2. • Workshop Goal:
– Present Analysis of 3 conceptual restoration designs and
invite questions
• Workshop Objectives:
Public Involvement Workshop #6
Theme: Life
Mascot: Western Snowy Plover
Color: Light Green
• Workshop Objectives:
1. Update Conceptual Restoration Plan’s progress
2. Share 3 conceptual restoration designs
3. Present results of Alternative Analysis
4. Answer questions
• Workshop Ground Rules
3. Conceptual Restoration Plan Progress Update
Planning Process
1. Collect data on existing conditions
2. Compile and analyze opportunities and constraints to
restoration
3. Meet with the Public to brainstorm potential restoration3. Meet with the Public to brainstorm potential restoration
alternatives
4. Determine preliminary restoration alternatives
5. Meet with Technical Advisory Committee and Public to
identify final alternatives
6. Analyze each of the final restoration alternatives
7. Report results of restoration alternatives analyses and
summarize the project findings
5. In February of 2006, a joint powers agreement was
adopted among the:
Rivers & Mountains Conservancy, State Coastal Conservancy,
& Cities of Long Beach & Seal Beach
Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority
=
These agencies comprise the project’s Steering Committee
6. Project Organization Chart
Community Technical Advisory
Steering Committee:
RMC, Coastal Conservancy,
Cities of Seal and Long Beach
Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority:
Project Manager
Consulting Team
Community
Stakeholders
Public
Involvement
Plan
Technical Advisory
Committee
Staff from
Applicable Public
Agencies
7. Technical Advisory Committee
Members of each of these organizations provide regular
advising throughout this project:
• Rivers and Mountains Conservancy
• California Coastal Conservancy
• City of Long Beach
• City of Seal Beach
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
• NOAA-National Marine Fisheries Service
• Counties of Los Angeles & Orange• Counties of Los Angeles & Orange
• US Army Corps Of Engineers
• Regional Water Quality Control Board
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife
• California Coastal Commission
• State Lands Commission
• Southern California Water Resources Research Project
• Port of Long Beach
• Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission
• CSU Long Beach, Dept of Biological Sciences
8.
9.
10.
11. • Workshop Goal was:
– Present 3 conceptual restoration designs
• Workshop Objectives:
Public Involvement Workshop #5
Theme: Fire
Mascot: Coulter’s Goldfield
Color: Red
• Workshop Objectives:
– Update on Conceptual Restoration Plan’s progress
– Share 3 conceptual restoration designs
– Discuss NEXT STEPS
– Perform workshop activity to generate feedback on
restoration design alternatives
• Workshop Ground Rules
12. Alt 1
•Minor changes to existing oil infrastructure
•Utilize/improve existing tidal connections
•Minor grading
•Transitional & upland habitat along
perimeters
•Potential interpretive sites on OTD and/or
State lands parcels
Note: trail locations are in draft form
13. Alt 2
•Consolidate oil infrastructure
•New tidal connections to SGR and Haynes
•Steam Shovel Slough expansion
•Moderate grading
•Transitional & upland habitat along
perimeters
•Potential interpretive sites on OTD and/or
State lands parcels
Note: trail locations are in draft form
14. Alt 3
•Consolidate oil infrastructure
•New tidal connections to SGR, Haynes, &
Los Cerritos Channel
•Fill & Grading of OC Retention Basin
•Significant grading to remove fill material
and create contiguous tidal channels
•Maximizes tidal salt marsh habitat
•Potential interpretive sites on OTD and/or
State lands parcels
Note: trail locations are in draft form
15. Alternatives Analyses
Primary processes analyzed and reported tonight are:
• Hydrology
• Habitat
• Public access
Additional items addressed in the reportAdditional items addressed in the report
• Preliminary engineering designs
• Infrastructure changes
• Phasing
• Possible construction methods
• Maintenance
• Consistency with project goals and objectives
16. Results of the Analyses
• Hydrology – Chris Webb
• Habitat – Matt James
• Public Access/Interpretive Opportunities – Clark Stevens• Public Access/Interpretive Opportunities – Clark Stevens
44. Habitat Modeling
• Practical questions
– How does SLR affect habitat distributions?
– How does plumbing affect habitats?
– How do alternatives differ?
• Philosophical questions
– What is the ideal mix of habitats today?
– In 50yrs?
– In 100yrs?
45. Modeled Habitats
Habitat Categories Examples
Sub-tidal Deep, shallow and eelgrass
Mudflat Unvegetated
Low marsh Cordgrass
Mid marsh Pickleweed, marsh plain
High marsh Glasswort, salt panne
Transition zone Wetland-upland ecotone
Upland Dune, CSS, grassland
Mixed freshwater wetland Seasonal, bioswales, riparian
Brackish marsh Artificial, natural?
Oil operations Roads and pads, unvegetated
50. Lesson #1: Sea Level Rise
• Moderate SLR
– Topography sufficient to provide resilience
– Thoughtful grading of adjacent uplands
• Significant SLR
– Topography not sufficient for adaption to 5.5 ft. of SLR– Topography not sufficient for adaption to 5.5 ft. of SLR
– Big temporal tradeoffs – wetlands now or in the future
– Sedimentation will be needed to preserve current salt marshes
over the next 100 years
54. Lesson #2: Culverts
• Must be carefully designed
• Likely to lead to muted and perched tides
– Culvert size and invert elevation
– Narrowing and elimination of habitat zones
• Adequate designs now might not be adequate with SLR• Adequate designs now might not be adequate with SLR
• Habitat conversion may not behave linearly with SLR
(models may not be sufficient)
• Open channels generally don’t have these issues
57. Minimum Alternative
• Resilient to moderate SLR
• Culverts = funky hydrology
• Fragmented habitats
• “Unnatural” topography
• Compatible with oil operations?• Compatible with oil operations?
– Raising roads/pads = filling wetlands?
– Vegetation-free buffers?
58. Moderate Alternative
• Resilient to moderate SLR*
• Some resilience to significant SLR*
• More salt marsh than Minimum Alt at current sea level
• More natural topography than Minimum Alt
59. Maximum Alternative
• Maximization of salt marsh habitat
• Most sub-tidal and mudflat
• Generally steep wetland-upland transitions
• Significant loss of high marsh and transition habitat
with moderate SLRwith moderate SLR
• Significant loss of vegetated marsh with significant SLR
60. Lesson #3: Preferred Alternative?
• Best design is probably a blending of different aspects of
different alternatives
• Not all possibilities captured
– More sub-tidal (fish, turtles, some birds)
– Entire levee removal– Entire levee removal
– Hydro connection between north and central areas
61. Lots of Project-specific Fine Tuning Still Needed
• Soil contamination
• Soil texture
– Will it need to be amended? Import good soil?
• Groundwater
• Beneficial re-use of graded soils on site?• Beneficial re-use of graded soils on site?
86. Next Steps
• Finalize report that presents the restoration
alternatives analyses and summarizes the project
findingsfindings
• Prepare project for preliminary engineering and
subsequent environmental review