes available, adjust IRWM plans accordingly.
Santa Cruz 2014 IRWM Plan Chapter 8 Plan Performance and Monitoring, Section 8.4 Overall IRWM Plan Performance Assessment: As resources allow, the RWMG will conduct an assessment of overall IRWM Plan performance using the methods described below. These methods were developed through the conceptual framework planning process, which identified a set of performance measures that would have the sensitivity to management actions and relationship to IRWM goals and objectives to gauge effectiveness. As part of the plan performance assessment, the RWMG will collect and manage data as described in Chapter 10, Data Management. The RWMG will use an adaptive management approach to incorporate “lessons learned” from project-specific monitoring into the IRWM Plan in terms of objectives, resource management strategies, or other aspects of the Plan or planning process.
Additionally, as more effects of climate change manifest, new tools are developed, and new information becomes available, the RWMG may need to adjust the objectives and strategies of the IRWM Plan to better address these changes.
No additional addendum to the 2014 IRWM Plan is required.
CHAPTER 12: RELATION TO LOCAL PLANNING
The 2016 IRWM Plan Standards are require a discussion of how the IRWM Plan relates to other planning documents and programs. New statewide requirements and planning programs implemented since the completion of the 2014 IRWM Plan include the Storm Water Resource Plan and the Sustainable Groundwater Management Program. These are described below as well as participation in climate action planning efforts.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 37
12.2 WATER PLANNING
Santa Cruz 2014 IRWM Plan Chapter 12 Relation to Local Planning, Section 12.2 Water Planning: The Santa Cruz IRWM Plan combines the relevant information contained in numerous water resources planning documents throughout the Region.
12.2.5 ADDENDUM - FLOOD PROTECTION AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLANS Storm Water Resources Plan: In December 2016, the Santa Cruz County Storm Water Resources Plan (SWRP) was completed. The SWRP is a comprehensive document outlining regional stormwater project priorities, as well as regional stormwater permit compliance. Development of the SWRP was led by the County of Santa Cruz Environmental Health with contributions by staff and representatives from the City of Santa Cruz, the City of Scotts Valley, the City of Watsonville, the City of Capitola, Ecology Action, the Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County, and the University of California Santa Cruz. The SWRP was approved by the RWMG on February 24, 2017 and incorporated to the IRWM Plan as an appendix. In June 2017, the SWRCB issued its letter of concurrence that the SWRP met the requirements of the California Water Code and the SWRP Guidelines. The SWRP is posted on the Santa Cruz IRWM website: www.santacruzirwmp.org/resources/swrp
12.2.8 GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLANS7
Following the enactment of California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) two new Groundwater Sustainability Agencies were established in the Region. The Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency (MGA) formed in March 2016 as the GSA for the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin (Basin 3-001). The Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency formed in June 2017 as the GSA for the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin (Basin 3-027). Under SGMA, both agencies are charged with managing the respective basins sustainably and are required to develop and adopt Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs). Both GSAs are joint powers of authority (JPAs) that are comprised of agencies that are also IRWM RWMG member agencies.
The development of a GSP is a comprehensive, multi-year planning effort that includes an assessment of the groundwater conditions in the basin, development of a water budget, establishing quantifiable sustainable management criteria and related metrics, and identifying recommended projects and management actions to achieve groundwater sustainability. As a high priority basin, the Mid-County GSP must be completed by January 2020; the schedule for development is 2017 – 2020. As a medium priority basin, the Santa Margarita GSP must be completed by January 2022; the schedule for development is 2018 – 2022.
The GSA agencies are coordinating with local land use planning agencies in the development of the GSP.
In 2017 and 2018, MGA and RWMF staff met and consulted with land use planning staff from the County of Santa Cruz and local municipalities, including the cities of Santa Cruz and Capitola, on water resources planning, principally groundwater management and regional land use planning. Topics discussed included seawater intrusion of coastal drinking water aquifers and groundwater modeling of various climate change scenarios and potential management actions in the Mid-County Basin. 7 New section to address the 2016 Plan Standards
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 38 The next formal IRWM Plan update will be completed following completion of the GSPs as the IRWM Plan will be directly informed and by the final recommendations and actions in the GSPs. Agencies that are actively participating in SGMA and IRWM planning include: the County of Santa Cruz, City of Santa Cruz, Soquel Creek Water District, Central Water District, Scotts Valley Water District, San Lorenzo Valley Water District and the Regional Water Management Foundation. There is close coordination between the agencies and organizations participating in GSP development and IRWM planning and implementation agencies.
No additional addendum to the 2014 IRWM Plan is required.
12.3 RELATION TO LOCAL LAND PLANNING
Santa Cruz 2014 IRWM Plan Chapter 12 Relation to Local Planning, Section 12.3.1 General Plans: Local water, watershed, and land use goals and objectives are reflected in the goals and objectives of the 2014 IRWM Plan. The IRWM Plan integrates with local general plans in two primary ways: 1) Through communication with local land use planners in the development, implementation, and future updates to the IRWM Plan; 2) through the participation of local planners in project development, review, and implementation.
12.3.1 ADDENDUM – GENERAL PLANS
Information sharing and collaboration with regional land use planning is ongoing through IRWM and the related planning efforts (e.g., Groundwater Sustainability Plans). There is a nexus between the General Plans and the Climate Action / Adaptation Plans which outline strategies and implementing actions to achieve the GHG reduction and related climate targets. These planning documents were considered in the 2014 Plan development and in the 2019 Vulnerability Assessment of climate change impacts to local water supply.
12.4.8 ADDENDUM - CLIMATE ACTION PLANS
The 2016 IRWM Plan Standards require the Plan consider and incorporate water management issues and climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies from local plans into the IRWM Plan. This was sufficiently addressed in the 2014 Plan but new information from more recent studies have been incorporated into the 2019 Vulnerability Assessment.
The Santa Cruz IRWMP Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 2019 considered and incorporated water management issues and climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies and measures from multiple local plans. Information was included and measures incorporated from the following: The County of Santa Cruz Climate Action Strategy, Santa Cruz County’s Coastal Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, Santa Cruz County Hazard Mitigation Plan, the City of Santa Cruz 2018 Climate Adaptation Plan Update and the Santa Cruz County / San Mateo County Community Wildfire Protection Plan to adapt to the projected effects of climate change. The Santa Cruz Plan Addendum 2019 refers to multiple strategies from the various plans listed above, utilizing IRWM as among the potential programmatic pathways to implement projects that help mitigate and adapt to climate change impacts on water resources.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 39 Table 12-1 (Addendum). 2019 Update on Relation to Local Planning for New or Updated Statewide Programs8
Agency
IRWM
Plan
GSA
GSP1 SWRP2 Climate Action or Adaptation Plan3, 4
Central Water District
City of Capitola (Climate Action Plan, 2015)
City of Santa Cruz (Climate Adaptation Plan, 2018) City of Scotts Valley
City of Watsonville (Climate Action Plan, 2015)
County of Santa Cruz (Climate Action Plan, 2018) Davenport County Sanitation District (Climate Action Plan, 2018) Resource Conservation District
(County Climate Action Strategy,
2013)
San Lorenzo Valley Water District (Climate Change Resolution, 2008) Santa Cruz County Sanitation District (Climate Action Plan, 2018) Scotts Valley Water District
Soquel Creek Water District
Regional Water Mgmt. Foundation
Notes:
1. Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) checkmark for GSA member or supporting agency
2. Stormwater Resource Plan – agency participated in the SWRP development
3. Climate change checkmark indicates agency has conducted climate change planning (e.g., Climate Action Plan); All County departments/agencies are covered under the County’s plan.
4. Groundwater Sustainability Plans includes assessment of Climate Change impacts on groundwater basins CHAPTER 13: STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT
Santa Cruz 2014 IRWM Plan Chapter 13 Stakeholder Involvement, Section 13.3 Stakeholder Engagement Methods and Activities: The 2014 IRWM Plan describes a public process that provides outreach and opportunity to participate in the IRWM planning process. Furthermore, access to participation and involvement in never based on an individual’s or group’s ability to contribute financially to IRWM plan development or the planning process, therefore; there are no revisions or addendums. The 2016 IRWM Guidelines include specific language regarding coordination with Native America tribes, the Plan is modified accordingly as presented below.
13.5 ADDENDUM - NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBE IDENTIFICATION AND OUTREACH As specified in the 2016 IRWM Guideline, coordination with a Native America tribe is to be on a government-to-government basis. While there are currently no federally recognized tribes within in the Santa Cruz IRWM Region. If at a future date, the Amah Mutsun or other were federally recognized as a tribe, they would be recognized as a sovereign nation.
8 New table added to address the 2016 Plan Standards
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 40 CHAPTER 15: CLIMATE CHANGE
The Santa Cruz IRWM Plan 2014 Chapter 15 Climate Change successfully addressed the required elements of the IRWM Plan Standards in effect at the time9 . The 2014 Plan assessed the vulnerability of
key attributes, including water demand, water supply, aquatic ecosystems, flood / stormwater management, and sea level rise. The Plan content surpassed the minimum requirements at that time by including the findings of a 2012 study conducted by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) into climate impacts on temperature, rainfall, runoff, and recharge for the Santa Cruz IRWM Region.10 The 2014 Plan identified strategies to increase infiltration and recharge in adaptation to changes in the amount, intensity, and timing of rainfall and runoff.
CHAPTER 15 ADDENDUM - INTRODUCTION
Since the completion of the 2014 IRWM Plan, the scientific findings, research and planning related to climate change has continued to advance at all scales, globally, nationally, statewide and locally. In 2018, the State of California issued its Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Climate change projections and related considerations, such as sea-level rise projections, have also been updated in statewide and regional planning documents (State of California OPC, 2018). To incorporate the findings of pertinent studies, guidance documents, and climate change projections completed since the 2014 IRWM Plan, the Santa Cruz region partnered with Central Coast Wetlands Group (CCWG) to conduct a 2019 Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (2019 Vulnerability Assessment) for the Santa Cruz IRWM Region. This Vulnerability Assessment is an ongoing evaluation that will be updated as new and/or more specific information becomes available in the Region.
The 2019 Vulnerability Assessment does not duplicate or re-present content already covered in the 2014 IRWM Plan. Collectively the 2014 Plan and the 2019 Vulnerability Assessment for the Santa Cruz IRWM Region address the 2016 Plan Standards. Portions of 2019 Vulnerability Assessment are included in this Addendum to demonstrate consistency with the 2016 Plan Standards. A summary of the 2019 Vulnerability Assessment is added as an Appendix B to 2014 Plan Addendum.
15.3 ADDENDUM – VULNERABILITY
In 2014, a vulnerability assessment was conducted based upon the DWR Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning and the hazards and risks of climate change identified in local, regional, and statewide studies and reports. An updated high-level summary of vulnerabilities are presented, consistent with the 2016 Plan Standards, by the following categories: water demand, water supply, water quality, sea level rise, flooding, and ecosystem and habitat (presented in that order in this section).
9 Plan Standards as presented in the November 2012 IRWM Prop 84 and 1E Guidelines. 10 Flint, L.E., and Flint, A.L. 2012. Simulation of climate change in San Francisco Bay Basins, California: Case studies in the Russian River Valley and Santa Cruz Mountains: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2012– 5132, 55 p.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 41
15.3.6 WATER DEMAND11
Within the IRWM Region, water demand is met with groundwater (78%), surface water (18%) and recycled water (4%) (SC County 2018). While these totals provide a regional context, meeting demand is agency specific based upon an individual agency’s water supply portfolio and several of the larger public purveyors (e.g., City of Santa Cruz, Soquel Creek WD, Scotts Valley WD) are largely, if not entirely, dependent upon either surface water or groundwater.
Large public water purveyors12 are required to develop an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) every 5-years that estimates future water demand projections and water supply available to meet that demand (Table 15-1 (Addendum)). Where there is a deficiency, the water purveyor is challenged to identify new sources and new conservation actions needed to align supply with demand. Current water supply planning is focused on addressing future demand based on future water supplies that do not account for changes due to climate change. Therefore, agencies will need to identify new supply resources to mitigate climate change related reductions in supply. Impacts to water supply infrastructure and water collection and groundwater infiltration areas within the watersheds due to climate change related hazards can compromise supply reliability.
Table15-1 (Addendum). Urban Water Management Plan Water Demand Projections Water Agency
Projected AFY
2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
City of Santa Cruz 10,210 9,897 9,835 9,820 na na
Soquel Creek Water District 3,900 3,800 3,500 3,400 3,400 3,300 San Lorenzo Valley Water District 2,107 2,132 2,180 2,216 na na Scotts Valley Water District 1,558 1,584 1,610 1,635 1,661 na Based upon the 2015 UWMPs prepared by the four large public purveyors, the total projected demand decreases from 2020 (19,795 AFY) to 2035 (19,106 AFY). This is a reflection of limited population increases and continued decreases in per capita demand as a result of aggressive and effective demand management measures by water purveyors and effective conservation efforts by residents.
A discussion of potential climate change impacts to a water purveyor’s water supply and customer demand was not required in the 2015 UWMP, it will be required in the 2020 Plans, so this additional information will inform the next IRWM Plan. Although it was not required in the 2015 UWMP, in recognition that planning for the impacts of climate change is an increasingly important component of water planning, both the City of Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District included assessments of climate change impacts in their 2015 UWMPs.
As presented in the City’s 2015 UWMP, using parameters from the econometric demand models, weather effects on City water demand were investigated using historical data on sales and weather and expressed as the expected change in demand per a 1° degree Fahrenheit (F) increase in average 11 New section to address the 2016 Plan Standards
12 Agencies using greater than 3,000 acre-feet of water annually or serving more than 3,000 connections
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 42 maximum daily air temperature over the entire year (M.Cubed, 2016). The analysis shows, based on current water use patterns, demand would increase from between 0.19 –1.38 % for 1°increase in average daily high temperature for every customer group except industrial. Golf consumption shows the largest increase in demand due to change in maximum daily temperature and multifamily consumption and is the least responsive. Total system demand would be expected to increase by about 0.45% per 1°F increase in average daily high temperature. If average temperature in Santa Cruz were to rise by 5.5°F by year 2100, water demand could be expected according to this analysis to increase by 2.5%.
General considerations of demand include:
• Greater variability in seasonal water demands as droughts become more frequent and more severe
• Warmer temperatures increase evapotranspiration which is expected to increase demand for outdoor water use for agricultural and landscape demands. A warmer climate may also extend the growing season and increase water demand
• Residential landscaping and recycled water irrigation needs will be higher as temperatures increase
• The effectiveness of prior water conservation programs have lowered per capita consumption to among the lowest in the state, which may limit the ability of residents to conserve further Nearly half (46%) of all the groundwater used in the County is for agriculture in the portion of Pajaro Valley within Santa Cruz County. Agricultural demand is dependent upon a variety of factors related to land use assumptions, crop type, cropping patterns, irrigation efficiencies, and other factors. Changes in land use, changes in crop type such as the conversion of deciduous crops to berry crops and the potential increase in the cultivation of cannabis, technological improvements in irrigation efficiency, and other economic, environmental and social drivers all have a role in shaping future agriculture demand that create uncertainty in long-term predictions. As part of the development of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the Mid-County Basin, groundwater modeling projections compared recent historical agricultural demand (1985-2015) to future demand based upon climate change projections (2016 – 2069); the total demand increased from 346 acre-feet per year (AFY) to 387 AFY, an increase of 11%, all other assumptions held steady (e.g., acreage and crop type, unchanged) (MGA 2019).
Agriculture demand is quite low in the Mid-County Basin accounting for only 4.5% of the Basin’s groundwater demand historically and 6.2% in the future accounting for climate change (MGA 2019). This is in contrast to the Pajaro Valley where agriculture demand is approximately 22,000 AFY for the farmland within Santa Cruz County (SC County 2018).
15.3.1 ADDENDUM - WATER SUPPLY
None of the large water providers import water from outside the region. A risk analysis performed as part of the County of Santa Cruz’s Climate Action Strategy assessed which impacts from climate change present the greatest risk to people and to the natural and built environments. It concluded that in the short to intermediate term (2010–2050) water shortage was the greatest risk (SC County 2013).
As described in the 2014 IRWM Plan, the local climate change projections suggest longer and drier summers, an increased frequency of droughts, increased evapotranspiration rates, and reduced groundwater recharge. Longer and more severe extended droughts, as well as, changes in hydrologic patterns with greater annual variability and fluctuation in precipitation will exacerbate current water
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 43 supply issues and reduce the reliability of the local water sources to meet demand. As noted in the 2014 Plan, droughts are estimated to become 50 percent more frequent and persistent during this century with an average of one drought every decade and the potential for a multi-decadal drought at the end of the 21st century.
Regional studies suggest that water supply shortages are already a serious problem for many areas of the Central Coast. Inter-annual water availability is variable and localized and the Central Coast region, like the entire state, experiences periodic droughts. It is projected that in the future the wettest years will become wetter, and the driest years will become drier relative to historical conditions (Langridge 2018). Absent adaptations, extreme droughts and rising temperatures will exacerbate water supply deficits (Langridge 2018).
There is coordination at the municipal and county level regarding the consideration of climate change impacts and adaptions on water supply in planning documents, for example the County’s Climate Action Strategy, the County’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, and the City of Santa Cruz Climate Adaptation Plan.
The 2020 Urban Water Management Plans will include considerations of climate change.
Table 15-2 (Addendum) presents water use by supplier and source and identifies climate change related impacts to water supply. Water purveyors face different impacts and challenges depending upon the individual agency specifics source(s) of supply, setting and management objectives (e.g., a surface water dependent agency contends with water rights, fishery bypass flows for instream fish flow requirements, etc.).
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 44 Table 15-2 (Addendum). Water Use in Santa Cruz County and Climate Change Related Impacts Water Supplier Population
Water
Use
(AFY)
GroundwaterSurface
Water
Recycled
Water Climate Change Related Impacts to Water Supply
Santa Cruz City Water Dept. 98,000 8,104 6% 94%
Increased drought frequency, intensity, duration; changes in ongoing hydrologic patterns with greater year-to-year variability/fluctuations in precipitation impacts operations and planning; wildfire hazard/impacts to watershed,
infrastructure, water quality and storage
Soquel Creek Water District 40,515 3,347 100% Seawater intrusion of coastal aquifers; declining groundwater recharge
San Lorenzo Valley Water
District 25,485 2,092 41% 59%
Increased drought (see above); wildfire hazard/impacts to watershed, infrastructure, water quality; declining
groundwater recharge
Scotts Valley Water District 10,629 1,139 87% 13% Declining recharge in the groundwater basin Central Water District 2,700 379 100% Seawater intrusion of coastal aquifers; declining groundwater recharge
Big Basin Water Company 1,680 135 95% 5% Declining recharge in the groundwater basin Mount Hermon Association 1,283 141 100% Declining recharge in the groundwater basin Forest Lakes Mutual Water 1,076 41 100% Declining recharge in the groundwater basin Smaller Water Systems
(5-199 conn.) 7,157 770 77% 14% Location, source dependent – see above Individual Users* 21,000 2,630 95% 5% Location dependent - may include declining groundwater recharge; seawater intrusion
Pajaro Agriculture (SC Co
only)** 22,430 93% 7% Seawater intrusion of coastal aquifers; declining groundwater recharge Mid- & North-County
Agriculture* 2,400 90% 10% Seawater intrusion of coastal aquifers; declining groundwater recharge Totals 209,525 43,608 78% 18% 4%
Note: City of Watsonville is not included in this table as water supply is covered under the Pajaro Watershed IRWM Planning Region.
Source: Santa Cruz County Water Resources Management Status Report for 2018 modified with Climate Change impacts
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 45 The potential climate change impacts on water supply by source are presented below.
Groundwater: Research on the dynamic relationship between groundwater, drought, and climate change is relatively limited compared to surface water studies (Brouyère et al. 2004, Hsu et al. 2007, Bates et al. 2008, Clifton et. al. 2010), and overall the effects of climate change on groundwater quantity and quality remain uncertain (Cisneros et al. 2014). Groundwater supplies may be adversely impacted by reduced groundwater recharge due to multiple related factors of warmer temperatures, increased evapotranspiration, greater storm intensity and increased runoff over shorter periods reducing percolation. A 2012 USGS study projected changes to precipitation, evapotranspiration, recharge and runoff through the year 2100 for Santa Cruz County and estimates the reduction in recharge from 10 – 30% (depending upon the climate model scenario)13. Groundwater supply has accumulated over millennia and groundwater levels do not fluctuate as rapidly as surface waters in response to annual precipitation patterns; declining levels of groundwater due to decreases in recharge may be gradual but the long-term impact is profound. For the near planning horizon, Soquel Creek Water District is currently planning for a climate change caused decrease of 11% in its water supply over the next 20 years (Daniels 2018). Longer-term reductions in groundwater supply are projected to be greater absent active efforts to recharge the Basin or alternative sources of supply to further reduce groundwater extraction.
Coastal groundwater aquifers, which includes portions of the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin, are vulnerable to greater risk and extent of seawater intrusion resulting from climate change inducted sea level rise. To prevent seawater intrusion protective elevations of freshwater aquifers must be maintained, so as sea level rises, groundwater elevations in freshwater aquifers must correspondingly rise to keep pace.
Surface Water: Surface water supply and the reliability of surface water will be reduced due to warmer climate conditions and changing patterns of seasonality of precipitation and hydrologic conditions that affect the quantity, quality, and distribution of surface water. Reduction in precipitation, most notably during droughts, directly reduces water supply for residents dependent upon surface water sources. As presented in the 2014 IRWM Plan, the frequency of droughts is projected to increase by 50% between 2000 and 2100 (relative to the historic reference period of 1971-2000). Droughts are projected to become longer and more intense (DWR 2008). Almost-half (46%) of the County population is served by water agencies that get more than 50% of their supply from surface water. The City of Santa Cruz Water Department (94% supply from surface water) provides water for City residents as well as the unincorporated surrounding areas, serving 95,000 residents. The City, as well as residents in Santa Cruz Mountains supplied by San Lorenzo Valley Water District (59% surface water) and the coastal community of Davenport are vulnerable to drought.
The City of Santa Cruz Water Department has conducted studies and reports that document the increased vulnerability of municipal water supplies due to multi-year droughts. When combining a multiyear drought with the necessary commitment to fish flow releases (mandated through the salmonid recover plan) would result in substantial water shortages for Santa Cruz’s water service customers.
Water supply vulnerability to multi-year droughts is the principal water management challenge the City 13 Flint, L.E., and Flint, A.L. 2012. Simulation of climate change in San Francisco Bay Basins, California: Case studies in the Russian River Valley and Santa Cruz Mountains: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2012– 5132, 55 p.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 46 is actively working to address through projects and management actions that reduce the shortfall between water supply and water demand during times of extended drought.
The City’s 2018 Climate Adaptation Plan Update includes an assessment on water supply. The Plan notes that climate change can significantly alter precipitation patterns affecting the quantity, quality, and distribution of water available. Reduction in precipitation is the primary concern as it directly reduces water supply. Other factors such as predicted increases to the intensity of winter precipitation can result in higher runoff, decreased percolation, and lower summer base flows in streams. High intensity rainfall over short periods decreases the time window during which water can be diverted from streams and reduces aquifer recharge. High sediment loads associated with elevated winter flows can also limit diversions and impact pumping and treatment operations. This in turn impacts water storage capability and availability during the long dry season.
15.3.2 ADDENDUM - WATER QUALITY
Surface water and groundwater quality are anticipated to be impacted by climate change induced increases in ambient air and surface water temperature as well as changing patterns of precipitation, greater storm intensity, increased runoff and reduced recharge. In addition, impacts from sea level rise will result in seawater intrusion to freshwater aquifers as well as alteration of coastal estuary habitats.
Warming surface water temperatures result in lower dissolved oxygen levels in water bodies. Higher water temperatures may degrade water quality by reducing dissolved oxygen levels which are associated with harmful and/or nuisance algal blooms that in turn enhance eutrophication in reservoirs (e.g. Loch Lomond). These conditions adversely impact the treatability of supplies, and taste and odor of drinking water.
Higher intensity storms may increase sediment loads in run-off resulting in higher turbidity in surface waters. This can impact/disrupt water treatment operations and may require potential changes or increases needed in treatment levels and new technology to handle poorer quality raw water. High runoff events can also impact stream channel stability resulting in erosion and high turbidity that may adversely impact aquatic habitat/species. Higher intensity storm events can also increase pollutant loads and mobilize contaminants that may accumulate in the lower watershed and adversely impact aquatic species. Conversely, during prolonged dry periods or droughts, decreased flows can increase the concentration of pollutants in waterways.
As noted previously, climate change will increase the frequency and intensity of wildland fires. These fires impact watersheds and increase the risk of landslides or mudslides, and sediment in watershed run-off that degrades water quality (CDPH 2017). High intensity storms following wildfires (which denude vegetation cover in watersheds) create conditions that are more prone to high erosion events that increase turbidity; landslides/large events that release large volumes of sediment into waterways can have significant adverse effects on salmonids and other aquatic species.
15.3.5 ADDENDUM - SEA LEVEL RISE
Sea level rose approximately eight inches (17-20 cm) over the past century (1900–2005) along most of the California coast (Cayan et al. 2008). Altimetry data indicates that the global mean sea level rise rate
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 47 has increased from 2 to 3 mm per year since the early 1990s, but the mean sea level along the Pacific Coast has been stable due during this period due to wind stress (Bromirski et al., 2011). However, when the regional climate patterns that drove local sea level trends shift, the Central Coast will very likely experience a rate of sea level rise that will correspond to, or may even exceed, the mean global rate of sea level rise (Bromirski et al., 2011)
As mentioned above the greatest impact of sea level rise on water supply is from seawater intrusion to freshwater aquifers. Sea level rise can impact groundwater quality in coastal aquifers by increasing the potential for seawater intrusion into freshwater aquifers. In addition, coastal erosion will increase as global sea levels continue to rise. Although erosion is not a new issue in California, rising sea levels threaten to increase the severity and frequency of erosion damage to coastal infrastructure and property. There are 54,300 feet of coastline behind coastal protection structures in Santa Cruz County including rip-rap, isolated sea walls, hip walls, wood piling structure, harbor jetties and beach groins.
These structures are expected to function through 2030, and then will begin to fail if not maintained or replaced. Looking to the future, relocation of water infrastructure out of hazard zones will need work in tandem with other adaptation strategies to manage flooding, maintain local character, improve natural habitat areas and ensure reliable drinking water and sewer service. In southern Santa Cruz County, sea level rise induced seawater intrusion may also adversely impact agricultural production in coastal farmlands.
The impact of sea level rise on wetlands is significant for the coastal river and creek mouth lagoon systems that provide a diverse set of environmental services for fresh and brackish water species throughout the entire of the IRWM planning region. These natural areas are vulnerable to an increase in the frequency and depth of flooding. Nearly all of the creek and river mouth wetlands in Santa Cruz County are within the coastal storm flood zone by 2030 (700 acres of habitat) and much of this fresh and brackish water habitat will be flooded monthly by saline water by 2100 due to rising tides.
15.3.4 ADDENDUM – FLOOD/STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
As mentioned above, it is anticipated that there will be a shift in peak precipitation from January to February, with less precipitation occurring in the fall (November-December) and spring (March-April) by 2100. The USGS also concluded that while the amount of annual precipitation is not expected to substantially change as a result of climate change, precipitation will be concentrated in mid-winter.
Large storm events increase watershed runoff and typically increase sediment transport that results in high turbidity (cloudiness caused by suspended material), in waterways. Local water treatment facilities that rely upon surface water from rivers and streams may not be able to treat highly turbid water without the addition of pre-treatment processes and/or new treatment infrastructure. Fires and landform changes can compromise watershed stability leading to landslides, creek erosion, and sedimentation. Increases in river flow rates and volumes during future storm events are predicted and can lead to greater erosion of creek channels and increase landslide potential in unstable areas of the watersheds.
Currently 246 storm drains are projected to be impacted by Soquel Creek flood waters. An additional 30 storm drains may be compromised by the higher ocean and river elevation by 2030 and by 2060, 86 more storm drains may be compromised. Several drains that currently provide flood relief may be further compromised due to higher river water levels and may become conduits for inland flooding by
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 48 2060 to areas isolated from current flooding. Levees along the Soquel Creek are insufficient to retain floodwaters within the channel and severe flooding is predicted when large creek discharge occurs during winter storm events.
Flooding and extreme storms pose similar risks in the City of Santa Cruz. A large portion of the downtown developed urban core is located within the historic flood plain of the San Lorenzo River.
Within the combined hazard zones, coastal storm flooding is the primary hazard placing property and infrastructure at risk. More than 70 buildings are projected to be at risk of impact (many from periodic coastal flooding) and more than 40% of these properties are private residences. Approximately 0.6 miles of roadway is projected to be at risk of flood and erosion damage as well as more than 2 miles of water, wastewater and storm drain pipe infrastructure. Santa Cruz’s coastal zone resources include the Santa Cruz Harbor, publicly owned and accessible beaches via dozens of coastal access locations, and valuable wetlands. Intense storms are also associated with high winds, which lead to soil saturation that exacerbates flooding, erosion, and tree fall. Sea level rise may currently contribute to rising and fluctuating groundwater at the Santa Cruz Wastewater Treatment Facility.
15.3.3 ADDENDUM – AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS
The 2014 IRWM Plan presents an assessment of the vulnerability of key attributes of the aquatic ecosystem to specific climate changes (Chapter 15, Table 15-10 (2014 Plan)). Habitats for temperaturesensitive fish may be impacted by increased water temperatures (DWR 2008). Salmonids present or historically present in local streams are a key driver in water resources planning and management in the Region, most notably for the City of Santa Cruz’s surface water sources (San Lorenzo River, north Coast Streams), for fish bypass flow and habitat requirements in a Habitat Conservation Plan that is still in development.
As presented in the Plan, climate models project increased climatic water deficit (CWD). CWD characterizes the relationship between soil moisture storage and evapotranspiration pressure, and integrates the effects of increasing temperature and varying precipitation on basin conditions. Changes in CWD will tend to increase demand for irrigation water and could have dramatic impacts on local ecology, particular to species that are on the edge of their habitat zones, for example the coastal redwoods.
Coastal inundation poses a risk to local creeks and wetlands. The impact of sea level rise on wetlands is significant for the coastal river and creek mouth lagoon systems that provide a diverse set of environmental services for fresh and brackish water species throughout the entire IRWM planning region.
Santa Cruz County supports high quality wetland and river mouth ecosystems within areas susceptible to the hazards of Sea Level Rise (Table 15-3 (Addendum)). These natural areas are vulnerable to an increase in the frequency and depth of flooding. Higher tides increase salt water inundation to brackish and fresh water wetlands. The Santa Cruz County Local Coastal Program (LCP) (2012) identifies and maps these wetlands and creeks as Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA). Much of these wetland resources are vulnerable to future impacts of erosion, storm flooding and rising tides (CCWG 2017a, NOAA 2017).
The NOAA Office for Coastal Management mapped potential impacts to marsh environments from sea level rise, which can be viewed on the NOAA Sea Level Rise Viewer using the Marsh Migration Tool.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 49 Figure 15-1 (Addendum) shows the change in marsh habitat around Watsonville Slough with increased levels of tides.
Current MHHW 0.5 ft SLR
2.5 ft SLR 5 ft SLR
Figure 15-1 (Addendum). Marsh Migration at Watsonville Slough (Current, 0.5ft, 2.5ft, & 5 ft of SLR) Nearly all of the creek and river mouth wetlands in Santa Cruz County are within the coastal storm flood zone by 2030 (700 acres of habitat) and much of this fresh and brackish water habitat will be flooded monthly by saline water by 2100 due to rising tides. Some of these wetland areas are designated critical habitat. The cumulative impacts of increased rain intensity and flows within coastal watersheds along with increased sea levels and storm wave impacts pose unique threats to these valuable wetland resources. Regional partners have begun to evaluate the potential impacts to these systems, but studies are incomplete and more research is needed. Adaptive management of coastal barrier beaches and river mouths will be necessary to ensure natural coastal processes are retained.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 50 Table 15-3 (Addendum). Overview of Potential Climate Change Impacts to Aquatic Resources
CLIMATE CHANGE
STRESSOR POTENTIAL IMPACT ON AQUATIC RESOURCES
Sea-Level Rise (SLR)
• Migration of estuarine salinity gradients
• Inundation and erosion of coastal marshes, beaches, mudflats, and other wetlands (leading to loss of habitat for many species) • Altered tidal range and tidal asymmetry (leading to tidal mixing and changes in sediment transport)
• Increased salinity of fresh and brackish water systems • Increased water depths
Increases in water
temperatures
• Shift in species composition
• Reductions in water quality due to increased growth of nuisance algae and to lower oxygen levels
Increases in air temperatures • Decreased water availability and drought Changes in precipitation
• Flooding of coastal areas due to higher peak stream discharge rates • Increased erosion due to high-flow discharge
• Changes in volume and timing of runoff and sediment distribution • Altered winter-spring discharge rates, leading to more pronounced flooding (especially if high flow coincides with heavy precipitation events)
• Reduced water quality due to changes in freshwater runoff • Changes in precipitation affecting pollutant loading levels in water bodies
• Altered salinity gradient from increase/decrease of streamflow Changes in storm intensity
• Increased intensity of coastal storms in some areas, causing coastal erosion, altered sediment transport, inundation of tidal wetlands, and loss of established upland vegetation and structures
• Increased magnitude of coastal storms in some areas, altering hydrological regimes
15.5 ADDENDUM - REGIONAL MITIGATION STRATEGIES
Santa Cruz 2014 IRWM Plan Chapter 15 Climate Change, Section 15.5 Regional Mitigation Strategies:
The Santa Cruz IRWM planning process encourages and promotes projects that implement climate change mitigation measures, including water use efficiency, water recycling, and reuse of urban runoff.
When submitting a project for inclusion in the IRWM Plan, project proponents are asked to list the ways in which their project will include climate change mitigation or adaptation measures, and whether, compared to existing conditions or project alternatives, the project will mitigate its contribution to climate change by reducing energy consumption or GHG emissions. The project ranking process gives preference to those projects that can demonstrate climate change mitigation or adaptation measures, and/or reduced GHG emissions compared with project alternatives. 2019 Addendum to the Santa Cruz IRWM Plan:
All aspects of water resources management have an impact on GHG emissions, including the distribution, treatment and use of water for domestic, municipal, industrial, and agricultural supply.
Water management results in the consumption of significant amounts of energy and the accompanying
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 51 production of GHG emissions, especially where water must be pumped from long distances, from the ground, or over significant elevations.
The IRWM planning provides an opportunity to coordinate with water managers and land use planners throughout the Region in order to encourage broader implementation of GHG reduction and climate mitigation actions. The IRWM Plan focuses on the sectors of emissions that are most directly linked to water management. Mitigation measures considered as part of the project review includes consideration of energy efficiency, emissions reduction, and carbon sequestration.
15.6 ADDENDUM - REGIONAL ADAPTATION STRATEGIES
15.6.1 PRIORITIZED MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES TO ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS 14 Assessing the Region’s vulnerability is an important step to informing sustainable water management and IRWM adaptation strategy prioritization. In this context, vulnerability is the susceptibility of a system component to harmful impacts due to climate change, and the degree of vulnerability is used to identify management actions that have the potential to reduce negative consequences. A vulnerability assessment provides a context to focus discussion on IRWM strategies that also can serve as potential mitigation or adaptation actions and may directly improve our preparedness for projected climate changes. For the 2014 Plan, an assessment was conducted to assess sensitivity, adaptive capacity, and vulnerability. The 2014 Plan also identified and prioritized strategies for each of the IRWM Plan Objectives.
In the 2019 Addendum, the previously identified vulnerabilities and strategies are considered, and their feasibility broadly assessed, for their potential to mitigate or adapt to the impacts of climate change. A list of prioritized management strategies is presented in Table 15-4 (Addendum). In listing and prioritizing these strategies, the Region can better define the types of projects and targets that will help respond to climate change, as well as, identify alignment with local climate change action and adaptation planning and implementation efforts.
14 New section to address the 2016 Plan Standards
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 52 Table 15-4 (Addendum). List of Prioritized Management Strategies for the Santa Cruz IRWM Region Key
attribute Stressors
Relevant projected
climatic/hydrologic
changes
Expected impact of
future climate
conditions
Vulnerability
Feasible to
Reduce
Impacts and
Vulnerability
Strategies
(Priority: High or Medium)
WATER DEMAND
Water
Demand Population growth
Average temperature
increase; Temperature
variability increase;
Drought frequency and
duration increase
Extended period of
peak demand;
Greater variability in
seasonal/annual
demand
Moderate Yes
• Conduct irrigation management and water conservation
• Conduct education/outreach on conservation strategies • Implement policies to minimize additional demand from new growth • Implement groundwater management that includes non-municipal pumpers, to promote sustainable groundwater use. (Sustainable Groundwater Mgmt. Act Groundwater Sustainability Plans)
• Utilize tiered rates
• Utilize rebate/retrofit programs
• Utilize temporary use restrictions as needed during critical supply shortages.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 53 Key
attribute Stressors
Relevant projected
climatic/hydrologic
changes
Expected impact of
future climate
conditions
Vulnerability
Feasible to
Reduce
Impacts and
Vulnerability
Strategies
(Priority: High or Medium)
WATER SUPPLY
Surface water
Population growth;
Aquatic ecosystem
streamflow
requirements
Drought frequency
increase
Surface water
reliability reduction,
increased potential for
water use conflicts
High Yes
• Develop production from alternative/supplemental sources • Increase production from existing resources
• Implement system interties
• Update/replace aging infrastructure
• Support low impact development (LID)/redevelopment
Seasonal
precipitation/runoff
pattern changes
Surface water
reliability reduction,
increased potential for
water use conflicts
High Yes
Increased
evapotranspiration
Greater evaporative
losses from
reservoirs; Drier soil
conditions
High No No high or medium priority strategies to reduce impact Groundwater Aquifer overdraft;
Saltwater intrusion
Groundwater recharge
reductions, Sea level
increase
Reduced groundwater
availability High Yes
• Develop production from alternative/supplemental sources • Implement system interties
• Construct and maintain groundwater recharge facilities • Shift groundwater pumping from coastal zone
• Implement groundwater management that includes non-municipal pumpers, to promote sustainable groundwater use. (Sustainable Groundwater Mgmt. Act Groundwater Sustainability Plans)
• Update/replace aging infrastructure
• Remove impervious coverage in recharge zones
• Support low impact development (LID)/redevelopment
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 54 Key
attribute Stressors
Relevant projected
climatic/hydrologic
changes
Expected impact of
future climate
conditions
Vulnerability
Feasible to
Reduce
Impacts and
Vulnerability
Strategies
(Priority: High or Medium)
WATER QUALITY
Water
Quality
Eutrophication
Surface water
temperature increases,
reduced dissolved
oxygen levels
Water quality degradation
from greater frequency
and severity of algal
blooms in reservoirs –
Impacts human use and
aquatic ecosystems
Moderate Yes
• Perform water system upgrades and maintenance
• Perform rural road improvements and maintenance
• Implement BMPs related to timber harvest activities
• Implement erosion control / sediment capture Best Management Practices • Implement fertilizer and irrigation management measures • Implement septic system upgrades, provide incentives for upgrades and/or maintenance
• Promote/implement private property sewer lateral upgrades and maintenance • Restore riparian zones
• Remove homeless encampments from riparian zones
• Conduct street sweeping
• Conduct regular infrastructure cleaning and maintenance • Implement exclusion of livestock from riparian zones
• Implement livestock waste management BMPs
Increased erosion and
sediment loads
Changing patterns of
precipitation;
increased storm
intensity, runoff
Higher turbidity impacts to
supply and water quality
treatment operations;
Increased pollutant loads
and contaminant
mobilization
– Impacts human use and
aquatic ecosystems
High Yes
Increased frequency
and severity of
wildland fires
Higher turbidity (see
above); Increased risk of
landslides/ mudslides and
erosion in storms following
wildfires
– Impacts human use and
aquatic ecosystems
High Yes
Pollutant concentration Changing patterns of
precipitation / drought
Reduced seasonal low
flows may increase
pollutant concentrations
in waterways
Moderate Yes
Saltwater intrusion Sea level rise induced
seawater intrusion Degraded water quality High Yes See Strategies in groundwater supply
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 55 Key
attribute Stressors
Relevant projected
climatic/hydrologic
changes
Expected impact of
future
climate conditions
Vulnerability
Feasible to
Reduce
Impacts and
Vulnerability
Strategies
(Priority: High or Medium)
FLOOD AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
Flood
hazard
Areas with high degree
of DCIA1; Developed
areas
Increased sea level
elevations; Possible
seasonal runoff
changes
Flood hazard increase
for flood prone areas High Yes
• Utilize riparian zones for flood management through acquisition or easement • Maintain and improve levee conditions for flood management and environmental quality
• Increase channel width and floodplain function
• Remove channel constrictions
• Maintain storm drain conveyance efficiency
• Improve stormwater infrastructure and conduct maintenance • Reduce directly connected impervious area
• Implement low impact development/redevelopment
• Conduct education and outreach on flood and stormwater issues • Increase riparian setbacks
• Conduct vegetation management
Stormwater
volumes
Areas with high degree
of DCIA Possible increased
frequency of high
intensity precipitation
events; Possible
seasonal runoff
changes
Localized risk of
episodic flooding Moderate Yes
Stormwater
quality
Areas with high degree
of DCIA
Potential to increase
pollutant entrainment
during winter storms
Low Yes
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 56 Key
attribute Stressors
Relevant projected
climatic/hydrologic
changes
Expected impact of future
climate conditions Vulnerability
Feasible to
Reduce
Impacts and
Vulnerability
Strategies1
SEA LEVEL RISE
Water and
Wastewater
System
Infrastructure
Rising Tides
Sea levels rise of between
10 and 17 inches by 2050,
and between 31 and
69 inches by 2100
(DWR 2011, CO-CAT
2010)
Elevated sea levels combined with
increases in winter storm intensity
and wave heights will increase risks
associated with coastal inundation.
Pump stations and sanitary sewer
infrastructure are situated in locations
vulnerable to winter storm damage.
Irrigation and water supply wells may
not be resilient to surface flooding
and if flooded by salt water or
contaminated flood waters may lead
to downward migration of these
waters into groundwater aquifers.
High Yes
• Integrate water/wastewater resources planning with land use/sea level rise planning. • Relocate or remove water/wastewater facilities that may be impacted by sea level rise. • Construct seawalls or levees to protect from sea level rise caused by climate change. • Prepare for short-term water shortage and water emergency supply for climate related events
• Protect, redesign or relocate coastline-related water infrastructure • Improve resiliency to flooding along the coast (project dependent) • Engineer a cut off wall to protect wastewater treatment facility • Prepare a regional sea level rise adaptation strategy • Evaluate, prioritize and implement necessary upgrade to existing structures Coastal Storm
Flooding
As sea level rises, higher
water levels allow waves
to encroach further up on
beaches and into low lying
areas.
Increases in tidal height may also
cause localized flooding along river
mouth estuaries and the agriculture
and urban development placed within
these river valleys, leading to periodic
flooding.
High Yes
• Reduce impacts of creek and/or river flooding to water system infrastructure • Seal wastewater pipes throughout system
• Seal pump gallery at City of Santa Cruz Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) • Storm drain pump station upgrades
• Identify and design flood plain enhancement and stormwater capture opportunities • Draft resiliency plan to identify actions needed to retain service and address increased flood risks at critical water/wastewater facilities
Coastal Erosion
Coastal erosion will
increase with sea levels
rise. Storm and wave
intensity likely to increase
in the Santa Cruz region,
and these large, episodic
erosional events may
occur more frequently.
Coastal erosion threatens critical
infrastructure, property, and natural
habitats. Higher sea level will allow
waves and tides to travel further
inland, exposing beaches, cliffs, and
coastal dunes to more persistent
erosional forces.
High Yes
• Protect and restore natural systems to take advantage of their protective services to increase resilience to coastal impacts and provide additional benefits such as improved water quality and increased nursery habitat and recreation areas. • Investigate beach nourishment
• Provide guidance on protecting critical coastal ecosystems and development • Draft a Beach Management Plan that establishes objectives and strategies to retain beach habitat in parallel with other sea level rise adaptation strategies. • Identify back shore habitat restoration opportunities that may provide additional resiliency to inland water infrastructure
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 57 Key
attribute Stressors
Relevant projected
climatic/hydrologic
changes
Expected impact of future
climate conditions Vulnerability
Feasible to
Reduce
Impacts and
Vulnerability
Strategies1
SEA LEVEL RISE
Water Quality
Seawater Intrusion
Increased chloride
concentration in coastal
aquifers
Aquifer water quality degraded, loss
of supply High Yes
• Implement Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency (MGA) Groundwater Sustainability Plan projects and management actions
• Shift groundwater pumping from coastal zone
• Maximize the use of regional surface water resources when available and leave more water in the aquifer to address the Basin’s overdraft condition. • Evaluate risk of contamination from surface flood waters (saltwater and contaminated freshwater sources)
Coastal Storm
Flooding
As sea level rises, higher
water levels allow waves
to encroach further up on
beaches and into low lying
areas.
Rising tides can lead to periodic
flooding (high tide events) of
infrastructure that can impact water
quality. Industrial sites, wastewater
infrastructure, and commercial
businesses that flood can leach
chemicals (oils and grease, fertilizers,
solvents) into surface waters leading
to local and coastal impacts.
High Yes
• Evaluate unprotected developed coastal bluff areas subject to future erosion, and develop plans and timeline for either armor placement, or retreat and relocation of existing public structures and/or infrastructure
• Install gates and pumps on vulnerable storm drains and upgrade undersized infrastructure.
• Enhance natural infiltration areas of watersheds through restoration, hydraulic enhancement and acquisition
Aquatic
Ecosystem &
Habitats
Coastal Storm
Flooding
Rising tides can increase
flooding of coastal creek
and river mouths and
wetland habitat areas with
greater salt water than
was previously
experienced.
Such flooding can lead to a change in
water chemistry from fresh or
brackish water conditions to one with
salinities comparable to ocean
concentrations. Resulting in adverse
impacts to coastal ecosystems and
habitats through loss of land and
alterations to freshwater flow
patterns.
High Yes
• Implement adaptation strategies to conserve California's biodiversity • Prepare fire reduction strategies to protect watershed lands using ecologically sustainable strategies
• Habitat/ecosystem monitoring and adaptive management
• Evaluate the feasibility, and prioritize and install new culverts and control structures to accommodate future river discharges.
• Evaluate drainage modifications (retention) in upper watershed that reduce downstream peak flows
• Prioritize the protection or transition of wetland habitat to future risks of SLR
1. SRL strategies were not prioritized during 2014 IRWM Plan development.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 58 Key
attribute Stressors
Relevant projected
climatic/hydrologic
changes
Expected impact of
future climate
conditions
Vulnerability
Feasible to
Reduce
Impacts and
Vulnerability
Strategies
(Priority: High or Medium)
Habitat - Aquatic Ecosystems
Habitat
quantity
Surface water
extraction;
Morphologic and
vegetative alterations;
Pollution inputs;
Sea level rise
Increased frequency of
droughts; Extended
dry season
Greater risk of
reduced water
availability for aquatic
ecosystems
High Yes
• Reduce stream withdrawals and increase base flow at critical times to achieve streamflow targets
• Identify and eliminate illegal diversions
• Restore natural stream form & function
• Restore riparian zone through acquisition/easements
• Reduce riparian encroachment
• Reduce erosion and sedimentation from public and private roads, unpermitted grading, and other sources.
• Restore lagoon /wetland structure and biotic habitat complexity • Increase/enhance wetland edge habitat
• Conduct riparian revegetation
• Remove or retrofit fish passage barriers
• Preserve or enhance large woody material in streams and riparian zone • Remove non-native species
• Promote natural sand bar function
• Improve wetland hydrology
• Support education/outreach/technical training programs • Support volunteer stewardship programs
• Support environmental education programs for schoolchildren • Reduce illegal dumping
Habitat
quality
Average maximum air
temperature increases,
Air temperature
variability increases
Increased
temperature stress on
coldwater species
High Yes
Increased nitrogen
availability will
increase risk of low
dissolved oxygen
conditions (water
quality impact)
High Yes
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 59
15.6.2 Strategies to Address Adapting to Changes in the Amount, Intensity, Timing, Quality and Variability of Runoff and Recharge15 Santa Cruz 2014 IRWM Plan Chapter 4 Goals and Objective, Section 4.6 Strategy Overview of the 2014 plan, Increase infiltration and recharge: As mentioned above, strategies to reduce the impact of impervious surfaces on the hydrologic function of regional watersheds were identified in each of the four functional areas. Regional opportunities to increase the amount of rainfall that is infiltrated can be realized by disconnecting impervious surfaces; increasing localized parcel-based infiltration through Low Impact Development (LID) on both private and public lands; constructing and maintaining recharge basins; and preventing and/or removing impervious surfaces in known recharge zones. In order to have a measurable impact on the amount of water lost as runoff in developed areas, these strategies would have to be implemented on a vast spatial scale throughout the impervious areas within the region.
Effective implementation of these strategies is collectively intended to restore the natural storm hydrograph in local tributaries and increase groundwater recharge. Increasing infiltration opportunities will retain greater annual volumes on the landscape and mitigate several projected climate change impacts, including a longer, warmer dry season and increased drought frequency. 2019 Addendum to the Santa Cruz IRWM Plan:
Water Supply – Impacts and vulnerabilities to water supply from projected changes in precipitation patterns and reductions in groundwater recharge are discussed in Section 15.3 and prioritized management strategies presented in Table 15-4 (Addendum).
Reduce Risks of Flooding: The periodic flooding predicted within the 2030 hazard maps can be planned for and adaptation strategies identified. Actions to provide protection and accommodation can be made that will reduce risks to properties.
Evaluate Culvert and Tide Gate Upgrades to Improve Creek Discharge: Culverts under county roads and coastal tide gates have restricted discharge during large rain events, which can exacerbate adjacent erosion, landslides, road damage and flooding upstream. Upgrades to this infrastructure that allow flow during large events may help to reduce flooding extent and duration of flooding. Retaining fluvial capacity within culverts while maintaining large wood structure within creeks will continue to be an important challenge which will require continued county investments.
Improve Flood Attenuation through Creek and Wetland Restoration: Riparian areas and wetlands can act as a critical buffer for large river discharge events as well as coastal waves, tides, and erosion.
Additionally, wetlands are able to migrate inland as sea levels rise, if space is provided. Wetlands also provide natural pollution filtration and shoreline stability, sequester carbon, and can store extra water in the case of a flood, along with being an important habitat that supports local fishing and tourism.
Numerous wetland restoration efforts are underway within the creeks and coastal lagoons of Santa Cruz County. Setback and other protection policies have been established within the County Riparian ordinance and City of Santa Cruz Creeks and Wetland Plan. The County and local community can support these and other activities within these watersheds to improve climate resiliency to coastal communities that surround these coastal confluences.
15 New section to address the 2016 Plan Standards
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 60
15.6.3 Strategies to Adapt to the Effects of Sea Level Rise (SLR) on Water supply16
Santa Cruz 2014 IRWM Plan Chapter 4 Goal and Objective, Section 4.2.4 Climate Change: Development of the conceptual models also considered the effects of climate change on the region, including the effects of sea level rise. Climate change model predictions specific to California and the Santa Cruz region were reviewed and incorporated into the IRWM conceptual framework in a format that is intended to be accessible and useful for regional decision makers. 2019 Addendum to the Santa Cruz IRWM Plan:
Potential impacts of sea level rise on water supply is an issue for the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin and the Pajaro Groundwater Basin (which is in the Pajaro IRWM Region). The MidCounty Groundwater Agency’s (MGA) Groundwater Sustainably Plan (GSP) describes projects and management actions necessary to achieve the Basin’s sustainability goal. Seawater intrusion is one of the GSP’s six indicators of sustainability. The Plan seeks to prevent seawater from moving farther inland than was observed from 2013 – 2017 and to maintain groundwater in coastal monitoring wells at levels that prevent further seawater intrusion with at least 99% modeled probability. Projects and management actions are identified in the Plan that address sustainability goals, measurable objectives, and undesirable results for the Basin; primarily the avoidance of seawater intrusion, with related benefits to surface water and groundwater dependent ecosystems.
To achieve sustainability in the Basin, these projects and management actions are recommended.
Baseline Projects & Management Actions (Group 1)
Group 1 activities represent existing groundwater management commitments by MGA member agencies, including: water conservation and demand management; and installation and redistribution of municipal groundwater pumping. Group 1 activities are currently being implemented and are expected to continue to be implemented to achieve groundwater sustainability within the Basin.
Projects & Management Actions Evaluated Against the Sustainable Management Criteria (Group 2) Activities in Group 2 have been developed and thoroughly vetted by MGA member agencies and are planned for near-term implementation, including: Pure Water Soquel; aquifer storage and recovery (ASR); water transfers / in-lieu groundwater recharge; and distributed storm water managed aquifer recharge.
Identified Projects & Management Actions That May Be Evaluated in the Future (Group 3) MGA’s analysis indicates the ongoing implementation of Group 1 activities and the added implementation of Group 2 projects and management actions will bring the Basin into sustainability.
However, if one of the projects and management actions required for sustainability in Group 2 either fails to take place or does not have the expected results, further actions will be required. In that case, appropriate projects and/or management actions will be chosen from Group 3, which include recycled water reuse, desalination, water use curtailment, or other projects that may become 16 New section to address the 2016 Plan Standards
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 61 possible through emerging technology. The specific activity selected will be based on factors such as size of the water shortage, speed of implementation, and scale of regulatory and political hurdles.
15.7 ADDENDUM – FUTURE EFFORTS
Results of the 2019 Vulnerability Assessment can be used to enhance IRWMP project design and spur partners to develop new projects to enhance the resilience of water resources and infrastructure to predicted climate impacts. Key actions to be integrated into future project development and selection for state grant funding should include: 1) ensure that all projects proposed within identified hazard areas are relocated outside of hazard areas or are resilient to the predicted environmental risks, 2) integrate recommended climate adaptation actions into the design and scope of existing and new projects, 3) develop new projects to increase the resiliency of priority water resources and water infrastructure 4) continued dialogue among IRWMP members regarding impacts to water resources due to climate change 5) develop methods to quantify and track incremental impacts of climate related hazards.
15.8 RELATED WATER SUPPLY PLANNING EFFORTS SINCE THE 2014 IRWM PLAN17 Several of the planning efforts by agencies completed since the 2014 IRWM Plan related to key water supply reliability strategies are highlighted below.
Recycled Water Feasibility Studies: With funding support from the State Water Resources Control Board, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department (2018), Soquel Creek Water District (2017) and Scotts Valley Water District (2017) each recently completed Recycled Water Feasibility Studies to assess the potential use of recycled water to supplement their respective water supply. This included a high-level feasibility study and conceptual level design of alternatives for recycled water. The studies are informing additional adaptation response planning and implementation actions.
Water Supply Advisory Committee (WSAC) 2015: The City of Santa Cruz WSAC's provided recommendations to secure the reliability of the City’s water supply. The recommendations include:
Conservation – In addition to existing conservation programs, the WSAC recommends looking at new programs, such as increased rebates and better management of peak season demand. The goal of additional programs is to further reduce demand by 200 to 250 million gallons per year by 2035, with a particular focus on producing savings during the peak season.
Groundwater Storage: In-Lieu Water Exchanges and Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) – In normal years the Santa Cruz Water Department (SCWD) receives more rainfall than is needed to meet customer demand or can be stored in Loch Lomond Reservoir. Using In-Lieu Water Exchanges, available winter flows would be delivered to Soquel Creek Water District (SqCWD) and/or Scotts Valley Water District (SVWD) customers, thus enabling reduced pumping from regional aquifers and enabling the aquifer to passively rest and recharge. Using ASR, available winter flows would be injected into aquifers through new and existing wells owned by the SCWD, SVWD and/or SqCWD, thereby actively recharging aquifers. A portion of the water delivered using In-Lieu or ASR would be 17 New section to update information in the 2014 Plan
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2019 ADDENDUM 62 effectively banked in the aquifers to be extracted and returned to SCWD when needed in future dry years.
Advanced Treated Recycled Water or Desalinated Water would be developed as a supplemental supply in the event the groundwater storage strategies described above prove insufficient to meet the Plan’s goals of cost-effectiveness, timeliness or yield. If it is determined that recycled water cannot meet the City’s needs, then desalinated seawater would be pursued.
Community Water Plan (2015): Soquel Creek Water District completed its Community Water Plan (SqCWD 2015) as a roadmap for achieving water supply sustainability by 2040. During the development of that Plan, community input gathered recognized the need for a timely solution to the threat of seawater intrusion. The Community Water Plan is a diversified portfolio of water conservation, groundwater management, and developing new water supplies. The District is proceeding with a Groundwater Replenishment and Seawater Intrusion Prevention Project, known as Pure Water Soquel.
Pure Water Soquel will reduce ocean discharge and increase water recycling at the Santa Cruz Wastewater Treatment Facility. The recycled water will then be purified at a water purification treatment facility and recharged into the Basin to create a seawater intrusion barrier, replenish the groundwater basin, and allow the District to reduce pumping at wells near the coast.
Groundwater Sustainability Planning: California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act requires plans be developed that describe strategies that will be implemented to balance water supply and demand within groundwater basins that are responsive to projected changes due to climate change. The Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency (MGA) Basin’s Groundwater Sustainably Plan will be submitted to the Department of Water Resources in 2020 and the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin will submit its Plan in 2022. Climate change scenarios were incorporated into the groundwater modeling used to develop the MGA’s water budget for the groundwater Basin and used to evaluate the different projects and management action scenarios to achieve sustainability in the Basin by 2040. Similarly, in the Santa Margarita Basin, climate change impacts are being assessed and incorporated into the planning framework for evaluating projects and management actions to achieve sustainability in that Basin.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix A
APPENDIX A: DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
PLAN STANDARDS REVIEW TOOL
IRWM Plan Review Form
(Per 2016 Plan Standards)
IRWM Planning Region:
Regional Water Management Group: Santa Cruz RWMG
IRWM Plan Title: Santa Cruz IRWM Plan 2014 & 2019 Addendum DWR Reviewer:
RESULT: ONE OR MORE PLAN STANDARDS NOT SUFFICIENT
IRWM Plan Standard Overall Standard
Sufficient (yes/no)
One or More
Requirement(s)
Insufficient
Governance
Region Description
Objectives
Resource Management Strategies
Integration *
Project Review Process
Impact and Benefit
Plan Performance and Monitoring
Data Management
Finance
Technical Analysis
Relation to Local Water Planning
Relation to Local Land Use Planning
Stakeholder Involvement
Coordination
Climate Change
* If not included as an individual section use Governance, Project Review Process, and Data Management Standards per 2016 Guidelines, p. 52.
Santa Cruz IRWM Region
Overall Standard Sufficient No
Sufficient
From IRWM 2016 Guidelines
IRWM 2016
Guidelines
Page Number
Location of
Standard in
Grantee IRWM
Plan
Brief Qualitative Evaluation y/n
The RWMG and individual project proponents who adopted
the Plan"
37 y/n
2014 Plan: §2.1.1,
pp. C2-2 - C2-9
2019 Addendum:
p. 3
The Regional Water Management Group (RWMG) approved
the IRWM Plan in 2014; proof of adoption by the RWMG and individual agencies has already been submitted to DWR.
A description of the IRWM governance structure including a discussion of whether or how Native American tribes will participate in the RWMG.
37 y/n
2014 Plan: §2.1,
pp. C2-2 - C2-11
2019 Addendum:
p. 3
2014 Plan: Governance structure includes the RWMG,
Steering Committee, stakeholders, and the Regional Water Management Foundation.
2019 Addendum: Brief description of how tribal interests are included in the governance stucture.
Public outreach and involvement processes 37 y/n/q
§2.1.4, p. C2-11;
§2.3.3, pp. C2-14 -
C2-15. See also
Chapter 14.
§2.1.4 describes how stakeholders can participate in the planning process and types of stakeholders involved. §2.3.3 elaborates further on the outreach and involvement process, explaining how any interested stakeholder can participate by attending workshops, responding to calls for projects,
commenting on the draft IRWM Plan, or simply by contacting the Steering Committee. See also Chapter 14 for a more
detailed description of stakeholder outreach and
involvement.
Effective decision making 37 y/n/q §2.2.2, p. C2-12
§2.2.2 describes how most day-to-day decisions are made by the Steering Committee, by consensus, and matters of
importance to the larger RWMG (such as decisions with
material financial implications) are made by the RWMG by majority vote.
Balanced access and opportunity for participation in the IRWM process 37 y/n/q §2.3, pp. C2-13 - C2-15
§2.3.1 describes how stakeholders participated in working groups with the RWMG to develop the objectives for the
IRWM Plan; §2.3.2 explains how most of the agencies with water management responsibility in Santa Cruz County are part of the RWMG, how the Steering Committee represents balanced interests, and how the governance structure also supports stakeholder participation in the planning process; and §2.3.3 further elaborates on processes for public
outreach and involvement.
Effective communication – both internal and external to the IRWM region 37 y/n/q §2.2.3, pp. C2.12 - C2.13
§2.2.3 describes how communication occurs within the
RWMG (through monthly meetings of the Steering
Committee, RWMG meetings on an as-needed basis, informal phone calls, email, etc.) and externally with stakeholders (through the website, email listserv) and with other IRWM regions (by active participation in the Central Coast IRWM Region meetings and Roundtable of Regions).
Long term implementation of the IRWM Plan 37 y/n/q §2.7, pp. C2-18 - C2-19
§2.7 describes long-term implementation of the Plan,
including how the Steering Committee will continue to
oversee Plan activities into the future, how Plan activities and projects will be funded (mainly through IRWM and other
federal/state/private grants), and how the planning process itself will be funded (i.e., with RWMG members equally
sharing costs).
Coordination with neighboring IRWM efforts and State and federal agencies 37 y/n/q §2.4 and §2.5, pp. C2-15 - C2-17 §2.4 describes how the Santa Cruz RWMG coordinates with neighboring regions (Pajaro River Watershed and the Bay Area regions). §2.5 describes how the planning process
involves and coordinates with federal and state agencies, which participate primarily in an advisory role for the Plan or in a technical advisory or permitting role for IRWM project implementation.
The collaborative process(es) used to establish plan
objectives 38 y/n/q §2.3.1, p. C2-14
§2.3.1 describes the collaborative way in which stakeholders participated in working groups with the RWMG to develop the objectives for the IRWM Plan.
How interim changes and formal changes to the IRWM Plan will be performed 38 y/n/q §2.6, pp. C2-17 - C2-18
§2.6 describes how interim and formal changes to the Plan are made: §2.6.1 describes how the project list is updated; §2.6.2 describes how informal Plan changes are made by
consensus of the Steering Committee, with opportunity for input by the RWMG; and §2.6.3 describes how formal Plan updates occur, requiring formal adoption by the RWMG.
Updating or amending the IRWM Plan 38 y/n/q §2.6.3, pp. C2-17 - C2-18
§2.6.3 describes how formal Plan updates occur, requiring formal adoption by the RWMG.
IRWM Plan Standard Requirements for 2016 IRWM Guidelines in Addition to Previously Required 2012 IRWM Guideline Requirements. See Appendix H in IRWM 2016 Guidelines.
A description of how the chosen form of governance addresses and insures:
IRWM Plan Standard: Governance
y/n - Present/Not
Present in the IRWM
Plan. If y/n/q, qualitative
evaluation needed.
Requirement Included Evidence of Plan Sufficiency
Overall Standard Sufficient No
Sufficient
From IRWM 2016 Guidelines
IRWM 2016
Guidelines
Page Number
Location of Standard in Grantee IRWM
Plan Brief Qualitative Evaluation y/n
If applicable, describe and explain how the plan will help reduce dependence on the Delta supply regionally. 38 y/n N/A Describe watersheds and water systems 38 y/n §3.10 - §3.18, pp. C3-19 - C3-56 §3.10 describes watersheds in the region. §3.11 describes biological resources. §3.12 describes watershed management. §3.13 describes streamflow and water supply watersheds. §3.14 describes groundwater. §3.15 describes the water
suppliers and infrastructure. §3.17 describes how the region handles wastewater. §3.18 describes the flood management component of the region's water system.
Describe internal boundaries 38 y/n §3.3 - §3.4, pp. C3-6 - C3-8 §3.3 describes boundaries with neighboring IRWM regions. §3.4 describes cities and communities within the region.
Describe water supplies and demands for minimum 20 year planning horizon 38 y/n §3.16, pp. C3-46 - C3-50
§3.19.1 describes impaired water bodies. §3.19.4 describes beach water quality. §3.20 generally discusses issues related to water quality in the region.
Describe social and cultural makeup,including specific
information on DACs and tribal communities in the region and their water challenges.
38 y/n/q §3.4, pp. C3-8 - C3-9; §3.72, pp. C3-13 - C3-
16 §3.4 provides demographics for the region's population, including ethnicities and languages spoken. §3.72 describes the disadvantaged and severely disadvantaged communities in the region and income distribution.
Describe major water related objectives and conflicts (1). 38 y/n/q §3.20, pp. C3-60 - C3-62; §4.2 - §4.5, pp.
C4-2 - C4-8
§3.20 discusses the major water-related issues and challenges in the region. §4.2 - §4.5 in Chapter 4, Goals and Objectives, describe how these issues and challenges were used as a basis for developing the Plan's goals and objectives through the conceptual framework process.
Explain how IRWM regional boundary was determined and
why region is an appropriate area for IRWM planning. 38 y/n/q §3.3, p. C3-6 The Santa Cruz regional boundaries were selected primarily on the basis of common water management issues, and on
regulatory and jurisdictional boundaries. The region is appropriate because it is consistent with past and ongoing water resources management efforts and partnerships; is based upon shared issues and concerns; and provides the necessary jurisdictional and statutory authorities for project implementation.
Describe neighboring and/or overlapping IRWM efforts 38 y/n §3.3.1 - §3.3.2, p. C3-7 Explain how opportunities are maximized (e.g. people at the table, natural features, infrastructure)for integration of water management activities
38 y/n §3.20, p. C3-62
The Santa Cruz IRWM planning effort is designed to help water resource managers address the Region's water issues in a comprehensive and holistic way. By bringing together all of the Region's water resource decision makers and stakeholders in a collaborative and organized decision making process, it is the intention that this Plan will result in greater integration of water management activities, and greater efficiency and coordination of agency and organizational efforts.
Describe water quality conditions. If the IRWM region has areas of nitrate, arsenic, perchlorate, or hexavalent chromium contamination, the Plan must include a description of
location, extent, and impacts of the contamination; actions undertaken to address the contamination, and a description of any additional actions needed to address the
contamination (2).
38 y/n
2014 Plan: §3.19, pp. C3-56 - C3-60; §3.20
p. C3-61
2019 Addendum: §3.19.5 pp. 7-21
2014 Plan: §3.19.1 describes impaired water bodies. §3.19.4 describes beach water quality. §3.20 generally discusses issues related to water quality in the region.
2019 Addendum: Describes AB 1249 Contaminants
Describe likely Climate Change impacts on their region as determined from the vulnerability assessment.
38 y/n
2014 Plan §3.9, p. C3-18
2019 Addendum §3.9, p. 4-7
2014 Plan: §3.9 Brief Climate Change description
2019 Addendum: §3.9 Climate change impacts per the
vulnerability assessment
IRWM Plan Standard Requirements for 2016 IRWM Guidelines in Addition to Previously Required 2012 IRWM Guideline Requirements. See Appendix H in IRWM 2016 Guidelines.
(1) Requirement must be addressed per CWC §10541 (e)(3). (2) Requirement must be addressed per CWC §10541 (e)(14).
IRWM Plan Standard: Region Description
y/n - Present/Not
Present in the IRWM
Plan. If y/n/q, qualitative
evaluation needed.
Requirement Included Evidence of Plan Sufficiency
Overall Standard Sufficient No
Sufficient
From IRWM 2016 Guidelines
IRWM 2016
Guidelines
Page Number
Location of Standard in
Grantee IRWM Plan Brief Qualitative Evaluation y/n
Through the objectives or other areas of the plan, the 7 items on pg 49 of GL are addressed (1). 49 y/n §4.8, pp. C4-13 - C4-19 (see Table 4-2)
The goals, objectives, and strategies of the IRWM Plan
together address all of the items on p. 41 of the Guidelines.
Table 4-2 illustrates how the objectives and strategies either directly or indirectly address these items.
Describe the collaborative process and tools used to establish objectives:
- How the objectives were developed
- What information was considered (i.e.,
water management or local land use
plans, etc.)
- What groups were involved in the process
- How the final decision was made and
accepted by the IRWM effort
48 - 50 y/n §4.2, pp. C4-2 - C4-7;
§4.5, p. C4-8
§4.2 describes the process used to develop the Plan's
objectives. RWMG members and other stakeholders worked
collaboratively to develop a conceptual framework, which led to the development of objectives and strategies (working group members listed on p. C4-6). The conceptual framework built off of previous IRWM Plan efforts that considered water resource issues and challenges in the region. §4.5 describes the30-day public comment period prior to final approval of the objectives.
Identify quantitative or qualitative metrics and measureable objectives:
Objectives must be measurable - there must be some metric the IRWM region can use to determine if the objective is being met as the IRWM Plan is implemented. Neither quantitative nor qualitative metrics are considered inherently better (2). 49 y/n/q §4.7 pp. C4-11 - C4-13
§4.7 describes the quantitative indicators that will be used to determine whether the objectives are being met as the Plan is implemented.
Explain how objectives are prioritized or reason why the objectives are not prioritized
50 y/n/q §4.5, p. C4-9
The objectives are not prioritized. The RWMG felt that by prioritizing some objectives over others, they would effectively be prioritizing the needs of some stakeholders over others. In the spirit of inclusivity, therefore, the RWMG opted to prioritize strategies, rather than objectives.
Reference specific overall goals for the region:
RWMGs may choose to use goals as an additional layer for organizing and prioritizing objectives, or they may choose to not use the term at all.
50 y/n §4.4, p. C4-8
Address adapting to changes in the amount, intensity, timing, quality and variability of runoff and recharge.
39 y/n 2014 Plan §4.4 - §4.7,
pp. C4-8 - C4-13
Each of four functional areas upon which the Plan framework is structured (Water Supply, Water Quality, Watershed
Resources, and Flood/Stormwater Management) includes
prioritized strategies (high, moderate) related to changes in the amount, intensity, timing, quality and variability of runoff and recharge.
Consider the effects of sea level rise (SLR) on water supply conditions and identify suitable adaptation measures.
39 y/n 2014 Plan §4.5 pp. C4-
8; Table 4-2 p. C4-14
Consideration of the effects of sea level rise on water resources in the region, including water supply conditions, were included in the development of the IRWM Conceptual Framework and are reflected in the 2014 IRMW Plan
Objectives.
Reducing energy consumption, especially the energy
embedded in water use, and ultimately reducing GHG
emissions.
39 y/n
2014 Plan: §4.2.4 p. C4-
7 2019 Addendum:
§4.2.4 pp. 23-24
To address the connection between water resource
management and energy, several key strategies and actions described in the Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning (US EPA Region 9 and DWR 2011) can be encouraged by the RWMG through the IRWM planning process. These
include emissions from water supply and delivery and agency staff fleets.
In evaluating different ways to meet IRWM plan objectives, where practical, consider the strategies adopted by CARB in its AB 32 Scoping Plan1.
39 y/n
2014 Plan: §4.8 p. C4-
13 2019 Addendum: §4.8
pp. 25-26
Where practical, the strategies adopted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in its AB 32 Scoping Plan, will be considered in evaluating different ways to meeting Santa Cruz IRWM Plan objectives.
Consider options for carbon sequestration and using
renewable energy where such options are integrally tied to supporting IRWM Plan objectives.
39 y/n
2014 Plan: §4.2.4 p. C4-
7 2019 Addendum:
§4.2.4 pp. 24-25
Carbon sequestration and use of renewable energy will be considered where these options are integrally tied to
supporting IRWM Plan objectives.
IRWM Plan Standard Requirements for 2016 IRWM Guidelines in Addition to Previously Required 2012 IRWM Guideline Requirements. See Appendix H in IRWM 2016 Guidelines.
(1) Requirement must be addressed per CWC §10540 (c).
(2) Requirement must be addressed per CWC §10541 (e).
IRWM Plan Standard: Plan Objectives
y/n - Present/Not
Present in the IRWM
Plan. If y/n/q, qualitative
evaluation needed.
Requirement Included Evidence of Plan Sufficiency
Overall Standard Sufficient No
Sufficient
From IRWM 2016 Guidelines
IRWM 2016
Guidelines
Page Number
Location of Standard in Grantee
IRWM Plan Brief Qualitative Evaluation y/n
Address which RMS will be implemented in achieving IRWM Plan Objectives (1). 39 y/n §5.2, p. C5-25 (see Table 5-4) Table 5-4 on p. C5-25 illustrates how the projects currently included in the IRWM Plan will implement the various
resource management strategies.
Identify RMS incorporated in the IRWM Plan:
Consider all California Water Plan (CWP)RMS criteria (29) listed in Table 3 from the CWP Update 2013
39 y/n
From 2014 Plan: §5.1 - §5.2, pp.
C5-2 - C5-24
From 2019 Addendum: §5.2.5,
§5.2.7-5.2.8 pp. 27-31
The 2016 Plan Standards require that all the RMS identified in the 2013 update of the CWP be evaluated. There are three RMS that were added the 2013 CWP that were not evaluated in the Santa Cruz IRWM Plan. These include: sediment
management; outreach and engagement; and water and
culture. The 2016 Plan Standards require consideration of a new category People & Water, as a result the section
numbering in the addendum is different from the 2014 Plan.
Consideration of climate change effects on the IRWM region must be factored into RMS. Identify and implement, using vulnerability assessments and tools such as those provided in the Climate Change Handbook, RMS and adaptation strategies that address region-specific climate change impacts.
Demonstrate how the effects of climate change on its region are factored into its RMS.
Reducing energy consumption especially the energy
39 y/n
From 2014 Plan: §5.1, p. C5-4,
and throughout various
strategies in Chapter 5, where
relevant
From 2019 Addendum: §5.2.9
(New Section) pp. 31-32
The addition of table 5-5 identifies the Resource Management Strategies applicable to the Santa Cruz Region that may eliminate or minimize vulnerabilities to climate change impacts and includes the addition of the three new RMSs from the 2016 update.
IRWM Plan Standard Requirements for 2016 IRWM Guidelines in Addition to Previously Required 2012 IRWM Guideline Requirements. See Appendix H in IRWM 2016 Guidelines.
(1) Requirement must be addressed per CWC §10540 (e)(1). (2) Requirement must be addressed per CWC §10540 (e)(10).
IRWM Plan Standard: Resource Management Strategies (RMS) y/n - Present/Not
Present in the IRWM
Plan. If y/n/q, qualitative
evaluation needed.
Requirement Included Evidence of Plan Sufficiency
Overall Standard Sufficient No
Sufficient
From IRWM 2016 Guidelines
IRWM 2016
Guidelines
Page Number
Location of Standard in
Grantee IRWM Plan Brief Qualitative Evaluation y/n
Process for projects included in IRWM plan must address 3 components:
- procedures for submitting projects
- procedures for reviewing projects
- procedures for communicating lists of selected projects 39 - 40 y/n §6.3, pp. C6-3 - C6-4; §6.4, pp.
C6-4 - C6-6; §6.4.2, p. C6-11
§6.3 describes procedures for submitting projects. §6.4 describes procedures for reviewing projects. §6.4.2 describes procedures for communicating the lists of projects.
Does the project review process in the plan incorporate the following factors:
How a project contributes to plan objectives
40 y/n Table 6-1 on p. C6-6
The project ranking criteria include the extent to which a project supports high and medium priority objectives for the IRWM Plan identified through the conceptual framework
process. Projects can receive up to 200 points, or 43% of the total maximum score for this category.
How a project is related to Resource Management Strategies identified in the plan. 40 y/n Table 6-1 on p. C6-6 Projects can receive up to 30 points for utilizing resource management strategies.
The technical feasibility of a project.
40 y/n Table 6-1 on p. C6-6
Projects are scored based on the extent to which they can document strong technical feasibility. Projects can receive up to 60 points.
A projects specific benefits to a DAC water issue. 40 y/n Table 6-1 on p. C6-6 Projects can receive up to 20 points to the extent that they provide water resource benefits for a DAC.
Environmental Justice considerations.
40 y/n Table 6-1 on p. C6-6
Projects can receive up to 10 points for demonstrating
mitigation of inequitable distribution of environmental burdens.
Project costs and financing 40 y/n Table 6-1 on p. C6-6 Projects can receive up to 10 points for project costs and financing.
Address economic feasibility 40 y/n Table 6-1 on p. C6-6 Projects can receive up to 20 points for demonstrating strong economic feasibility.
Project status 40 y/n Table 6-1 on p. C6-6 Projects can receive up to 10 points for documenting that permits are secured and CEQA completed.
Strategic implementation of plan and project merit
40 y/n §6.4, p. C6-5
The prioritization process seeks to identify projects that, among other things, demonstrate project effectiveness and address strategic considerations for IRWM implementation.
Status of the Project Proponent's IRWM plan adoption
40 y/n §6.4.4, p. C6-11
All project sponsors must formally adopt, or commit to
formally adopting, the IRWM Plan prior to an IRWM
application being submitted, and must have formally adopted the Plan prior to the grant contract being executed.
Project's contribution to reducing dependence on Delta supply (for IRWM regions receiving water from the Delta).
40 y/n N/A
Project's contribution to climate change adaptation.
Include potential effects of Climate Change on the region and consider if adaptations to the water management system are necessary (1).
Consider the contribution of the project to adapting to identified system vulnerabilities to climate change effects on the region.
Consider changes in the amount, intensity, timing, quality and variability of runoff and recharge.
Consider the effects of SLR on water supply conditions and identify suitable adaptation measures.
40 y/n
From 2014 Plan: Table 6-1 on p.
C6-6
From 2019 Addendum: pp. 33-
35 In November 2018, the Santa Cruz Region’s Project Solicitation form was updated to include additional questions to address the 2016 Plan Standards. The Santa Cruz IRWM Supplemental Questionnaire and scoring criteria were updated to include the two additional questions related to a: 1) Project's contribution to climate change adaptation and the 2) Contribution of project in reducing GHGs compared to project alternatives.
Contribution of project in reducing GHGs compared to project alternatives.
Consider the contribution of the project in reducing GHG emissions as compared to project alternatives
Consider a project’s ability to help the IRWM region reduce GHG emissions as new projects are implemented over the 20- year planning horizon.
Reducing energy consumption, especially the energy
embedded in water use, and ultimately reducing GHG
emissions.
40 y/n
From 2014 Plan: Table 6-1 on p.
C6-6
From 2019 Addendum: pp. 33-
35 In November 2018, the Santa Cruz Region’s Project Solicitation form was updated to include additional questions to address the 2016 Plan Standards. The Santa Cruz IRWM Supplemental Questionnaire and scoring criteria were updated to include the two additional questions related to a: 1) Project's contribution to climate change adaptation and the 2) Contribution of project in reducing GHGs compared to project alternatives.
Specific benefits to critical water issues for Native American tribal communities. 53 y/n From 2019 Addendum: §6.4 p. 35 There are no state or federal tribal lands within the Santa Cruz IRWM region.
IRWM Plan Standard Requirements for 2016 IRWM Guidelines in Addition to Previously Required 2012 IRWM Guideline Requirements. See Appendix H in IRWM 2016 Guidelines.
(1) Requirement must be addressed per CWC §10540 (e)(10).
IRWM Plan Standard: Project Review Process
y/n - Present/Not
Present in the IRWM
Plan. If y/n/q, qualitative
evaluation needed.
Requirement Included Evidence of Plan Sufficiency
Overall Standard Sufficient No
Sufficient
IRWM 2016 Guidelines Requirement
IRWM 2016
Guidelines
Page Number
Location of
Standard in
Grantee IRWM
Plan
Brief Qualitative Evaluation y/n
Contain performance measures and monitoring methods to
ensure that IRWM objectives are met (1). 40 y/n
§8.3, pp. C8-3 - C8-
4, and §8.4, pp.
C8-4 - C8-10
§8.3 describes project monitoring methods, and §8.4 describes how the RWMG will gauge overall Plan performance based on a set of quantitative performance measures identified through the conceptual framework process that measure the extent to which Plan objectives are being met.
Contain a methodology that the RWMG will use to oversee and evaluate implementation of projects. 40 y/n §8.2, pp. C8-3 Table 8-1 illustrates how the RWMG will track implementation of projects in the IRWM Plan.
Each project in the IRWM Plan is monitored to comply with all applicable rules, laws, and permit requirements. 58 y/n From 2014 Plan:
Chapter 8
Introduction, pp.
C8-2
Any project that is funded through the IRWM Program will be monitored by the project proponent to ensure compliance with all applicable rules, laws, and permit requirements along with any additional performance measures prescribed for the
project.
Contain policies and procedures that promote adaptive
management and, as more effects of Climate Change manifest, new tools are developed, and new information becomes
available, adjust IRWM plans accordingly.
40 y/n From 2014 Plan:
§8.4, pp. C8-5
The RWMG will use an adaptive management approach to
incorporate “lessons learned” from project-specific monitoring into the IRWM Plan in terms of objectives, resource
management strategies, or other aspects of the Plan or
planning process. Additionally, as more effects of climate change manifest, new tools are developed, and new
information becomes available, the RWMG may need to adjust the objectives and strategies of the IRWM Plan to better address these changes.
IRWM Plan Standard Requirements for 2016 IRWM Guidelines in Addition to Previously Required 2012 IRWM Guideline Requirements. See Appendix H in IRWM 2016 Guidelines.
(1) Requirement must be addressed per CWC §10541 (e)(7). y/n - Present/Not
Present in the IRWM
Plan. If y/n/q, qualitative
evaluation needed.
IRWM Plan Standard: Plan Performance and Monitoring
Requirement Included Evidence of Plan Sufficiency
Overall Standard Sufficient No
Sufficient
IRWM 2016 Guidelines Requirement
IRWM 2016
Guidelines
Page
Number
Location of Standard
in Grantee IRWM
Plan
Brief Qualitative Evaluation y/n
Identify a list of local water plans used in the IRWM plan 41 y/n §12.2, pp. C12-4 - C12-6
Describe the dynamics between the IRWM plan and other
planning documents
41 y/n
§12.2 - §12.5, pp. C12-
4 - C12-18
The IRWM Plan uses the information contained in local
water management plans to develop a regional
perspective for the purpose of water resource planning.
In addition to local water management planning
documents, land use and regional planning documents
that are relevant to water resources planning (described in §12.3, §12.4, and §12.5) are incorporated into the
IRWM Plan to help inform the development of this
regional perspective. All of the data and information
contained in the IRWM Plan will be reviewed and
updated approximately every five years, depending on
available funds, as part of the formal Plan update.
Describe how the RWMG will coordinate its water mgmt
planning activities
41 y/n Chapter 12
Chapter 12 in its entirely describes how the RWMG has
coordinated its water management planning activities to address or incorporate all or part of the actions of its members and other water and land use management
agencies, including groundwater management, urban
water management, wastewater management, flood
management, watershed management, and stormwater
management, as well as other planning efforts such as
City and County general planning, and regional planning efforts. All of the data and information contained in the IRWM Plan will be reviewed and updated approximately
every five years, depending on available funds, as part of the formal Plan update.
Discuss how the plan relates to these other planning
documents and programs. Same as 2012 GL with the
following addition: "It should be noted that Water Code § 10562 (b)(7) requires the development of a stormwater
resource plan and compliance with these provisions to
receive grants for stormwater and dry weather runoff
capture projects. Upon development of the stormwater
resource plan, the RWMG shall incorporate it into IRWM
plan. The IRWM Plan should discuss the processes that it will use to incorporate such plans." Minor wording differences - e.g. Groundwater Sustainability Plan example in the 2016 Guidelines instead of Groundwater Managemenbt Plan in
the 2012 Guidelines.
63 - 64 y/n
From the 2014 Plan:
§12.2, pp. C12-4
From the 2019
Addendum: pp. 37-38
In December 2016, the Santa Cruz County Storm Water
Resources Plan (SWRP) was completed. The SWRP was
approved by the RWMG on February 24, 2017 and
incorporated to the IRWM Plan as an appendix.
Following the enactment of California’s Sustainable
Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) two new
Groundwater Sustainability Agencies were established in the Region. As a high priority basin, the Mid-County
Groundwater Sustainablility Plan (GSP) must be
completed by January 2020; the schedule for
development is 2017 – 2020. As a medium priority basin, the Santa Margarita GSP must be completed by January
2022; the schedule for development is 2018 – 2022. The
next formal IRWM Plan update will be completed
following completion of the GSPs as the IRWM Plan will
be directly informed and by the final recommendations
and actions in the GSPs.
Consider and incorporate water management issues and
climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies from local plans into the IRWM Plan.
63 - 64 y/n
From the 2014 Plan:
§12.4.8, pp. C12-13-
C12-14
From the 2019
Addendum: §12.4.8,
pp.38-39
The 2016 IRWM Plan Standards require the Plan
consider and incorporate water management issues and
climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies
from local plans into the IRWM Plan. This was
sufficiently addressed in the 2014 Plan but new
information from more recent studies haves been
incorporated into the 2019 Vulnerability Assessment.
IRWM Plan Standard Requirements for 2016 IRWM Guidelines in Addition to Previously Required 2012 IRWM Guideline Requirements. See Appendix H in IRWM 2016 Guidelines.
IRWM Plan Standard: Relation to Local Water Planning
y/n - Present/Not
Present in the IRWM
Plan. If y/n/q,
qualitative evaluation
needed.
Requirement Included Evidence of Plan Sufficiency
Overall Standard Sufficient No
Sufficient
IRWM 2016 Guidelines Requirement
IRWM 2016
Guidelines
Page Number
Location of
Standard in
Grantee
IRWM Plan
Brief Qualitative Evaluation y/n
Document current relationship between local land use
planning, regional water issues, and water management
objectives
41 y/n
§12.3 - §12.6,
pp. C12-7 -
C12-18
§12.3 - §12.5 describe the various land use and other regional planning efforts that are relevant to water resources
management planning, and that inform the IRWM Plan. Many of the IRWM Plan objectives require coordination between land use planners and water managers; §12.6 describes how land use planners and water managers coordinate in the Santa Cruz IRWM region to address these issues, from projectspecific planning to general land use planning.
Document future plans to further a collaborative, proactive relationship between land use planners and water managers 41 y/n
§12.6 and
§12.7, pp. C12-
18 - C12-19
These sections describe both the opportunities and challenges for future collaboration between land use planners and water managers as part of the IRWM planning effort.
Demonstrate information sharing and collaboration with
regional land use planning in order to manage multiple water demands throughout the state, adapt water management
systems to climate change, and potentially offset climate change impacts to water supply in California.
41 y/n
From the 2014
Plan: §12.3.1,
pp. C12-7 -
C12-8
From 2019
Addendum:
§12.3.1, pp. 38
Information sharing and collaboration with regional land use planning is ongoing through IRWM and the related planning efforts (e.g, Groundwater Sustainability Plans). There is a nexus between the General Plans and the Climate Action / Adaptation Plans which outline strategies and implementing actions to achieve the GHG reduction and related climate targets. These planning documents were considered in the 2014 Plan development and in the 2019 Vulnerability
Assessment of climate change impacts to local water supply.
IRWM Plan Standard Requirements for 2016 IRWM Guidelines in Addition to Previously Required 2012 IRWM Guideline Requirements. See Appendix H in IRWM 2016 Guidelines.
IRWM Plan Standard: Relation to Local Land Use Planning y/n - Present/Not
Present in the IRWM
Plan. If y/n/q, qualitative
evaluation needed.
Requirement Included Evidence of Plan Sufficiency
Overall Standard Sufficient No
Sufficient
IRWM 2016 Guidelines Requirement
IRWM 2016
Guidelines
Page Number
Location of Standard
in Grantee IRWM Plan Brief Qualitative Evaluation y/n
Discuss involvement of DACs and tribal communities in the IRWM planning effort 41 - 42 y/n §13.4 and §13.5, pp. C13-11 - C13-14 Describe decision-making process and roles that stakeholders can occupy 41 - 42 y/n
Chapter 2
Governance: §2.1.4, p.
C2-11; §2.3.1 - §2.3.3,
pp. C2-14 - C2-15
While decisions regarding the IRWM Plan are made by the Steering Committee and the RWMG, stakeholders have input into the decision making process through various means. §2.1.4 describes how stakeholders can participate in the planning process. §2.3.1 describes how stakeholders
participated in working groups with the RWMG to develop the objectives for the IRWM Plan. §2.3.2 and §2.3.3 elaborate on the outreach and involvement process, explaining how any interested stakeholder can participate and provide input by attending workshops, responding to calls for projects,
commenting on the draft IRWM Plan, or simply by contacting the Steering Committee.
Discuss how stakeholders are necessary to address objectives and RMS 41 - 42 y/n
Chapter 4 Goals and
Objectives, Chapter 5
RMS, Chapter 6
Project Review
Process and
Integration, and
Chapter 8 Plan
Performance and
Monitoring
Stakeholders address IRWM Plan objectives and strategies primarily through the implementation of projects and
programs in the IRWM Plan, as well as through water
management and land use management activities related to the IRWM planning process. This is addressed in several chapters throughout the IRWM Plan, including Chapter 6
Project Review Process and Integration (p. C6-2: "The Santa Cruz IRWM Plan will be implemented through the specific actions, plans, projects, and programs proposed by the RWMG and stakeholders"), Chapter 4 Goals and Objectives (see discussion of the Conceptual Framework process in §4.2.3 beginning on p. C4-5), Chapter 5 Resource Management
Strategies (see Table 5-4 on p. C5-25), and Chapter 8 Plan Performance and Monitoring (see especially §8.4 beginning on p. C8-4).
Discuss how a collaborative process will engage a balance in interest groups 41 - 42 y/n
Chapter 13
Introduction, p. C13-2;
Chapter 2 Governance
§2.3, pp. C2-13 - C2-15
The Introduction to Chapter 13 establishes that the outreach efforts during the IRWM Plan update have aimed to ensure that diverse interests and perspectives were considered in establishing the region's water management goals, objectives, strategies, and priorities. Chapter 2 Governance §2.3 generally describes how the Santa Cruz IRWM governance structure
functions to ensure an effective, open, balanced, and inclusive process that achieves the goals and objectives of the IRWM Plan.
Contain a public process that provides outreach and
opportunity to participate in the IRWM plan (1). Per 2016 GL:
“Native American tribes – It should be noted that tribes are sovereign nations, and as such coordination with tribes is on a government-to-government basis.”
41 - 42 y/n
From the 2014 Plan:
§13.5, pp. C13-13-
13.14 From the 2019
Addendum:
§13.5, pp 39
As specified in the 2016 IRWM Guideline, coordination with a Native America tribe is to be on a government-to-government basis. While there are currently no federally recognized tribes within in the Santa Cruz IRWM Region. If at a future date, the Amah Mutsun or other were federally recognized as a tribe, they would be recognized as a sovereign nation.
Identify process to involve and facilitate stakeholders during development and implementation of IRWM plan regardless of ability to pay; include description of any barriers to
involvement (2). "Stakeholder Involvement" in the 2012 GL is referred to "Native American Tribe and Stakeholder
Involvement" in the 2016 GL and Tribes are referred to
specifically.
41 - 42 y/n
From the 2014 Plan:
§13.3, pp. C13-7;
§13.5, pp. C13-13-
13.14 From the 2019
Addendum:
§13.5, pp 39
The 2014 IRWM Plan describes a public process that provides outreach and opportunity to participate in the IRWM planning process. Furthermore, access to participation and involvement in never based on an individual’s or group’s ability to contribute financially to IRWM plan development or the
planning process.
Tribal Involvment is specifically addressed in the 2014 plan in Section 13.5 NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBE IDENTIFICATION AND
OUTREACH.
IRWM Plan Standard Requirements for 2016 IRWM Guidelines in Addition to Previously Required 2012 IRWM Guideline Requirements. See Appendix H in IRWM 2016 Guidelines.
(1) Requirement must be addressed per CWC §10541 (g).
(2) Requirement must be addressed per CWC §10541 (h)(2).
IRWM Plan Standard: Stakeholder Involvement
y/n - Present/Not
Present in the IRWM
Plan. If y/n/q, qualitative
evaluation needed.
Requirement Included Evidence of Plan Sufficiency
Overall Standard Sufficient No
Sufficient
IRWM 2016 Guidelines Requirement
IRWM 2016
Guidelines
Page Number
Location of Standard in
Grantee IRWM Plan Brief Qualitative Evaluation y/n
Contain a plan, program, or methodology for further data gathering and analysis of prioritized vulnerabilities. 42 - 44 y/n §15.7, pp. C15-30 §15.7 describes how the RWMG will continue to explore ways in which existing and updated climate models, and other available climate change tools and projections for the region, can be used for future vulnerability assessments updated in future versions of the Plan.
Include climate change as part of the project review process. 42 - 44 y/n Chapter 6 Project Review
Process and Integration,
Table 6-1 pp. C6-6
See Table 6-1: Projects can receive additional points to the extent that they contribute to regional adaption to climate change vulnerabilities identified in the Plan or in other state/local planning documents, and/or to the extent that they reduce GHG emissions or improve energy efficiency compared with project alternatives or existing conditions.
Evaluate IRWM region's vulnerabilities to climate change and potential adaptation responses based on vulnerabilities assessment in the DWR Climate Change Handbook for
Regional Water Planning (1). Addition in 2016 GL - "At a minimum, the vulnerability evaluation must be equivalent to the vulnerability assessment contained in the Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning, Section 4 and
Appendix B."
42 - 44 y/n
From the 2014 Plan: §15.2,
pp. C15-5 - C15-14; §15.3,
pp. C15-15 - C15-24; §15.6,
pp. C15-28 - C15-29
From the 2019 Addendum:
§15.3, pp 40-50
In 2014, a vulnerability assessment was conducted based upon the DWR Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water
Planning and the hazards and risks of climate change
identified in local, regional, and statewide studies and reports.
A high-level summary of vulnerabilities are presented,
consistent with the 2016 Plan Standards, by the following categories: water demand, water supply, water quality, sea level rise, flooding, and ecosystem and habitat.
Provide a process that considers GHG emissions when
choosing between project alternatives (1). Addition in 2016 GL - "At a minimum, that process must determine a project’s ability to help the IRWM region reduce GHG emissions as new projects are implemented over a 20-year planning horizon and consider energy efficiency and reduction of GHG emissions when choosing between project alternatives."
42 - 44 y/n
From the 2014 Plan: §15.5,
pp. C15-26 - C15-27.
Chapter 6 Project Review
Process and Integration,
Table 6-1 pp. C6-6 Chapter
4 §4.2.4 pp. C4-7
From the 2019 Addendum:
§15.5, pp 50-51
The RWMG encourages the reduction of GHG emissions for
IRWM Plan implementation projects through the project
review and ranking process. The IRWM planning provides an opportunity to coordinate with water managers and land use planners throughout the Region in order to encourage broader implementation of GHG reduction and climate mitigation
actions.
Include a list of prioritized vulnerabilities based on the vulnerability assessment and the IRWM’s decision making process. Addition in 2016 GL - "A list of prioritized
vulnerabilities which includes a determination regarding the feasibility for the RWMG to address the priority
vulnerabilities."
42 - 44 y/n
From the 2014 Plan: §15.3,
pp. C15-18, p. C15-20, and
pp. C15-21; §15.6, pp. C15-
28 - C15-29
From the 2019 Addendum:
Table 15.4 pp. 51-58
In the 2019 Addendum, the previously identified strategies are considered, and their feasibility broadly assessed, for their potential to mitigate or adapt to the impacts of climate change. A list of prioritized management strategies is
presented in Table 15-4. In listing and prioritizing these strategies, the Region can better define the types of projects and targets that will help respond to climate change, as well as, identify alignment with local climate change action and adaptation planning and implementation efforts.
Address adapting to changes in the amount, intensity, timing, quality, and variability of runoff and recharge. 42 - 44 y/n From the 2014 Plan: §15.6,
pp. C15-28 - C15-29.
Chapter 4, §4.6 pp. C4-9 -
C4-11
From the 2019 Addendum:
§15.6, pp 59
The 2019 Vulnerablity Assessment added three new Regional Adaptation Strategies to address the amount, intensity, timing, quality, and variability of runoff and recharge. These strategies include: Reduce Risks of Flooding, Evaluate Culvert and Tide Gate Upgrades to Improve Creek Discharge, and Improve
Flood Attenuation through Creek and Wetland Restoration.
Areas of the State that receive water imported from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the area within the Delta, and areas served by coastal aquifers must also consider the effects of sea level rise (SLR) on water supply conditions and identify suitable adaptation measures.
42 - 44 y/n §15.6, pp. C15-28 - C15-29.
Chapter 4, §4.6 pp. C4-9 -
C4-11
From the 2019 Addendum:
§15.6, pp 60
Potential impacts of sea level rise on water supply is an issue for the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin.The MidCounty Groundwater Agency’s (MGA) Groundwater Sustainably Plan (GSP) describes projects and management actions necessary to achieve the Basin’s sustainability goal.
Projects and management actions are identified in the Plan that address sustainability goals, measurable objectives, and undesirable results for the Basin; primarily the avoidance of seawater intrusion, with related benefits to surface water and groundwater dependent ecosystems.
IRWM Plan Standard Requirements for 2016 IRWM Guidelines in Addition to Previously Required 2012 Guideline Requirements. See Appendix H in IRWM 2016 Guidelines.
(1) Requirement must be addressed per CWC §10541 (e)(9).
IRWM Plan Standard: Climate Change
y/n - Present/Not
Present in the IRWM
Plan. If y/n/q, qualitative
evaluation needed.
Requirement Included Evidence of Plan Sufficiency
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix B 1
APPENDIX B: SUMMARY OF THE 2019 CLIMATE CHANGE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix B 2
PREFACE
To inform the 2019 Addendum to the 2014 Santa Cruz IRWM Plan, a Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment was conducted to assess and incorporate new information since the completion of the 2014 IRWM Plan. This work was led by Central Coast Wetlands Group (CCWG) with the Regional Water Management Foundation (RWMF) and selected staff representing the Santa Cruz Regional Water Management Group (RWMG). The following presents a summary of that work.
This point-in-time summary is based upon information provided by RWMG agencies and/or available in mid-2019; it does not provide a full description of all the various climate change related efforts in the Region. Planning for climate change is on-going as work continues at the individual RWMG agencies as well as through IRWM efforts to continue to assess vulnerabilities, conduct adaptation planning and mitigations strategies as new information becomes available.
DISCLAIMER: THE DATA UTILIZED FOR PURPOSES OF THE SEA LEVEL RISE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT AND SOCIAL
VULNERABILITY TO CLIMATE CHANGE ANALYSIS WERE COLLECTED FROM VARIOUS SOURCES AND IS INTENDED TO BE USED FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. SITE-SPECIFIC EVALUATIONS MAY BE NEEDED TO CONFIRM/VERIFY INFORMATION PRESENTED IN THESE DATA. INACCURACIES MAY EXIST, AND NEITHER CENTRAL COAST WETLANDS
GROUP (CCWG) NOR THE REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT FOUNDATION (RWMF) CAN PROVIDE ANY WARRANTIES
OR GUARANTEES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, REGARDING THEIR ACCURACY OR RELIABILITY FOR ANY ASPECT OR USE OF THIS INFORMATION FOR ANY PURPOSE. FURTHER, ANY USER OF THESE DATA ASSUMES ALL RESPONSIBILITY AND
FURTHER AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD CCWG AND THE RWMG HARMLESS FROM AND AGAINST ANY DAMAGE, LOSS, OR LIABILITY ARISING FROM ANY USE OF THIS INFORMATION.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix B 3
2019 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated in its 2014 Synthesis Report:
Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea level has risen. (IPCC 2014)
The combination of ice melt and the thermal expansion of seawater (due to warmer water temperatures) has led to global sea level rise (IPCC 2014). Research shows that since 1971, thermal expansion and glacial melt have caused 75% of observed sea level rise (IPCC 2014). The IPCC’s 2014 Fifth Assessment Report (IPCC 2014) projected sea level rise by the end of the century as a result of thermal expansion to range from 0.23 to 0.98 meters (9-48 inches). It predicts with “virtual certainty” that sea level rise will continue beyond 2100, and projects sea level rise beyond 2300 to be between 1 and 3 m (IPCC 2014).
IPCC scientists predict that the serious consequences of climate change will continue to grow and expand. The rate of increase in sea surface temperature is unprecedented, and is accelerating the planet’s water cycle, which will result in extreme weather events throughout the globe. Droughts, storms, floods, and wildfires will become more common. These events will expose ecosystem and human system vulnerability, and will likely disrupt and damage food and fresh water supplies (IPCC 2014). The extreme increases in temperature to could result in a summer ice-free arctic by 2050 (IPCC 2014) and cause the oceans to thermally expand, both of which will raise the average level of all oceans.
This continuing increase in average global sea level will have various consequences effects, including coastline destruction, the displacement of major population centers, and economic disruption.
CALIFORNIA STATE GUIDANCE & REPORTS
The 2019 Vulnerability Assessment reviewed the pertinent reports released since the completion of the 2014 IRWM Plan, these include:
The Ocean Protection Council State of California Sea-Level Rise Guidance (2018): This report specifically recommends that “risk assessments and adaptation planning efforts should be conducted at community and regional levels” including “cross-jurisdictional coordination”.
The Coastal Commission’s Residential Adaptation Policy Guidance (revised draft 2018) provides an indepth discussion of sea level rise adaptation policies related to residential development.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Pacific Coastal Flood Mapping (2018): FEMA is working to update the Pacific Coastal flood maps through the California Coastal Analysis and Mapping Project for Region IX. This project is incorporating the latest engineering and mapping data for areas impacted by coastal flooding for the California Coast in order to provide the most up-to-date coastal flood maps.
Natural Resources Agency Safeguarding California 2018 Update: California Climate Adaptation Strategy):
This report describes the state’s progress in climate adaptation and presents an actionable plan for the near future. Building on the 2009 California Adaptation Strategy and the 2014 Safeguarding
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix B 4
California Plan, the 2018 report is directed by Assembly Bill 1482 (2015-16) to update the state’s adaptation strategy every three years.
California 4th Climate Assessment (Pierce 2018): California released its 4th Climate Change Assessment, a multi-region review of climate change impacts that also provides planning tools to support the state’s response.
Rising Seas in California, An Update on Sea-level Rise (Griggs 2017): This document, requested by the California Ocean Protection Council and guided by a set of questions from the state Sea-Level Rise Policy Advisory Committee, provides a synthesis of the state of the science on sea-level rise. It provides the scientific foundation for the update to the State of California Sea-Level Rise Guidance Document.
RECENT REGIONAL STUDIES AND REPORTS
A number of recent studies have been completed that evaluate hazards and/or vulnerabilities of various portions of the Monterey Bay and Santa Cruz County. The following provides a brief summary of regional studies and efforts.
Central Coast Climate Change Assessment. 2018. Langridge, Ruth. (University of California, Santa Cruz). 2018. Central Coast Summary Report. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment.
Publication number: SUM-CCCA4-2018-006.
ESA PWA Monterey Bay Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Study: Technical Methods (2014): This vulnerability study and technical methods report, prepared by PWA, presents the methods and data used to develop maps of erosion and coastal flooding hazard zones for the Monterey Bay study area, from Año Nuevo to Monterey’s Wharf 2. The hazard zones, including dune and cliff erosion, rising tides, and coastal storm flooding, take into account geology, tides, waves, historic erosion, existing armoring, and various sea level rise projections in order to most accurately represent the projected extents of erosion and flooding for 2030, 2060, and 2100. This report describes in depth the GIS layers and metadata for each hazard zone, and the processes used to create those layers.
The Nature Conservancy’s Coastal Resiliency Mapping Tool (2015): The Nature Conservancy (TNC) has developed a publicly accessible interactive mapping tool to view projected sea level rise hazards for various geographies across the world, on both local and global scales. Users can explore the extent of flooding and erosion along selected coastlines—specifically in the Americas or on a global scale—for multiple time horizons or amounts of sea level rise, and can overlay ecological, social, or economic layers to view vulnerabilities. City of Capitola and Santa Cruz County Sea Level Vulnerability reports (2017): The Capitola and Santa Cruz County reports document similar hazards in Santa Cruz County along the coast with similar or more extensive impacts to residential and agricultural properties. By 2100 sea level rise and fluvial models used in this analysis project that much of the coastal and low-lying areas along rivers may be periodically flooded during winter storms and high river discharges. By 2100 tidal inundation within low lying coastal areas may pose a serious challenge. Each of these reports makes valuable adaptation recommendations.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix B 5
City of Santa Cruz Water Study 2019 “Climate Change – how projections are evolving and what it means”. The Water Supply Advisory Committee studied the potential for climate change to impact water supply availability. The study identified two alternative ways to characterize climate change, one being an extended drought and the other being changes in ongoing hydrology. USGS CoSMOS. CoSMoS v3.1 for Central California shows projections for future climate scenarios (sea-level rise and storms) to provide emergency responders and coastal planners with critical storm-hazards information that can be used to increase public safety, mitigate physical damages, and more effectively manage and allocate resources within complex coastal settings. Data for Central California covers the coastline from Pt. Conception to Golden Gate Bridge. Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin (2019).
GSP development included extensive consideration of climate change. The Plan required development of an integrated groundwater/surface water model upon which the Basin’s water budget (past, present and future) and sustainable planning scenarios are based. The model accounted for future climate generated from a catalog of historical climate data from warm years in the Basin’s past to simulate the warmer temperatures predicted by global climate change.
Specifically, the Catalog Climate uses historical temperature and precipitation data from the Santa Cruz Co-op and Watsonville Waterworks climate stations. This approach was recommended by the model Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to address the uncertainty noted in precipitation forecasts for coastal California in a variety of available global climate models. The TAC was made up of a team of specialists whose role was to support scientific inquiry and challenge the assumptions of the MGA’s technical consultants who developed and calibrated the model.
Additional Pertinent Reports include:
City of Santa Cruz. 2018. City of Santa Cruz Climate Adaptation Plan Update 2018-2023 Fisher, A.T., S. Lozano, S. Beganskas, E. Teo, K. Young, W. Weir, R. Harmon. 2017. Regional Managed Aquifer Recharge and Runoff Analyses in Santa Cruz and northern Monterey Counties, California. Prepared for: The California State Coastal Conservancy Project 13-118 Flint, L.E., and Flint, A.L., 2012, Simulation of climate change in San Francisco Bay Basins, California: Case studies in the Russian River Valley and Santa Cruz Mountains: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5132, 55 p. CALFIRE, San Mateo — Santa Cruz Unit & the Resource Conservation District for San Mateo County and Santa Cruz County. 2018. Community Wildlife Protection Plan. Santa Cruz County San Mateo County
County of Santa Cruz. 2015. Santa Cruz County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2015-2020. ESA 2016. Monterey Bay Sea Level Rise: Climate Change Impacts to Combined Fluvial and Coastal Hazards.
ESA PWA. May 2012. Evaluation of Erosion Mitigation Alternatives for Southern Monterey Bay.
Report prepared for Monterey Bay Sanctuary Foundation and the Southern Monterey Bay Coastal Erosion Working Group, 30 May 2012, ESA PWA REF.#1972.00. 216pp.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix B 6
PROJECTED CHANGES IN CLIMATE VARIABLES IN THE SANTA CRUZ IRWM REGION Many climate models have been generated to predict changes in ocean and land temperature, rain frequency and intensity, coastal wave exposure, and sea level rise. California has created several webbased interfaces to help local and regional planners “downscale” climate models for local planning purposes. The Cal-Adapt website (http://cal-adapt.org/) provides a geographically based climate model interpretation tool that generates predictive changes to various climate variables using different IPCC GHG emissions projections. Emissions scenario Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 (High Emissions Scenario) coincides with a scenario in which no effort is taken to alter present practices, resulting in increasing rates of emissions. Emissions scenario RCP 4.5 (Low Emissions Scenario) coincides with emission rates associated with global success at curbing emissions as prescribed within international climate treaties.
The Cal-Adapt tool was used to project changes in various climate variables that may affect water resources within the Santa Cruz IRWM planning area. Changes in climate variables are presented for both the RCP 4.5 and 8.5 emissions scenario as a worst-case prediction of potential vulnerabilities.
Where applicable, other recent local studies and findings are also discussed in this section.
TEMPERATURE CHANGES
The most recent Cal-Adapt projections show that overall maximum temperatures are expected to continue to rise throughout the century. By aggregating and averaging downscaled global climate models, scientists predict a temperature increase of between 4.4 and 7.1 degrees Fahrenheit between the historical time period (1961 to 1990) and projected time period (2070 to 2099) in the Santa Cruz IRWM region. This suggests that average overall temperature could shift from the historical average of
67.5 degrees Fahrenheit to 71.9 (under the low emissions scenario) or 74.6 degrees Fahrenheit (under the high emissions scenario) for the 2070 to 2099 time period (Cal-Adapt 2019).
RAINFALL CHANGES
Projections of changes in precipitation in California are more nuanced than projected changes in temperature and have less separation between RCP4.5 and 8.5 scenarios (Pierce et al. 2018). There is a projected increase of year-to-year variability with wetter days during periods of precipitation, but with fewer total days with precipitation. Average annual precipitation under RCP8.5 shows significant increases by 2100 for the state overall as well as for the Santa Cruz IRWM Region.
Precipitation generally increases throughout the Central Coast, with the largest increases in the northern part of the region and smaller increases in the inland and southern parts of the region. Using down scaled models for the Santa Cruz IRWM Region, scientists predict an increase of between 4 and nearly 10 inches between the historical time period (1961 to 1990) and projected time period (2070 to 2099) in Santa Cruz County. This suggests that average overall precipitation within the IRWM region could shift from the historical average of 37.3 inches to 41.3 inches (under the low emissions scenario) or 47 inches (under the high emissions scenario) for the 2070 to 2099 time period (Cal-Adapt 2019) (Table 1).
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix B 7
Table 1. Annual average precipitation (inches)
Annual average precipitation (inches) from four representative global climate models downscaled using LOCA.
Precipitation on average is expected to increase by a relatively small amount, but the variability increases substantially by the end of the century. Across the central coast region, projections show that the wettest years will become wetter, and the driest years will become drier relative to historical conditions. (CCCA4 2018). Other climate variables, including evapotranspiration (water loss in plants) and runoff rates from storms, will also increase over time. Average base flow levels in creeks are projected to decline.
A study conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (Flint 2012) projects that there will be a shift in peak precipitation from January to February, with less precipitation occurring in the fall (NovemberDecember) and spring (March-April) by 2100. The USGS also concluded that while the amount of annual precipitation is not expected to substantially change as a result of climate change, precipitation will be concentrated in mid-winter. As a result, flooding is a growing threat that deserves careful attention as one of the more hazardous impacts of climate change (SC County 2015). Large storm events increase watershed runoff and typically increase sediment transport that results in high turbidity (cloudiness caused by suspended material), in waterways. Local water treatment facilities that rely upon surface water from rivers and streams may not be able to treat highly turbid water without the addition of pretreatment processes and/or new treatment infrastructure.
SEA LEVEL RISE
Globally, sea level rise is driven by two primary factors—global ice melt and thermal expansion of seawater—but locally there are numerous processes that can alter the rate, extent, and duration of changes in sea level. As such, accurately predicting sea level over the coming centuries for specific locations is very challenging.
Sea level rose approximately eight inches (17-20 cm) over the past century (1900–2005) along most of the California coast (Cayan et al. 2008). Since 1993, altimetry data suggests that the global mean sea level rise rate has increased from 2 to 3 mm per year, but during this time, data from altimetry and tide gauges show that the mean sea level along the Pacific Coast has been stable due to wind stress (Bromirski et al., 2011). However, when the regional climate patterns that drove local sea level trends shift, the Central Coast will very likely experience a rate of sea level rise that will correspond to, or may even exceed, the mean global rate of sea level rise (Bromirski et al., 2011).
Previously the State of California used estimates of global sea level rise produced by Rahmstorf (2007) and Cayan et al. (2008) for coastal adaptation planning purposes under Executive Order S-13-08. These projections suggested possible sea level rise of approximately 14 inches (36 cm) by 2050 and up to Site Historical
RCP 4.5 RCP 8.5
2010-2039 2040-2069 2070-2099 2010-2039 2040-2069 2070-2099 Santa Cruz
Region 37.3 42.5 40.7 41.3 41.2 41.6 47.0
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix B 8
approximately 55 inches (140 cm) by 2100 (NRC 2012). More recent work that incorporates advanced models and observations of ice sheets, suggests the possibility of more extensive loss from Antarctica in the 21st century than previously considered (DeConto and Pollard, 2016), as well as a probabilistic approach to support risk assessment (Kopp et al. 2014). The new approaches were incorporated into the latest CA-focused SLR projections (Griggs et al. 2017) and California’s Fourth Climate Assessment (Pierce et al. 2018), both of which suggest SLR by 2100 of up to ~3 m is physically tenable, though unlikely.
Table 2 compares SLR projections from the State’s 2013 Guidance Document and the 2018 Guidance Document Update and distinguishes the differences between the scenario-based SLR projections of the 2013 Guidance Document and the probabilistic SLR projections of the 2018 Guidance Document Update.
The probabilistic projections for Santa Cruz are based on a tide gauge located in Monterey, as this is the nearest tide gauge used in the 2018 Guidance Document Update.
Table 2. State of California Sea Level Rise Guidance 2018 Updated Projections FOG
The future of coastal fog under climate change remains uncertain. Fog has decreased over urban areas due to increased heating of impervious surfaces that reduce condensation and raise marine cloud ceilings (Williams et al. 2015). Fog has decreased over agricultural land due to improved air quality, which reduces cloud condensation nuclei (LaDochy & Witiw 2012, Gray et al. 2016). Globally driven changes in air patterns can also cause strong changes in fog at the local level, such as the resilient atmospheric ridge that parked warm dry air over California in August 2017, shutting down the usual pattern of onshore coastal fog advection into coastal ecosystems (see also September 2010 event, (Kaplan et al. 2017)).
Only one dynamic mechanistic model exists to simulate future California coastal fog (O’Brien et al. 2013). It projects a 12- 20 percent reduction in coastal fog by 2070. The future of fog is uncertain because system feedbacks and their response to climate change (i.e. such as coastal upwelling and shifts in the center of summertime high pressure zones) are not well characterized. Fog can be intercepted by coastal zone flora (which obtain up to one-third of their moisture from fog) and can also prevent low stream flows, critical to maintaining salmonids during dry periods.
Fog occurs primarily in the summer months and plays a vital role in coastal ecosystems, and according to the Central Coast Regional Report(Langridge, 2018), “coastal zone flora can get up to 1/3 of their water from intercepted fog water.” Plants in fog-filled forests can take in water through their leaves, supplying
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix B 9
lifesaving “fog drip” to salmonids in low flow coastal streams that would otherwise dry out during the late summer dry season. In addition, shade from summertime fog and low clouds cools coastal systems, reducing the rate of plant evapotranspiration and plant uptake of subsurface water reserves, leaving more water in the system (Langridge, 2018). Furthermore, the disappearance of fog in late summer can exacerbate the climatic water deficit for entire watersheds, leading to fire-ready tinder conditions.
The role that coastal fog plays in preventing evaporation and maintaining cooler temperatures also has important implications for water use and water supply in the Santa Cruz IRWM region. A decline in coastal fog would change the local coastal climate, resulting in warmer temperatures and increased evaporation during the summer months. This in turn may lead to increased agricultural and landscape water use, putting additional demand on water supplies in the region.
POTENTIAL HAZARDS AND RISKS OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN THE SANTA CRUZ REGION State guidelines recommend that regional planning groups identify key areas where there is a high risk of climate change vulnerability to water infrastructure. Within the Santa Cruz IRWM region, a number of studies have been completed to evaluate the status and future vulnerabilities of water resources and supply infrastructure to possible climate related hazards.
Hazards were identified through the previous vulnerability analysis (SC IRWMP 2014) from which geographic areas of greatest risk can be inferred. The below geographic analysis of hazards which could lead to significant impacts to infrastructure or resources (low or moderate adaptive capacity) were evaluated to prioritize future climate resiliency and adaptation projects. Table 3 below outlines descriptions of the hazards and the sources of the data used in the analysis.
Table 3. Identified Climate Change Related Hazards within the Santa Cruz IRWM Region Hazard Description Data Source Used
for Analysis
Drought/Water
Shortage
Longer and more severe droughts and changes in hydrologic patterns pose threats to water supply reliability, particularly for surface water dependent agencies. 95,000 residents receiving water from the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, as well as residents in the Santa Cruz Mountains and Davenport, rely upon surface water for water supply are vulnerable to drought. The City’s Water Supply Advisory Committee 2015 recommendations and its supporting, and subsequent, technical reports/studies document the significant risk to water supply posed by multiple year drought conditions.
City of Santa Cruz
Seawater
Intrusion
Seawater intrusion occurs when there is a negative pressure within groundwater aquifers due to pumping that leads to ocean water moving into coastal portions of the geologic strata that contain the aquifers.
Seawater contamination can lead to the loss of use of coastal water supply and irrigation wells or require costly treatment.
Santa Cruz Mid
County Groundwater
Agency
Rising Tides
These hazard zones show the area and depth of inundation caused simply by rising tide and ground water levels (not considering storms, erosion, or river discharge). The water level mapped in these inundation areas is the Extreme Monthly High Water (EMHW) level, which is the high water level reached approximately once a month.
ESA PWA 2014
Coastal Storm
Flooding
These hazard zones depict the predicted flooding caused by future coastal storms. The processes that drive these hazards include (1) storm surge (a rise in the ocean water level caused by waves and ESA PWA 2014
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix B 10
Hazard Description Data Source Used
for Analysis
pressure changes during a storm), (2) wave overtopping (waves running up over the beach and flowing into low-lying areas, calculated using the maximum historical wave conditions), and (3) additional flooding caused when rising sea level exacerbate storm surge and wave overtopping. These hazard zones also take into account areas that are projected to erode, sometimes leading to additional flooding through new hydraulic connections between the ocean and low-lying areas.
Coastal
Erosion
These layers represent future cliff and dune (sandy beach) erosion hazard zones, incorporating site-specific historic trends in erosion, additional erosion caused by accelerating sea level rise and (in the case of the storm erosion hazard zones) the potential erosion impact of a large storm wave event. The inland extent of the hazard zones represents projections of the future crest of the dunes, or future potential cliff edge, for a given sea level rise scenario and planning horizon
ESA PWA 2014
(modified by CCWG
2017)
Wildfire
Wildfires severity can be increased due to intensive rain followed by warmer, dryer summers with less fog, leading to an increase in the dryness of the forest and understory brush that fuels fire intensity.
Large-scale wildfires damaging watersheds pose short-term and longterm hazards to water quality and water supply/reservoir storage.
CalFire Hazard
Severity Zone
Landslides More intense rainfall and associated increases in river discharge can lead to an increase in landslides within vulnerable areas.
Cooper Clark
Landslide Study
Fluvial
Flooding
FEMA flood hazard maps are used for the National Flood Insurance Program and present coastal and fluvial flood hazards. These flood maps were used to identify current hazards as defined by FEMA An additional river flooding vulnerability analysis was done as part of this study to evaluate the cumulative impacts of rising seas and future changes in fluvial discharge due to changes in rainfall within the Soquel watershed. The ESA modeling team expanded hydrologic models of the Soquel watershed provided by the County to estimate discharge rates under future climate scenarios. The fluvial model estimates localized flooding along the Soquel Creek when discharge is restricted by future high tides. The model results are presented here and reviewed within the separate Fluvial Report by ESA.
FEMA FLHZ, ESA
2016
WATER SUPPLY
DROUGHT IMPLICATIONS ON COUNTY WATER SUPPLY
None of the large water providers in the Santa Cruz Region import water from outside the region; thus, the Region is dependent upon local sources. As described in the 2014 IRWM Plan, the local climate change projections suggest longer and drier summers, an increased frequency of droughts, increased evapotranspiration rates, and reduced groundwater recharge. Longer and more severe extended droughts, as well as, changes in hydrologic patterns with greater annual variability and fluctuation in precipitation will exacerbate current water supply issues and reduce the reliability of the local water sources to meet demand. As noted in the 2014 Plan, droughts are estimated to become 50 percent more frequent and persistent during this century with an average of one drought every decade and the potential for a multi-decadal drought at the end of the 21st century. Regionally, it is projected that in
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix B 11
the future the wettest years will become wetter, and the driest years will become drier relative to historical conditions (Langridge 2018)
Countywide, groundwater is source of approximately 80% of the total water used. Approximately half of all the groundwater used is for agriculture in the portion of Pajaro Valley within Santa Cruz County.
Longer and more severe droughts and changes in hydrologic patterns pose threats to water supply reliability, particularly for surface water dependent agencies. Almost-half (46%) of the County population is served by water agencies that get more than 50% of their supply from surface water. The City of Santa Cruz Water Department (94% supply from surface water) provides water for City residents as well as the unincorporated surrounding areas, serving 95,000 residents. The City, as well as residents in Santa Cruz Mountains supplied by San Lorenzo Valley Water District (59% surface water) and the coastal community of Davenport are vulnerable to drought.
The City of Santa Cruz Water Department studies and reports document the increased vulnerability of municipal water supplies due to multi-year droughts. When combining a multi-year drought with the necessary commitment to fish flow releases (mandated through the salmonid recover plan) would result in substantial water shortages for Santa Cruz’s water service customers. Water supply vulnerability to multi-year droughts is the principal water management challenge the City is actively working to address through projects and management actions that reduce the shortfall between water supply and water demand during times of extended drought.
The City’s 2018 Climate Adaptation Plan Update includes an assessment on water supply. The Plan notes that climate change can significantly alter precipitation patterns affecting the quantity, quality, and distribution of water available. Reduction in precipitation is the primary concern as it directly reduces water supply. Other factors such as predicted increases to the intensity winter precipitation can result in higher runoff, decreased percolation, and lower summer base flows in streams. High intensity rainfall over short periods decreases the time window during which water can be diverted from streams and reduces aquifer recharge. High sediment loads associated with elevated winter flows can also limit diversions and impact pumping and treatment operations. This in turn impacts water storage capability and availability during the long dry season.
Water purveyors face different impacts and challenges depending upon the individual agency specifics source(s) of supply, setting and management objectives (e.g., a surface water dependent agency contends with water rights, fishery bypass flows for instream fish flow requirements, etc.). Generalized impacts identified include shortfalls from overdraft of the groundwater basin, inadequate supply during a drought, or inadequate facilities to meet current demands.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 12
Table 4. Water Use in Santa Cruz County and Climate Change Related Impacts Water Supplier Population
Water
Use
(AFY)
GroundwaterSurface
Water
Recycled
Water Climate Change Related Impacts to Water Supply
Santa Cruz City Water Dept. 98,000 8,104 6% 94%
Increased drought frequency, intensity, duration; changes in ongoing hydrologic patterns with greater year-to-year variability/fluctuations in precipitation impacts operations and planning; wildfire hazard/impacts to watershed,
infrastructure, water quality and storage
Soquel Creek Water District 40,515 3,347 100% Seawater intrusion of coastal aquifers; declining groundwater recharge
San Lorenzo Valley Water
District 25,485 2,092 41% 59%
Increased drought (see above); wildfire hazard/impacts to watershed, infrastructure, water quality; declining
groundwater recharge
Scotts Valley Water District 10,629 1,139 87% 13% Declining recharge in the groundwater basin Central Water District 2,700 379 100% Seawater intrusion of coastal aquifers; declining groundwater recharge
Big Basin Water Company 1,680 135 95% 5% Declining recharge in the groundwater basin Mount Hermon Association 1,283 141 100% Declining recharge in the groundwater basin Forest Lakes Mutual Water 1,076 41 100% Declining recharge in the groundwater basin Smaller Water Systems
(5-199 conn.) 7,157 770 77% 14% Location, source dependent – see above Individual Users* 21,000 2,630 95% 5% Location dependent - may include declining groundwater recharge; seawater intrusion
Pajaro Agriculture (SC Co
only)** 22,430 93% 7% Seawater intrusion of coastal aquifers; declining groundwater recharge Mid- & North-County
Agriculture* 2,400 90% 10% Seawater intrusion of coastal aquifers; declining groundwater recharge Totals 209,525 43,608 78% 18% 4%
Note: City of Watsonville is not included in this table as water supply is covered under the Pajaro Watershed IRWM Planning Region.
Source: Santa Cruz County Water Resources Management Status Report for 2018 modified with Climate Change impacts
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 13
Other studies further document the complexity of climate related impacts on water supply. The Santa Cruz County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (2015) notes potential water shortages due to the combination of increasing temperatures, changes in precipitation patterns increasing climatic water deficit, increased salt water intrusion, decreased groundwater recharge, and higher demand. This has a very high probability of occurrence and also significant (high) consequences. The plan further notes that the effects of climate change on water supplies will have impacts on agriculture, recreation and tourism, and the economy overall as well as on natural ecosystems.
Cook et al. (2015) compares paleoclimate drought records with future predicted conditions based on climate change model. The author found that drought conditions in the coming century are likely to be as bad as or worse than the most severe historical droughts in the region, with severe dry periods lasting several decades (20-30 years). In some cases, winter precipitation may increase, but gains in water during that period will most likely be lost due to hotter, drier summers and greater evaporation.
Other recent studies linking climate change, precipitation changes, and drought conditions have found that warming temperatures greatly increase drought risks in California (Diffenbaugh et al., 2015).
Regional study suggest that water supply shortages are already a serious problem for many areas of the Central Coast. Inter-annual water availability is variable and localized and the Central Coast region, like the entire state, experiences periodic droughts. Absent adaptations, extreme droughts and rising temperatures will exacerbate water supply deficits (Langridge 2018).
Groundwater, which is the source of approximately 80% of water used in the Region, will also be impacted by climate change. Research on the dynamic relationship between groundwater, drought, and climate change is relatively limited compared to surface water studies (Brouyère et al. 2004, Hsu et al. 2007, Bates et al. 2008, Clifton et. al. 2010), and overall the effects of climate change on groundwater quantity and quality remain uncertain (Cisneros et al. 2014).
WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND PROJECTIONS NEXT 20 YEARS
Large public water purveyors are required to draft an Urban Water Management Plan every 5-years that estimates future water demand projections and water supply available to meet that demand (Table 5).
Where there is a deficiency, the water purveyor is challenged to identify new sources and new conservation actions needed to align supply with demand. Current water supply planning is focused on addressing future demand based on future water supplies that do not account for changes due to climate change. Therefore, agencies will need to identify new supply resources to mitigate climate change related reductions in supply. Impacts to water supply infrastructure and water collection and groundwater infiltration areas within the watersheds due to climate change related hazards can compromise supply reliability.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 14
Table 5. Urban Water Management Plan Water Demand Projections From each district listed Water Agency
Projected AFY
2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
City of Santa Cruz 10,210 9,897 9,835 9,820 na na
Soquel Creek Water District 3,900 3,800 3,500 3,400 3,400 3,300 San Lorenzo Valley Water District 2,107 2,132 2,180 2,216 na na Scotts Valley Water District 1,558 1,584 1,610 1,635 1,661 na
SEAWATER INTRUSION
Two of the primary water supply aquifers in the Santa Cruz IRWM Region, the Purisima and Aromas aquifers, are hydrologically connected to the Pacific Ocean. This connection creates the potential for seawater intrusion into the coastal portions of these freshwater aquifers. Seawater intrusion is caused by two primary processes: prolonged groundwater extraction that exceeds natural or artificial groundwater recharge leading to long-term groundwater overdraft of coastal wells that reduces head pressure, and to a lesser extent, coastal salt water pressure exacerbated by sea level rise.
Residents in much of mid-Santa Cruz County (Soquel, Aptos, Capitola, La Selva) are highly dependent on groundwater and susceptible to seawater intrusion due to historic overdraft of its productive aquifers occurring over decades. A 1968 USGS groundwater study identified seawater intrusion as the greatest threat to groundwater supplies in the basin now known as the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin (Hickey 1968). The report documented a seawater wedge offshore of the Basin’s productive aquifers and noted that seawater had likely moved toward the coast in response to groundwater pumping. Saltwater began to appear in wells in the southern quarter of the Basin as well as at the Soquel Point area to the northwest since the 1980s. The Basin will be vulnerable to seawater intrusion until coastal groundwater levels rise to protective elevations at all coastal monitoring wells. Currently, five coastal monitoring wells have average groundwater levels below elevations that would protect against seawater intrusion.
In recent years, principally as a result of efforts by Soquel Creek Water District which is the largest user in the Basin and reduced consumption by residents, groundwater levels are rising and the condition of the Basin is improving. Full basin recovery has not been achieved, and the Basin is still considered in long-term overdraft due to ongoing sweater intrusion. In 2016, in response to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency formed. As required under SGMA, in 2019 the MGA adopted a Groundwater Sustainability Plan that outlines how the MGA will achieve groundwater sustainability in the Basin by 2040.
With the rise in sea level in the coming decades, saltwater intrusion will be exacerbated. The probability of saltwater intrusion is high due to the current groundwater overdraft in portions of the Mid-County Basin and the Pajaro Valley Basin in southern Santa Cruz County. The consequence of seawater intrusion in the Mid-County Basin is high due to the dependence upon groundwater. The consequence in south County is high due to the economic impacts and potential loss or fallowing of valuable agriculture lands.
There current efforts to reduce and manage groundwater pumping to halt saltwater intrusion will be challenged by the additional effects sea level rise due to climate change (SC County, 2015).
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 15
Seawater intrusion is not a concern in the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin due to its inland location.
Because nearly all of the potable water, approximately 95%, for the City of Santa Cruz Water Department is supplied from surface sources, seawater intrusion is much less of a concern than is the lack of adequate supply and storage to supply the City during prolonged drought. The City operates a small number of wells that could be affected by seawater intrusion through a combination of sea level rise, diminished surface flows and lowered ground water levels. The City’s groundwater management can influence how the adjacent district distributes ground water resources. As a member of the MGA, the City is working with the other member agencies to implement projects and management actions to improve conditions in the groundwater basin.
In 2017, Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency (MGA) commissioned an innovative aerial geophysical survey to determine the status of seawater intrusion in the upper aquifers near shore off the coast of the Basin. The survey is documented in Hydrogeological Investigation Salt-Fresh Water Interface – Monterey (Ramboll 2018) and in a technical memorandum titled Management Implications of SkyTEM Seawater Intrusion Results (Hydrometrics WRI 2018). The survey confirmed the existing locations of known seawater intrusion and provided information on the current location of the advance of seawater in regional aquifers below the sea floor. Using the survey data, the team mapped the interaction in between fresh and saline water in the coastal zone in the northern part of the Monterey.
Results from this study show relative salt content of various aquifer zones within the County (Figure 1).
The MGA intends to repeat this survey over time to track the movement of the freshwater-saltwater interface to inform the MGA’s assessment of seawater intrusion.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 16
Figure 1 . 2016 Choloride Concentration in Onshore Wells and Shallowest Aquifer Unit with Salty Water (SC Mid County Groundwater Agency 2018)
RISING TIDES
Tides in Santa Cruz County are mixed semidiurnal, with two high tides and two low tides per day, each differing in height. Regionally, sea level is influenced by the shape of the shoreline and local wind and weather patterns. As sea level rises, higher water levels allow waves to encroach further up on beaches and into low lying areas. Increases in tidal height may also cause localized flooding along river mouth estuaries and the agriculture and urban development placed within these river valleys, leading to periodic flooding.
INFRASTRUCTURE AND WATER SUPPLY
City of Santa Cruz Neary Lagoon Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF): Groundwater level at the Neary Lagoon Wastewater Treatment Facility is very high. The anticipated rise in groundwater due to sea level rise may adversely impact the facility by impacting storage tanks and associated infrastructure (Griggs and Haddad 2011). A large underground pump gallery is also susceptible to groundwater impacts through infiltration of groundwater through electrical conduits and cracking walls (Griggs and Haddad 2011, SC County 2015).
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 17
WATER QUALITY
Rising tides can lead to periodic flooding (monthly high tide events) of infrastructure that can impact water quality. Industrial sites, wastewater infrastructure, and commercial businesses that become flooded can leach common chemicals (oils and grease, fertilizers, solvents) into these surface waters leading to local and coastal impacts.
AQUATIC HABITAT
Rising tides can increase flooding of coastal creek and river mouths and wetland habitat areas (Watsonville Slough and Corcoran and Schwan Lagoons) with greater salt water than was previously experienced. Such flooding can lead to a change in water chemistry from fresh or brackish water conditions to one with salinities comparable to ocean concentrations. Such a change in salinity can lead to impacts on plant and animal species and a progression in habitat types towards estuarine ecosystems which may impact various amphibian, bird and plant species that currently use these coastal habitats.
HAZARD ZONES
Figure 2 below shows the hazard zones for rising tides at the 2030, 2060, and 2100 time horizons. Table 6 shows the counts of infrastructure that may be vulnerable to rising tides at each time horizon.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 18
Figure 2. Highlighted Areas of Rising Tides within the IRWM Region for Time Horizons (2030, 2060, 2100)
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 19
Table 6. Water Infrastructure (count) at Risk to Rising Tides Infrastructure 2030 2060 2100
Storm Drains 68 146 324
Sewer Structures 2 42 132
Water Main 12 102 299
Santa Cruz WWTF 0 0 1
COASTAL STORMS AND WAVES
The impacts of storm and wave damage are episodic and have the greatest severity when large storms coincide with high tide events. Coastal inundation is one of the most costly and damaging impacts associated with sea level rise. Low-lying coastal areas of the Monterey Bay region will be exposed to a greater risk of major flooding events, and storm surge, high tides, and waves will travel farther inland (Heberger et al. 2011). Elevated sea levels combined with increases in winter storm intensity and wave heights will increase risks associated with coastal inundation (Storlazzi and Wingfield 2005; and Wingfield and Storlazzi 2007)
INFRASTRUCTURE AND WATER SUPPLY
Santa Cruz County Sanitation District Sewer Infrastructure: Numerous pump stations and associated sanitary sewer infrastructure operated by the Santa Cruz County Sanitation District are situated in locations vulnerable to winter storm damage. It is expected that several of these facilities may be increasingly impacted as sea level rises and storms increase (SC County 2015).
Many irrigation and water supply wells are not resilient to surface flooding and if flooded by salt water or contaminated flood waters may lead to downward migration of these waters into groundwater aquifers.
WATER QUALITY
In conjunction with coastal inundation, coastal water quality will likely decline as storm-induced flood waters recede, drawing debris, industrial and agricultural chemicals, septic/waste water system bacteria, and other contaminants into the bay. This increased runoff has the potential to increase the frequency and severity of harmful algal blooms (HABs) in the area, posing a serious threat to local fisheries and marine mammal populations (Largier 2010).
AQUATIC HABITAT
Coastal storms and wave impacts can damage native plant communities of coastal creeks and wetlands and lead to the inward migration of saltwater into brackish and freshwater areas of these ecosystems.
Coastal lagoons (Watsonville Slough and Corcoran and Schwan lagoons) and river mouth estuaries susceptible to storm impacts of saltwater and ocean debris.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 20
HAZARD ZONES
Figure 3 below shows the hazard zones for coastal storm flooding at the 2030, 2060, and 2100 time horizons. Table 7 shows the counts of infrastructure that may be vulnerable to coastal storm flooding at each time horizon.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 21
Figure 3. Highlighted Areas of Coastal Storm Flooding within the IRWM Region for Time Horizons (2030, 2060, 2100) Table 7. Water Infrastructure at Risk to Coastal Storm Flooding Infrastructure 2030 2060 2100
Storm Drains 368 540 748
Sewer Structures 139 267 366
Water Main (segments) 363 656 898
Santa Cruz WWTF 0 0 1
COASTAL EROSION
Coastal erosion of the Santa Cruz County coastline threatens critical infrastructure, property, and natural habitats. Coastal erosion will increase as global sea levels continue to rise. Higher sea level will allow waves and tides to travel further inland, exposing beaches, cliffs, and coastal dunes to more persistent erosional forces (Storlazzi and Griggs 2000). Erosion is not a new issue in California, but rising sea levels threaten to increase the severity and frequency of erosion damage to coastal infrastructure and property. Statewide, a 4.6-foot (1.4 m) rise in sea level has the potential to erode approximately 41 square miles (68 km2) of coastline by the end of the century (Heberger et al. 2009).
Seasonal patterns of storms and wave intensity are the primary driving forces behind coastal erosion along the California coast. While a natural process that shape shorelines and beaches, erosional forces become a hazard when they interact with permanent structures that rely on a stable shoreline. Despite the gradual day-to-day erosion experienced along the coast, it is the large, episodic erosional events that pose the greatest threat to the Monterey Bay shoreline. Given the recent evidence that suggests storm and wave intensity is likely to increase in this region, these large, episodic erosional events may occur more frequently. Protecting and restoring natural systems to take advantage of their protective services can increase resilience to these coastal impacts. Protecting and restoring these systems will likely provide additional benefits such as improved water quality and increased nursery habitat and recreation areas.
ASSUMED PROTECTIONS PROVIDED BY COASTAL STRUCTURES
There are 54,300 feet of coastline behind coastal protection structures in Santa Cruz County (including the Pajaro dunes area) that reduce risks of coastal erosion and storm flooding (Table 8). These protective structures were accounted for in this vulnerability analysis for the 2030 planning horizons, under the assumption that these structures will function through 2030, and then will begin to fail if not maintained or replaced.
Responses to shoreline changes include taking no action, relocating structures, and construction of hard and soft armoring. Hard armoring includes revetments, seawalls, bulkheads, and other structures designed to reduce wave impact forces on cliffs, bluffs, or dunes. Such structures are often assumed by engineers to have a 20 to 30 year lifespan. Once in place, these structures must often be repaired, replaced or strengthened to maintain protection. These hard structures often limit or eliminate sand supply to adjacent beaches and cause passive erosion of the coastline in front of or adjacent to the seawall or revetment. Conversely, soft armoring is any form of reinforcement or coastal protection that mimics natural barriers, including sand dunes, beaches, and wetlands. Soft armoring is most applicable
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 22
in areas where the shoreline is able to migrate inland in response to SLR, and does not prevent all shoreline erosion. Dr. Griggs from UCSC has estimated that approximately 30% of the Santa Cruz County coast has been hard armored in response to continued erosion or retreat of the shoreline (Griggs, and Haddad, 2011). This information is corroborated through analysis of the Coastal Commissions GIS layer of coastal armoring for Santa Cruz County.
Table 8. Inventory of Existing Coastal Protection Structures in Santa Cruz County
STRUCTURE LOCATION TYPE OF STRUCTURE AND LENGTH
North County Isolated rip-rap (1,016 feet)
City of Santa Cruz Extensive rip-rap, isolated sea walls, hip wall and harbor jetty (11,758 feet) 7th Ave to Capitola East Cliff sea wall, extensive rip-rap (13,073 feet) City of Capitola Rip-rap, coastal hip walls, & beach groins (4,088 feet) Seacliff Extensive rip-rap and wood piling structures (15,466 feet)
INFRASTRUCTURE AND WATER SUPPLY
Coastal erosion will have long-lasting impacts on Santa Cruz County transportation infrastructure, threatening over 50 miles (~83 km) of highway, roads, and rail throughout the region including Highway
1. Important water infrastructure (water supply, stormwater, wastewater) is often located within roadways and therefore also at risk of erosion. A significant number of storm water and wastewater structures are currently vulnerable to erosion, when accounting for coastal protective structures. The number of structures and feet of pipe at risk increase significantly by 2060 if coastal armoring is not maintained or replaced. Sewer and water mains are vulnerable during all time horizons to failure due to coastal erosion (From SC County Vulnerability Assessment CCWG 2017).
WATER QUALITY
Coastal erosion can lead to the loss or damage of water infrastructure (water supply, sewer, stormwater) and lead to spills of hazardous materials into coastal surface waters.
AQUATIC HABITAT
Coastal erosion can lead to the loss of aquatic habitat area (wetlands and estuaries) and also to the loss of valuable beach areas that play an important role in managing coastal creek lagoons (bar built estuaries) hydrology and water chemistry (Clark and O’Connor 2019).
HAZARD ZONES
Figure 4 below shows the hazard zones for coastal erosion at the 2030, 2060, and 2100 time horizons.
Table 9 shows the counts of infrastructure that may be vulnerable to coastal erosion at each time horizon.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 23
Figure 4. Highlighted Areas of Coastal Erosion within the IRWM Region for Time Horizons (2030, 2060, 2100)
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 24
Table 9. Water Infrastructure at Risk to Coastal Erosion Infrastructure 2030 2060 2100
Storm Drains 124 486 736
Sewer Structures 35 307 464
Water Main (segments) 71 713 1252
WILDFIRE
Santa Cruz County is likely to experience increased temperatures and generally drier conditions in the years to come due to climate change. Moreover, a recent analysis predicts longer, deeper droughts punctuated with rare, but more frequent, extremely wet winters, precisely the setup for longer, more intense fire seasons (Swain 2018). Increased tree mortality, linked to cyclic drought, and changes in ecological and disease pressures, such as Sudden Oak Death, further contribute to fire risk. An increase in wildfire frequency, duration, and intensity can be expected, making fuels reduction projects imperative for community protection.
Wildland/urban interface fires are a significant threat to the Santa Cruz IRWM region. Climate change impacts through increased temperatures and changing precipitation patterns (shorter more severe winters and prolonged, hotter, dryer summers) will exacerbate the risk of wildfires and decrease the fire return frequency (Mann et al., 2016). For example, models suggest temperature rise under the moderate warming scenario, increases risk of large wildfires in California by up to 55 percent, twice the estimated risk if temperatures remain in the lower warming range (Cal-Adapt, 2019). According to CalAdapt, the annual average area burned by wildfires in Santa Cruz IRWM region is projected to increase between the historical time period (1961 – 1990) from 442 acres to 691acres (RCP 4.5) or 887 acres (RCP
8.5) in the projected time horizon (2070 to 2099), assuming a moderate population increase.
In addition to the increased risk of wildfires in the region, post-recovery time may be lengthened, and fire spread following ignitions will be enhanced, leading to a complex impact on fire regimes.
Furthermore, expansion into wildland urban interface will continue to increase fire risks to human communities Langridge 2018). Fire impacts to water supply and distribution infrastructure has been noted as a concern during previous wildfires in California, reducing fire fighters and residents’ ability to save structures and possibly increasing risks to human life.
FIRE IMPACTS TO WATER QUALITY AND WATER SUPPLY
Watershed lands damaged by large-scale wildfires fire can pose substantial short-term and long-term hazards to water quality and water supply, including damaged infrastructure, increased treatment costs, need for alternative supplies, and diminished reservoir capacity (Smith et al 2011). The USGS’ California Water Science Center identified the potential effects of wildfire on municipal water supplies and downstream aquatic ecosystems listed below – those applicable to the Santa Cruz Region include:
Increased sediment loading of water-supply reservoirs, shortened reservoir lifetime, and increased maintenance costs
Increased loading of streams with nutrients, dissolved organic carbon, major ions, and metals
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 25
Post-fire erosion and transport of sediment and debris to downstream water-treatment plants, water-supply reservoirs, and aquatic ecosystems
Increased turbidity or heightened iron and manganese concentrations, which may increase chemical treatment requirements and produce larger volumes of sludge, both of which would raise operating costs
Changes in source-water chemistry that can alter drinking-water treatment Fire can impact water quality, reducing the use of source water and increasing treatment costs and can lead to changes in fluvial flow rates and erosion and sedimentation (reviewed in erosion section below).
Most water purveyors drawing upon surface or spring supplies should anticipate extended turbidity events following a large fire in their watersheds. Elevated levels of turbidity are likely to persist from several months to several years following an extensive fire and therefore reliability of surface water sources during the months or years following the fire may be uncertain.
The City of Santa Cruz relies upon surface water sources for ~95% of its annual supply; Loch Lomond, its lone water system reservoir located in the heavily forested Santa Cruz Mountains holds 2.8 billion gallons. San Lorenzo Valley Water District, also located in the Santa Cruz Mountains, relies upon surface water sources for ~60% of its supply. The small coastal community of Davenport is entirely depending upon surface water sources. All of these water supply systems are vulnerable to the impacts of largescale wildfires directly impacting water system infrastructure (e.g., distribution lines, pump stations, etc.) and post-fire water quality impairments from watershed erosion. Rainstorms mobilize ash and debris and increase sediment, nutrient and contaminant (e.g., trace metals) transport into waterways and reservoirs. Fire hazard facility planning and protocols (e.g., maintaining defensible space) around critical infrastructure and protecting diversion and distribution facilities from post-fire erosion and slope stability, particularly within the principal water supply watersheds of the San Lorenzo River and the North Coast streams, is an increasingly important consideration for water supply reliability, infrastructure resiliency and climate adaptation.
The Community Wildfire Protection Plan (Calfire 2018) has identified a number of priority areas to implement/expand fire reduction efforts within watershed lands that supply water to the various water districts (figure of watershed supply lands and fire overlay). Of the 280 square miles of watershed lands that provide supply to residential service, 45 square miles (16%) are within fire hazard areas (as defined by the Santa Cruz County General Plan 1994) or 2% are in very high and 69% are in high fire risk areas as defined by the Calfire FRAP dataset (2008).
FIRE HAZARD AREAS/ GIS ANALYSIS
The County maintains GIS data layers depicting high fire risk areas within the County. Additionally, CalFire maintains a dataset of wildfire hazard areas. CalFire has mapped three hazard ranges: moderate, high and very high (Figure 5). Wildfire hazard areas are areas of significant fire hazard based on fire history, potential fuel over a 30- to 50-year period, blowing embers, terrain, and weather.
Water supply infrastructure (pumps, piping, collection systems, dams) are distributed throughout the watershed and much of this infrastructure is vulnerable to loss in a wildfire.
A GIS evaluation of water supply infrastructure within fire hazard zones highlighted Infrastructure that is 1) susceptible to fire damage and 2) provides service to otherwise isolated communities .It was also noted that infrastructure reliability may also be compromised due to long duration power shut offs resulting from the new PG&E Public Safety Power Shutoff program to reduce wildfire risks.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 26
Figure 5. Fire Hazard Severity Zones (Calfire FRAP 2008)
CREEK EROSION AND LANDSLIDES
Watershed vegetation plays and important role in protecting drinking water quality and quantify within watershed lands that provide water to the various water districts. Vegetation, which can be impacted or lost due to forest fires and urban development, controls erosion, helps ensure a clean water supply and regulates surface runoff and erosion (USEPA and Water Research Foundation. 2009). Fires and landform changes can compromise watershed stability leading to landslides, creek erosion, and sedimentation.
Increases in river flow rates and volumes during future storm events are predicted and can lead to greater erosion of creek channels and increase landslide potential in unstable areas of the watersheds.
This sediment can clog water intakes and culverts and landslides can damage infrastructure located adjacent to creeks exacerbating downstream damage and compromising water supply and stormwater infrastructure.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 27
WATER SUPPLY AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Downstream drinking water intakes benefit from stable watershed processes and can be compromised by catastrophic impacts to watershed lands from severe storms, fire and erosion. Countywide, 18% of the water supply is sourced from surface water (County of Santa Cruz, EHS Annual Report 2018). These sources are vulnerable to habitat impacts and upland impacts associated with changes in rainfall, fluvial processes, vegetation composition and vigor, and vulnerability to water infrastructure.
Roads cross streams throughout the Santa Cruz Mountains and rely on culverts and bridges to enable adjacent creeks to flow freely. The combined effects of increased sediment from erosion and landslides and increased fluvial flows predicted with climate change will make much of this infrastructure undersized or under-engineered and will be vulnerable to catastrophic failure during large storm events (i.e., Santa Barbara 2017 storm)
WATER QUALITY AND AQUATIC HABITAT
Increased sedimentation within creeks can impact water quality and compromise habitat including spawning grounds for anadromous fish.
HAZARD ZONES
49,210 acres, or 13%, of the County’s 378,894 acres of watershed areas falls within landslide area. Figure 6 shows landslide areas identified by a study conducted in 1975 (Cooper-Clark, 1975). Table 10 below shows specific infrastructure and creeks that intersect or comes within 100 meters of these landslide areas.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 28
Figure 6. Landslide Areas in Santa Cruz County (Cooper-Clark 1975) Table 10. Tally of key water infrastructure within or adjacent to Landslide hazard areas
INFRASTRUCTURE
HIGH
(INTERSECTS
HAZARD)
MEDIUM
(WITHIN 100M OF
HAZARD)
Storm Drains 247 655
Sewer Structures 7 107
Water Main (segments) 143 549
Creeks (segments)* 53 597
*Creek hazard risks are designated as definite (high) and probable/questionable (medium) land slide deposit areas.
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 29
FLUVIAL FLOODING
Storm intensity is predicted to increase within Santa Cruz County through 2100 (ESA 2016). These more infrequent but intense rain events are predicted to cause rivers and creeks to rise rapidly leading to localized flooding and erosion (CCWG 2017). Fewer but more severe rainfall events are projected which will result in intense run-off that may overwhelm sewer and treatment facilities and potentially negatively affect stream and coastal water quality. Researchers examining the projected precipitation volatility in California in the coming decades concluded that the projected changes in precipitation patterns poses significant challenges to existing water storage, conveyance and flood control infrastructure (Swain et al. 2018).
HAZARD ZONES
Figure 7 shows the FEMA flood hazards areas within the Santa Cruz IRWM Region. Table 11 shows vulnerable water infrastructure.
Figure 7. FEMA Flood Hazard Areas
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 30
Table 21. Water Infrastructure at Risk to Fluvial Flood Hazards (FEMA) Infrastructure
FEMA Flood Zones
A A99 AE VE
Storm Drains (Count) 165 672 950 139
Sewer (Count) 41 423 267 80
Water Main (Count) 134 797 922 108
SCWWTF X
CASE STUDY: FLUVIAL FLOODING ON SOQUEL CREEK
A previous study (CCWG 2017b) evaluated the combined threats of higher ocean levels during storm events and higher river discharge caused by excessive localized rain events within the Soquel watershed.
This fluvial analysis generated an additional hazard zone for each time horizon that was then used to evaluate structures vulnerable to this river flooding (Figure 8).
The projected increase in fluvial discharge within
Soquel Creek due to more intense rainfall during
storms used for this analysis is outlined in Table 12
(ESA 2016). River flooding height due to more
intense rainfall is estimated to increase by
approximately 2 feet (increasing depth to 8.5 feet
in parts of downtown) between 2010 and 2060.
Cumulative Impacts on Water Infrastructure:
Currently 246 storm drains are projected to be
impacted by Soquel Creek flood waters. An
additional 30 storm drains may be compromised by the higher ocean and river elevation by 2030 and by 2060, 86 more storm drains may be compromised. Several drains that currently provide flood relief may be further compromised due to higher river water levels and may become conduits for inland flooding by 2060 to areas isolated from current flooding. Levees along the Soquel Creek are insufficient to retain floodwaters within the channel and severe flooding is predicted when large creek discharge occurs during winter storm events.
Impacts to Aquatic Resources: Wetland and riparian resources along Soquel Creek are identified within the fluvial hazard layer as early as 2030 but are likely resilient to these hazards.
Table 32. Increase in 100-year Discharge
for Soquel Creek Relative to Historic
Period (1950-2000)
EMISSIONS
SCENARIO 2030 2060 2100
RCP 4.5 13% 15% 20%
RCP 8.5 62% 68% 95%
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 31
Figure 8. Projected Fluvial Flooding of Soquel Creek for Time Horizons 2030, 2060, 2100
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 32
VULNERABILITY OF NATURAL COASTAL RESOURCES
Coastal inundation poses a risk to local creeks and wetlands. The impact of sea level rise on wetlands is significant for the coastal river and creek mouth lagoon systems that provide a diverse set of environmental services for fresh and brackish water species throughout the entire of the IRWM planning region.
Santa Cruz County supports high quality wetland and river mouth ecosystems within areas susceptible to the hazards of Sea Level Rise (Table 13). These natural areas are vulnerable to an increase in the frequency and depth of flooding. Higher tides increase salt water inundation to brackish and fresh water wetlands. The Santa Cruz County Local Coastal Program (LCP) (2012) identifies and maps these wetlands and creeks as Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA). Much of these wetland resources are vulnerable to future impacts of erosion, storm flooding and rising tides (CCWG 2017a, NOAA 2017).
The NOAA Office for Coastal Management mapped potential impacts to marsh environments from sea level rise, which can be viewed on the NOAA Sea Level Rise Viewer using the Marsh Migration Tool.
Figure 9 shows the change in marsh habitat around Watsonville Slough with increased levels of tides.
Current MHHW 0.5 ft SLR
2.5 ft SLR 5 ft SLR
Figure 9. Marsh Migration at Watsonville Slough (Current, 0.5ft, 2.5ft, & 5 ft of SLR)
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 33
Nearly all of the creek and river mouth wetlands in Santa Cruz County are within the coastal storm flood zone by 2030 (700 acres of habitat) and much of this fresh and brackish water habitat will be flooded monthly by saline water by 2100 due to rising tides. Some of these wetland areas are designated critical habitat. The cumulative impacts of increased rain intensity and flows within coastal watersheds along with increased sea levels and storm wave impacts pose unique threats to these valuable wetland resources. Regional partners have begun to evaluate the potential impacts to these systems, but studies are incomplete and more research is needed. Adaptive management of coastal barrier beaches and river mouths will be necessary to ensure natural coastal processes are retained.
Table 43. Overview of Potential Climate Change Impacts to Aquatic Resources
CLIMATE CHANGE
STRESSOR POTENTIAL IMPACT ON AQUATIC RESOURCES
Sea-Level Rise (SLR)
Migration of estuarine salinity gradients
Inundation and erosion of coastal marshes, beaches, mudflats, and other wetlands (leading to loss of habitat for many species) Altered tidal range and tidal asymmetry (leading to tidal mixing and changes in sediment transport)
Increased salinity of fresh and brackish water systems Increased water depths
Increases in water
temperatures
Shift in species composition
Reductions in water quality due to increased growth of nuisance algae and to lower oxygen levels
Increases in air temperatures Decreased water availability and drought Changes in precipitation
Flooding of coastal areas due to higher peak stream discharge rates Increased erosion due to high-flow discharge
Changes in volume and timing of runoff and sediment distribution Altered winter-spring discharge rates, leading to more pronounced flooding (especially if high flow coincides with heavy precipitation events)
Reduced water quality due to changes in freshwater runoff Changes in precipitation affecting pollutant loading levels in water bodies
Altered salinity gradient from increase/decrease of streamflow Changes in storm intensity
Increased intensity of coastal storms in some areas, causing coastal erosion, altered sediment transport, inundation of tidal wetlands, and loss of established upland vegetation and structures
Increased magnitude of coastal storms in some areas, altering hydrological regimes
COASTAL RESILIENCE FROM NATURAL HABITATS
Coastal wetlands and dunes can play an important role in mitigating the increasing risks to coastal communities from erosion and flooding by dissipating wave energy and stabilizing the shoreline (Santa Cruz IRWMP 2014). Unlike hard structures, natural habitats have the capacity to migrate upslope as sea level changes and even to slow the relative rate of sea level rise by accumulating sediments that allow the coastline to keep pace with rising waters (Reed 1995, McKee et al. 2007, Kirwan and Temmerman 2009, Gedan et al. 2011). In addition to coastal protection, natural habitats can provide multiple benefits to many different sectors of the community—including the provision of fishery habitat, water quality regulation, and recreation values (Zedler and Kercher 2005, Barbier et al. 2008, Everard et al. 2010).
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 34
Coastal wetlands and dunes in the Santa Cruz IRWM Region protect over 60% of the Santa Cruz IRWM Region coastline (Error! Reference source not found.10).
Although historically present, these habitats are no longer found in the urban central area of the Santa Cruz IRWM Region between Natural Bridges State Beach and Aptos, where most water system infrastructure and people are located. Coastal habitat restoration to support coastal hazard reduction will enhance water quality and aquatic ecosystems in both the San Lorenzo and the Soquel Creek lagoons and is a priority in the Central Coast Coho Salmon Recovery Plan (NMFS 2012).
Figure 10 Coastal Habitats in Santa Cruz IRWM Region (Source: Santa Cruz IRWMP 2014)
KEY RISKS AND VULNERABILITIES
Recognizing that water infrastructure can be vulnerable to predicted climate hazards is the first step towards adaptation planning and implementation. Identification of priority infrastructure within harms way can help IRWMP members to prioritize potential resiliency upgrades and identify grant funding available to address these vulnerabilities. Through a GIS interpretation of predicted hazards and existing infrastructure, a list of infrastructure within hazard zones were identified. Working with IRWMP members responsible for this infrastructure, the IRWMP Climate update team identified the below listed infrastructure as at risk of damage or loss due to the predicted hazards and potential responses to address those risks. (Table 14).
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 35
Table 54. Actions to Address Regional Climate Hazards
Asset Hazard Actions Key Partners
Water Infrastructure
Storm Drains
Coastal storm
flooding
Install gates and pumps on vulnerable
storm drains and upgrade undersized
infrastructure. Monitor all pumping
station sites.
Santa Cruz County, Cities of
Santa Cruz and Capitola Public
Works
Rising tides
Estimate effective life of infrastructure
using sea level rise predictions and install
gates or pumps on vulnerable storm
drains
Santa Cruz County, Cities of
Santa Cruz and Capitola Public
Works
Fluvial flooding
Evaluate options to reduce reliance on
vulnerable storm drain infrastructure (LID,
retention and detention, groundwater
infiltration)
City and County planning
departments, SCRCD
Coastal Erosion
Prioritize critical infrastructure within
coastal erosion hazard zones for upgrade
or redesign/relocation
Santa Cruz County, Cities of
Santa Cruz and Capitola Public
Works
Culverts and
Tide Gates
Rising tides Evaluate, prioritize and implement
necessary upgrade to existing structures
Santa Cruz County, Cities of
Santa Cruz and Capitola Public
Works
Fluvial flooding Evaluate, prioritize and design secondary overflow/diversion options
Santa Cruz County, Cities of
Santa Cruz and Capitola Public
Works
Fluvial flooding
Evaluate the feasibility, and prioritize and
install new culverts and control structures
to accommodate future river discharges.
Santa Cruz County, Cities of
Santa Cruz and Capitola Public
Works, SCRCD
Fluvial flooding
Identify and design flood plain
enhancement and stormwater capture
opportunities
Santa Cruz County
Environmental Health, Water
Districts, IRWMP members
Fluvial flooding
Evaluate drainage modifications
(retention) in upper watershed that
reduce downstream peak flows
Santa Cruz County
Environmental Health, Water
Districts, IRWMP members
Coastal Erosion
Prioritize critical infrastructure within
coastal erosion hazard zones for upgrade
or redesign/relocation
Santa Cruz County, Cities of
Santa Cruz and Capitola Public
Works
Wastewater
distribution
and treatment
Coastal Storm
Flooding and
Coastal erosion
Relocate infrastructure out of hazard
areas or redesign to be resilient to
identified hazards.
Engineer a cut off wall to protect
wastewater treatment facility
City of Santa Cruz Waste Water
Treatment Facility
Rising Tides
Draft WWTF resiliency plan to identify
actions needed to retain service and
address increased flood risks
City of Santa Cruz Waste Water
Treatment Facility
Fluvial flooding
Identify and design flood plain
enhancement and stormwater capture
opportunities
Santa Cruz County
Environmental Health, Water
Districts, IRWMP members
Impacts to Water
Quality
Seal pump gallery at wastewater
treatment facility. Seal wastewater pipes
throughout system.
Monitor and protect wastewater facility
from ground water infiltration.
City of Santa Cruz Waste Water
Treatment Facility
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 36
Asset Hazard Actions Key Partners
Groundwater
Wells
Coastal storm
flooding, rising
tides
Evaluate risk of contamination from
surface flood waters (saltwater and
contaminated freshwater sources)
County Water Districts
Saltwater Intrusion
Evaluate risk to municipal ground water
wells from sea level rise exacerbated
seawater intrusion
Mid-County Groundwater
Agency, Water Purveyors
(Districts, City of Santa Cruz)
Droughts
Enhance natural infiltration areas of
watersheds through restoration, hydraulic
enhancement and acquisition
Santa Cruz County, SCRCD,
CCWG
Impacts to Water
Quality
Evaluate options for mitigating future
water quality problems, such as salt
intrusion into groundwater due to
advancing sea levels.
Mid-County Groundwater
Agency, Water Purveyors
(Districts, City of Santa Cruz)
Water Supply
Coastal storm
flooding, rising
tides
Evaluate upgrades, resiliency or relocation
of vulnerable infrastructure
Water Purveyors (Districts, City
of Santa Cruz)
Fire
Increase fire protection/resiliency for
vulnerable infrastructure prioritized based
on community reliance and public safety.
Water Purveyors (Districts, City
of Santa Cruz), SCRCD
Fluvial flooding
and landslides
Upgrade critical distribution infrastructure
needed to maintain water service that is
vulnerable to river flooding and landslides
Water Purveyors (Districts, City
of Santa Cruz), Santa Cruz
County Environmental Health
and Public Works
Conserve and
curtail water usage
Reduce system demand through
implementing water conservation
programs developed in the Water
Conservation Master Plan and following
recommendations from the Water Supply
Advisory Committee, focusing on reducing
peak season demand.
Water Purveyors (Districts, City
of Santa Cruz), Santa Cruz
County Environmental Health
and Public Works, SCRCD
Impacts to Water
Quality
Evaluate options for mitigating future
water quality problems, such as increased
turbidity in flowing sources due to
intensifying storm activity. Evaluate
potential changes or increases needed in
treatment levels, new technology to
handle poorer quality raw water. Prepare
for increase in nuisance algae blooms in
Loch Lomond.
Water Purveyors (Districts, City
of Santa Cruz), Santa Cruz
County Environmental Health
and Public Works
Santa Cruz
Harbor
Sea level rise and
coastal storm
flooding
Prioritize implementation of Santa Cruz
Harbor SLR vulnerability and adaptation
plan (Submitted to SLC)
Harbor District
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 37
Asset Hazard Actions Key Partners
Natural Resources
Beaches
Coastal storm
flooding and
erosion
Draft a Beach Management Plan that
establishes objectives and strategies to
retain beach habitat in parallel with other
sea level rise adaptation strategies.
Investigate beach nourishment.
Santa Cruz County, State Parks,
Monterey Bay National Marine
Sanctuary (MBNMS)
Sea level rise
Draft a Beach Management Plan that
establishes objectives and strategies to
retain beach habitat in parallel with other
sea level rise adaptation strategies.
Santa Cruz County, State Parks,
MBNMS
Sea level rise and
coastal erosion
Identify back shore habitat restoration
opportunities that may provide additional
resiliency to inland water infrastructure.
Investigate beach nourishment.
Santa Cruz County, State Parks,
MBNMS
Wetlands
Sea level rise Prioritize the protection or transition of wetland habitat to future risks of SLR
CCWG, Santa Cruz County, City
of Santa Cruz, City of Capitola,
CDFW, USFWS, State Parks,
SCRCD
Fluvial flooding,
coastal storm
flooding
Identify flood plain adaptation,
reclamation and restoration options that
will provide flood attenuation and reduce
flooding to infrastructure
Santa Cruz County, SCRCD
Impacts to Water
Quality
Evaluate options for mitigating future
water quality problems, such as increased
turbidity in flowing sources due to
intensifying storm activity or advancing
sea levels.
Santa Cruz County, State Parks,
USFWS, Watsonville Wetlands
Watch, SCRCD
Creeks and
Riparian areas
Sea Level Rise
Evaluate coastal river flooding hazards
that will be exacerbated by sea level rise
for San Lorenzo River and Aptos Creek
City of Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz
County
Droughts
Enhance natural infiltration areas of
watersheds through restoration, hydraulic
enhancement and acquisition
Santa Cruz County, SCRCD,
CCWG
Landslides Identify creek enhancement opportunities
to reduce landslide risk
Santa Cruz County, SCRCD,
CCWG
Fire Remove invasive species understory to
establish natural shaded fire breaks
Santa Cruz County, SCRCD,
California Conservation Corps.
Fluvial flooding
and droughts
Support expansion of County riparian and
instream enhancement efforts to increase
watershed infiltration and reduce winter
erosion and sedimentation
Santa Cruz County, SCRCD,
CCWG
Impacts to Water
Quality
Evaluate options to mitigating future
water quality problem due to intensifying
storm activity. Evaluate potential changes
or increases needed in treatment levels,
new technology to handle poorer quality
raw water.
Santa Cruz County, SCRCD
Anadromous
Fish
Drought
Support Riparian habitat enhancement to
enhance shade needed to maintain base
flow conditions.
Santa Cruz County, CCWG,
SCRCD
Lands Slides
Establish sediment response strategy for
future landslides within high priority
spawning grounds.
Santa Cruz County, CCWG,
SCRCD
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT
2019 Addendum Appendix B 38
Asset Hazard Actions Key Partners
Anadromous
Fish Sea Level Rise
Establish river mouth management
strategies that best address the multiple
habitat, fish and adjacent land use needs.
Santa Cruz County, City of
Santa Cruz, City of Capitola,
CCWG, SCRCD
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix C
APPENDIX C: SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER
MANAGEMENT STORM WATER RESOURCES PLAN
LETTER TO DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix C 1
California Department of Water Resources
Division of Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Financial Assistance Branch
Attn: Ted Daum
1416 9th Street, Room 354
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Incorporation of the approved Santa Cruz County Storm Water Resources Plan into the Santa Cruz IRWM Plan
Dear Mr. Daum:
The Santa Cruz County Storm Water Resources Plan (SWRP) was completed in December 2016. The Regional Water Management Group (RWMG) for the Santa Cruz Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Region approved the SWRP on February 24, 2017 and incorporation of the SWRP as an appendix to the Santa Cruz IRWM Plan.
The SWRP is a comprehensive document outlining regional stormwater project priorities, as well as regional stormwater permit compliance. Development of the SWRP was led by the County of Santa Cruz Environmental Health with contributions by staff and representatives from the City of Santa Cruz, the City of Scotts Valley, the City of Watsonville, the City of Capitola, Ecology Action, the Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County, and the University of California Santa Cruz. In June 2017, the State Water Resources Control Board issued its concurrence that the SWRP met the requirements of the California Water Code and the SWRP Guidelines.
• Storm Water Resource Plan
• Attachment 1: SWRP Project list
• Attachment 2: SWRP Project Submittal Form
• Attachment 3: Wasteload Allocation Attainment Program for Watersheds in Santa Cruz County
• Attachment 4_Technical Summary Letter Low Impact Development Opportunity Analysis in the Monterey Bay Region
• State Water Resources Control Board - letter of concurrence June 2017 The SWRP and the State Water Resources Control Board letter of concurrence from June 2017 are attached to the 2014 Santa Cruz IRWM Plan Amendment as Appendix C and D respectively.
Correspondence regarding these items may be direct to:
Santa Cruz IRWM Plan
Tim Carson, Program Director
Regional Water Management Foundation
Community Foundation Santa Cruz County
(831)662-2050
[email protected]
Storm Water Resource Plan
Sierra Ryan, Water Resource Planner
County of Santa Cruz
(831) 454-3133
[email protected]
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix D
APPENDIX D: STORM WATER RESOURCES PLAN CONCURRENCE
LETTER FROM THE STATE WATER RESOURCE CONTROL BOARD
SANTA CRUZ INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
2019 Addendum Appendix E
APPENDIX E: SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
STORM WATER RESOURCES PLAN
Santa Cruz County
Storm Water
Resources Plan
December, 2016
Prepared by the County of Santa Cruz Environmental Health with contributions by staff and representatives from the City of Santa Cruz, the City of Scotts Valley, the City of Watsonville, the City of Capitola, Ecology Action, the Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County, and the University of California Santa Cruz.
Santa Cruz Storm Water Resources Plan December 2016
2 Contents
Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................................3 Watershed Identification......................................................................................................................................8 Water Quality Compliance..................................................................................................................................34 Organization, Coordination, Collaboration.........................................................................................................41 Quantitative Methods.........................................................................................................................................51 Identification and Prioritization of Projects........................................................................................................66 Implementation Strategy & Schedule.................................................................................................................86 Education, Outreach, Public Participation..........................................................................................................99 References........................................................................................................................................................106 Figures
Figure 1: SWRP Watersheds and Groundwater Basins.........................................................................................9 Figure 2: Water Agency and IRWM Boundaries .................................................................................................18 Figure 3: Municipalities and park land in the SWRP...........................................................................................19 Figure 4: Natural Resources................................................................................................................................31 Figure 5: Hydromodification through impervious surfaces................................................................................33 Figure 6: Landuse types in Santa Cruz County....................................................................................................38 Figure 7: Water Quality Monitoring locations throughout the SWRP................................................................57 Figure 8: Example of LID Bioretention Opportunity Map for Soquel Creek Water District. All of the maps can be found in Appendix IV. ....................................................................................................................................69 Figure 9: Managed Aquifer Recharge Suitability, produced by Dr. Andrew Fisher, University of California Santa Cruz, in conjunction with the Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County.........................................73 Figure 10: Example of how MS4 catchment pollutant loading results could be mapped using TELR to illustrate the catchments with the greatest potential risk per unit area to the receiving water quality (i.e., purple and red catchments) and priorities for stormwater..................................................................................................94 Figure 11: Geosyntec catchment prioritization demonstrated for the Goleta area...........................................95 Figure 12: Coastal Flood Risk Area....................................................................................................................103 Table
Table 1: watersheds within the SWRP and impairments......................................................................................9 Table 2: Water bodies with established and proposed TMDLs in Santa Cruz County........................................20 Table 3: U.S. Geological Survey Surface Flow Gages..........................................................................................22 Table 4: Water Supply Watersheds and Related Water Systems.......................................................................23 Table 5: Estimated volume of potable water supplied by Santa Cruz County public water agencies................29 Table 6: Impaired Water Bodies and Pollutant sources .....................................................................................34
Santa Cruz Storm Water Resources Plan December 2016
3 Table 7: Priority BMPs to Address Pollutants of Concern...................................................................................39 Table 8: Capture and Recharge projects in the SWRP ........................................................................................55 Table 9: Stations to be Monitored for Fecal Indicator Bacteria (E. coli) and Nitrate .........................................58 Table 10: Runoff and Infiltration potential for key locations within the SWRP..................................................70 Table 11: PCR Tiers..............................................................................................................................................79 Table 12: Project Ranking Criteria ......................................................................................................................82 Table 13: Possible Funding Mechanisms............................................................................................................86 Abbreviations:
303(d) List List of impaired waterbodies maintained by the SWQCB AFY Acre Feet per Year
AMBAG Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments
ASBS Area of Special Biological Significance
BMP Best Management Practice
BMP RAM Best Management Practice Rapid Assessment Method CASGEM CA Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring
CCRWQCB Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board CEDEN CA Environmental Data Exchange
CWA Clean Water Act
DAC Disadvantaged Community
DSC-MAR Distributed Stormwater Collection Managed Aquifer Recharge DWR Department of Water Resources
EMC Event Mean Concentration
FIB Fecal Indicator Bacteria
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GIS Geographic Information Systems
GSA Groundwater Sustainability Agency
GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan
IRWMP Integrated Regional Water Management Plan
JPA Joint Powers Authority
LAFCO Local Agency Formation Commission
LID Low-impact Development
LIDI Low Impact Development Initiative
LPR Model Load Pollutant Reduction Model
LRDP Long-range Development Plan
MAR Managed Aquifer Recharge
Santa Cruz Storm Water Resources Plan December 2016
4 MHI Median Household Income
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association
NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
NRPR Natural Resources Project Inventory
PCR Post-construction Requirement
PEAIP Program Effectiveness Assessment and Improvement Plan PES Payments for Ecosystem Services
PGR Primary Groundwater Recharge
PRMS Precipitation Runoff Modeling System
PVBMP Pajaro Valley Basin Management Plan
QAAP Quality Assurance Achievement Plan
qPCR Method of quantifying DNA
RCD Resource Conservation District
RWMF Regional Water Management Foundation
SLWMP San Lorenzo Waste Management Plan
SRF State Revolving Fund
SSA Sanitary Sewer Analysis
SWMP Stormwater Management Plan
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load
UCSC University of California Santa Cruz
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
WAAP Waste Allocation Attainment Plan
WDO Water Demand Offset
WMZ Watershed Management Zone
Santa Cruz Storm Water Resources Plan December 2016
5 Executive Summary
The SWRP is a comprehensive document outlining regional stormwater project priorities, as well as regional stormwater permit compliance. This document draws heavily from the MS4 stormwater permits for the 4 cities, the county, and UCSC. Because these permits are already in place, there is no new regulatory compliance language included in the SWRP that is not already adopted through those permits. Additionally, there is no additional programmatic monitoring, since compliance monitoring is already being done in alignment with existing requirements. Though there is no new regulatory work required to meet the goals of the plan, the document is particularly useful as a one-stop-shop that describes all of the existing programs within the SWRP boundary.
Instead of mandatory program development, the Plan focuses on regional and statewide priorities for storm water projects to be implemented above and beyond those required by law. The Plan was written with consideration of the following:
1. Santa Cruz County is almost entirely self-sufficient in terms of water supply
2. The Santa Cruz SWRP boundary encompasses two complete and one partial groundwater basin, all of which are in a state of critical overdraft. Seawater intrusion is a critical concern in two of the basins.
3. The six large and over 130 smaller water systems in the region use a combination of groundwater and surface water to meet demand. Additionally, there are over 8,000 private wells in the County.
Agriculture is the largest user of water.
4. Santa Cruz County is home to special status fish including steelhead trout and coho salmon. Low stream baseflow during the dry season can severely impact successful breeding of both species.
5. Multiple water bodies in the SWRP boundary are considered impaired and included on the 303(d) list of impaired waterbodies. Several Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) have been developed and others are planned for the future. Prime constituents of concern are sediment, pathogens, and nutrients.
6. Most watersheds in the SWRP boundary contain a mix of urban and non-urban landuses, making the achievement of all water quality objectives through solely urban stormwater management extremely unlikely.
7. Flood control is an ongoing concern for the region. Climate predictions indicate a likelihood of fewer storms of greater intensity in the future, making the need for flood water management even more vital.
A project solicitation was conducted in June 2016. Thirty-three projects were received, submitted by both public agencies and non-profit organizations. A ranking was developed to cover the wide range of benefits offered by stormwater projects. Points were given for all of the following categories:
Clear description of project and quantification of benefits Metrics driven approach
Readiness to proceed
Drinking water augmentation
Enhancing watershed processes
Benefiting Disadvantaged Community
Santa Cruz Storm Water Resources Plan December 2016
6 Flood protection
Having cost-share/match already committed
Community support
Proponents were able to submit their proposals as either “Projects,” “Programs,” or “Opportunities.” The former two options were ranked and expected to have well developed plans and budget. The latter option was not ranked. Highly developed projects with multiple benefits scored the highest, and will be likely to apply for funding as it becomes available. In most cases, the decision about whether to apply for funding will be determined by the project proponents. It is unlikely that any of the projects submitted to the SWRP will be able to proceed without grant funding.
The timeline for implementation of the SWRP follows two parallel tracks:
1) Regulatory compliance which is already underway by the regulated community (primarily municipalities). This includes storm water education and outreach to the public. 2) Implementation of projects submitted to the SWRP and project specific outreach which will be done in accordance with grant solicitation and funding awards. Additional project solicitations to submit to the SWRP will also be held in advance of future grant solicitations or based upon request of the stakeholders.
This plan was written with the input of staff from multiple agencies and water suppliers, non-profits, and the general public. The region is dedicated to ever improving stormwater management with the view of stormwater as a resource rather than a nuisance.
Santa Cruz Storm Water Resources Plan December 2016
7 Introduction
On September 24, 2014, Governor Brown signed SB 985 (Pavley) into law. This bill created a requirement that in order to receive grant funding for a storm water and/or dry-weather runoff project where the grant funding was provided by a bond act approved by the voters after January 1, 2014, the project be included in a Storm Water Resource Plan (SWRP). The minimum contents of a SWRP were specified in SB 985. The State Water Resources Control Board published the final Storm Water Resources Plan Guidelines in December, 2015 (hereafter Guidelines), which describe the requirements of an SWRP consistent with SB 985 and other laws and regulations.
This document comprises the Santa Cruz SWRP.
A Regional approach to resource management is not new to Santa Cruz County, where local water districts, cities and the County have been writing and implementing plans to address challenging resource problems for decades. Santa Cruz is a small county with relatively small watersheds, most of which are contained entirely within the county boundaries. Since the 1980’s there have been ongoing efforts to collaborate on watershed health, water quality, water supply, and stormwater management. The Santa Cruz Integrated Regional Management Plan represents a culmination of much of the previous work.
Since 2009, all of the holders of MS4 permits within the County have been meeting regularly through the Stormwater Information Network (SIN). The benefits of collaboration through SIN led to the 2015 collaborative Wasteload Allocation Attainment Plan (WAAP) for Watersheds in Santa Cruz County. The WAAP was a joint effort drafted by the County of Santa Cruz and the Cities of Capitola, Santa Cruz, Scotts Valley, and Watsonville to outline the implementation of activities that will achieve TMDL wasteload allocations.
Municipalities and non-profits in the SWRP have also partnered on two regional storm water grants, both funded through Prop 84. The first was a “Low Impact Development Bioretention Opportunity Analysis” which resulted in project selection and high priority location ranking for LID projects. The second was a “Santa Cruz Countywide Low Impact Development Best Management Practices” implementation project which resulted in the construction of four stormwater retention projects.
This SWRP builds on past and ongoing collaborations and leverages the staff time and planning already contributed to those efforts. The numbered section headings throughout the document come from the State Water Resources Control Board SWRP Guidelines.
Santa Cruz Storm Water Resources Plan December 2016
8 Watershed Identification
1) Plan identifies watershed and subwatershed(s) for storm water resource planning.
The SWRP provides guidance on storm water planning within its boundary. The boundary is congruent with the IRWMP boundary on the North, South and West. The Eastern border terminates at the Pajaro River. The SWRP encompasses 18 watersheds and 56 subwatersheds, as well as scores of small catchments. Having a variety of watershed sizes allows water managers to select the appropriate scale at which to size projects and programs. The boundary also comprises two complete groundwater basins, the Santa Margarita and the Santa Cruz Mid-County, as well as a majority of the Pajaro Valley basin.
2) Plan is developed on a watershed basis, using boundaries as delineated by USGS, CalWater, USGS Hydrologic Unit designations, or an applicable integrated regional water management group, and includes a description and boundary map of each watershed and sub-watershed applicable to the Plan.
Santa Cruz County contains two major river watersheds, the San Lorenzo and the Pajaro, and many smaller watershed drainages in urban areas that flow directly to the Monterey Bay. Figure 1 identifies all of the watersheds, subwatersheds, and many of the urban catchments within the SWRP Boundary. Below that, Table 1 includes geographic information including size of the watershed, and lists the impairments identified within the watersheds.
Santa Cruz Storm Water Resources Plan December 2016
9 Figure 1: SWRP Watersheds and Groundwater Basins
Table 1: Watersheds within the SWRP and Impairments
Watershed
Name
Area
(Sq. Mi.)
Main Tributaries Water Supply Watershed Impaired
San Lorenzo 138 Branciforte, Carbonera,
Zayante, Bean, Fall,
Newell, Bear, Boulder,
Kings Creeks
San Lorenzo; Hare, Jamison,
Corvin, Forest Springs;
Bracken Brae Creek; Peavine,
Silver, Foreman, Clear,
Sweetwater Creeks; Fall,
Bennet, Bull Creeks; Lompico
Creek; Tunnell Gulch;
Pogonip Creek, Newell Creek.
San Lorenzo – Temperature (proposed),
Pesticides, Pathogens, Nutrients, Sediment;
Zayante - Pesticides, Pathogens, Sediment;
Bean - Sediment; Boulder - Sediment;
Lockhart Gulch - Sediment, Miscellaneous;
Bear - Sediment; Branciforte - Sediment,
Pathogens; Carbonera - Nutrients, Sediment,
Pathogens; Fall - Sediment; Kings - Sediment;
Lompico - Nutrients, Pathogens, Sediment;
Love - Sediment; Mountain Charlie -