DRAFT-2 1/31/2004. Memorandum of Understanding

Transcription

1 DRAFT-2 1/31/2004 Memorandum of Understanding The following points of agreement between the Army Corps of Engineers and the Resource Agencies provide the parameters for the continued development of a NED Flood Project for the Lower Pajaro River and Tributaries. MIG has facilitated two meetings between the San Francisco Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and the NOAA Fisheries, Regional Water Quality Board and California Department of Fish and Game (Agencies) for the purpose of clarifying the permit ability of the current NED Project Alternatives for Pajaro River and Tributaries Flood Protection. This draft set of points is intended to outline the results of these meetings. The ACOE and Agencies believe that a variation of the NED Pajaro River Mainstem Alternative 2a and a variation of Salsipuedes and Corralitos Creeks Tributary Alternative 4 are potentially acceptable to NOAA Fisheries under Section 7 Consultation and permit-able by the State Agencies under the authorities of CCRWQCB and the California Department of Fish and Game, subject to the outcome of the following actions by the ACOE, Agencies, Local Sponsors and/or Action Pajaro Valley. I. NED Analysis Continued NED Refinement It is acknowledged that the NED project design will be refined over the next 9-10 months period before it is memorialized in a public draft EIR-EIS (see the attached calendar). Even then, the design will be at an estimated 30% completion. Over the next year, while the NED plan is finalized, and on a continuous basis through project construction, the ACOE will encourage and accommodate Priority Subsequent Opportunities to be planned and carried out in conjunction with the NED project. The Watershed Study section, below, defines such a program more fully. The Agencies understand that the Pajaro River mainstem Alternative s 2 C and 2 E 1, in their "pure form" have been evaluated by the ACOE for economic justification purposes and that they significantly reduce the net Federally recognized flood damage reduction benefits of the Recommended Plan 2A and are therefore not feasible NED alternatives. However, additional refinement of the construction features of Alternative 2e (alternative channel sides for bench excavation and confining such excavation to a specific reach) can lead to elements of this alternative being incorporated into a Modified Alt 2 A to enhance it to address the Agency Performance Standards Checklist (attached) to the extent possible within NED constraints. The ACOE agrees to provide the Agencies with the information, assumptions, and interpretations used to arrive at the preliminary Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) conclusions of Alternatives 2A, 2C, 2D, and 2E. To 1 See the appendices for a description and diagrams of the ACOE alternatives including 2D which has not yet been evaluated by the ACOE

2 facilitate this, there will be periodic meetings between the ACOE designers and the Agency Technical Team. The Agencies are agreeable to working within the existing maximum justifiable cost NED project and will not request further advocacy for a joint NED-NER at this time. Congressman Sam Farr's Office will explore the pros and cons of advocating a combined Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) for the tributary and Pajaro mainstem projects in order to justify the highest possible inclusion of Alternative 2e project elements into the final NED. elements include stable channel cross section involving bank full channel widening, 100 foot (each side) un-maintained, high Mannings " N" Value vegetation corridor,, and 100 ' highly maintained flood plain terraces (each side) as depicted on attached Cross Section Diagram.: The ACOE will include as many of the above listed elements into an enhanced "Alternative 2aX" as possible as the NED level design is carried out over the next 9 months. The ACOE will consult and collaborate with the Agencies throughout the process, through the Executive Committee system of communication and periodic meetings between the ACOE designers and the Agency Geomorphic Technical Team of Brian Cluer, AL Riley and Marcin Whitman. Action Pajaro Valley may also participate in these meetings through its technical consultants. Maintenance Plan Analysis The ACOE and the Local Sponsors will participate with Action Pajaro Valley in analysis of maintenance needs and costs of the Pajaro Mainstem Alternatives 2 A, 2 C, 2 D and 2E and Salsipuedes and Corralitos Creek Tributary Alternative T4. This comparative analysis will provide decision makers with maintenance program and budget comparisons. Action Pajaro Valley will contract for these services with a work program concurred with by both the local sponsors and the ACOE. Such analysis will start with all existing maintenance planning and analysis already completed by the ACOE in its analyses of the NED alternatives and the Local Sponsors planning and costing prepared for current maintenance efforts. This effort will also address Hydraulic and Geomorphic Analysis The Pajaro Mainstem Alternative 2 A Modified variation that emerges though the ACOE design work and the collaboration above will be subjected to an analysis of hydraulic velocities and sheer stresses, sediment transport, and overall geomorphic integrity and stability. The analysis will address the Agencies Performance Standard Checklist (attached). The same vigorous analyses shall be conducted for the current NED Salsipuedes and Corralitos Creek Tributary Alternatives before finalization of the Draft EIR. The ACOE will further explore the possibilities available to combine Section 1135 and Section 206 authorities with the current NED proposal as a means of maximizing the additional stable Plan elements in in advance of our following the NED project. (These authorities can only be used on a completed project - be it the existing or the NED, not a plan that is being designed.)

3 II. Watershed Study The Agencies are agreeable to working within the existing maximum justifiable cost NED project and will not request further advocacy for a joint NED-NER at this time, assuming the outcome of the following actions by the ACOE, the Local Sponsors, the 4 County Flood Prevention Authority and APV carry-out the following: A Project Management Plan (PMP) under ACOE Watershed Study Authority will be completed by approximately June, 2004 focusing on lower Pajaro Rive priority flood protection and environmental enhancement opportunities in the NED project area and Upper Watershed projects with the potential to maintain and reduce the flood peak flows through the lower Pajaro NED flood protection project. The PMP is expected to be finalized by June 2004 detailing the work scope identified below Complementary Project Opportunities (CPO) The Watershed Study Work Program will contain a Program intended to establish protocols for coordination between the NED Project and parallel projects developed by other project sponsors to complement the NED project to expand setback footprint, inclusion of river re-alignment features, and or other complementary project elements such has meander belts, clustered areas of riparian habitat and similar features through all NED Project Reaches, including the tributaries. The Plan must encourage and accommodate opportunities that will arise over time to include multi-objectives, without jeopardizing the NED project or increasing the local cost share of the Project. Although the CPO s may not be "integrated" into the NED project, any PSO project that emerges can be coupled onto the NED project, without increasing the local cost share, to result in a final constructable and permittable project. This CPO program will establish a work program for pro-active outreach to identify subsequent opportunities involving willing sellers and to assure that the NED project structure and implementation plan is adequately flexible to accommodate these as well as other unforeseen opportunities or events. : Examples: Agricultural landowner in Reach 4 agrees to sell acreage to the Santa Cruz Land Trust to establish a riparian strip outside of the NED project take line. Under the Complementary Project Opportunity program, the COE agrees to look at adjusting the levee alignment to encompass the additional land purchased by the outside Project Sponsor. The COE might further agree to include the additional work in a single construction contract, with the extra cost borne by the PSO project Sponsor. During the NED project construction, a major flood occurs. The disaster results in significant FEMA post disaster mitigation funding for the Pajaro Valley such funding coming with willing seller only requirements. Additional land outside the NED project take line is available from willing sellers. The Corps NED plan must be able to accommodate such additional features in its project design, without "integrating" such elements into NED. During the NED construction engineering the Pajaro Valley experiences a major earthquake causing collapse of the Hwy 1 Bridge. Priority Subsequent Opportunity protocol would assure that the NED project would revise its plans to accommodate this unforeseen event.. Additional lands from willing sellers may be utilized to complement the NED project to add periodic clusters of riparian habitat for terrestrial species migration, for increasing Manning's N roughness budgets

4 within the NED project corridor, for urban pocket parks in the Watsonville-Pajaro urban reaches and for trails and access opportunities along the urban reaches of the NED Flood Project corridor. The Watershed Study work program will include an active property owner outreach, education and preliminary negotiation effort which is adequately funded to: Identify WILLING SELLERS of land outside of the Alternative 2A "X" NED footprint. No condemnation powers will be used for acquisition of these additional lands. Funding for purchase of additional lands to come from sources outside of funds raised through Zones 1, 1 &1A, and Zone 7 current or future benefit assessments or future taxes. Relationship between CPO and the ACOE NED Project It is not envisioned that Complementary Project Opportunity projects that emerge from the Watershed Study effort will be "integrated' into the NED project. In order to protect the integrity of the NED project from a congressional authority framework, the NED project and the Complementary Project Opportunities program must maintain a financial and Federal Authority 'firewall". This separation is also important in order to satisfy the "willing seller" condition of many of the available outside funding sources such as FEMA, Prop 40 and 50 and most environmental restoration grants from State and Federal sources. Upper Watershed Programs The PMP will include study and identification of projects to maintain and reduce peak flood flows into the NED Project reach through efforts such as maintenance and expansion of Soap Lake detention, identification of implementable opportunities to increase floodplain storage through efforts such as the Dr. Curry-Granite Rock concepts, additional upstream detention opportunities on the Pajaro mainstem and its tributaries upstream of Murphy's crossing. Such opportunities may be fundable by the ACOE "using a new Congressional (construction) authority supported by the study based on NED and/or NER benefits. Certain smaller scale efforts also may be funded through the Continuing Authorities Program (e.g. section 1135, 206, or 205). All such efforts require the support (cost-sharing) of a non-federal sponsor. III. Performance Standard for Compliance with the Terms of the MOU Agencies, ACOE and Local Sponsors Obligations: It is the objective of the Agencies to work with the ACOE and Local Sponsors to develop a permittable flood control project. This will be accomplished by providing as much technical assistance and review as possible to expedite the identification of a project. On December 1, 2004 NOAA Fisheries will evaluate the progress and due diligence of the ACOE and the Local Sponsors to meet the stated objectives of this MOU. Specifically, NOAA Fisheries expects the PMP to be completed by June 30, 2004, and evaluate whether the Watershed Study Work Program has made significant progress to identify additional opportunities to enhance the NED as described in this MOU under the Complementary Project Opportunity section. At this time NOAA Fisheries will determine whether demonstrated progress has been made to continue with this agreement. At this time NOAA Fisheries will provide a written report to Congressman

5 Sam Farr and Dr. William T. Hogarth, NOAA Fisheries, to update them on the status of this project. In the event that a NED plan in conjunction with the CPO cannot reasonably meet the performance standards of the Agencies, the Agencies by law accept no agreements to suspend their obligations under federal and state laws for resource protection.

6 MOU Appendix-Definitions Corps of Engineers Description of Alt 2 C and 2 D Alternative 2C This alternative is based on Philip Williams & Associates (PWA) Scenario 3 (as presented in the PWA report prepared for the Sierra Club, An Environmental Alternative for the Pajaro River Flood Plan, 10 July 2003). It assumes that Alt 2A (100 set back plan) is in place and includes bench excavation on both sides of the river in all reaches, channel widening, and approximately 2 miles of additional river length (meander) in Reach 4. Alternative 2 D- This Alternative includes Alternating Bench Excavation. (Wendy please complete) Alternative 2E This alternative is based on the PWA Scenario 2. It assumes Alt 2A (100 set back plan) in place and includes bench excavation on both sides of the river in all reaches as well as channel widening. It does not include construction of any meanders. The quantities used to develop the preliminary cost estimates for both Alternative 2C and 2E were based on cross-sections determined through HEC-RAS modeling with the following assumptions. The levee-to-levee width was assumed to be the same as for Alternative 2A in all reaches. A 100 riparian corridor was assumed on each side of the river with a hydraulic roughness (n-value) equal to 0.10 to (The hydraulic roughness for the mowed bench areas and channel bottom were assumed to be the same as Alternative 2A.) The height of the levees was adjusted to contain a 1% chance exceedence event with approximately 90% confidence. (Note: The 1% chance exceedence water surface elevation at the Main Street Bridge for Alternatives 2C and 2E was about 5 lower than for Alternative 2A.) Agency Performance Standards for NED Project for the Pajaro The resource agencies have expressed the following Performance Standards for design of the NED project Such Performance Standards are more fully described in the February 10, 2003 CRWQCB letter to the US Army Corps of Engineers (Attached) 1) A bank full or active channel which can support a dynamic low flow channel, pools, riffles and point bars; and 2) A riparian corridor for shade (temperature control), nutrient trapping, river bank stabilization and habitat for terrestrial and aquatic fauna, and 3) A vegetated depositional flood plain area for sediment storage and nutrient trapping In applying these performance standards to the design of the NED flood project, the Agencies have provided the following guidance and interpreataiton to the ACOE and Local Sponsors: 1. The Agencies are not requiring a specific design of the flood control project, however we are requiring a reasonable compliance with our performance standards which emphasize the ability of the flood control system to sustain a riparian corridor and reduce the costs and impacts of maintenance.

7 2. The Agencies believe there is a maintenance free project. The Agencies want to have a maintenance free zone, and designate removal of sediment along a planned flood plain corridor where maintenance disturbances will minimize environmental impacts and maintenance crews will have easier access. 3. The Agencies have been very careful to say that the agency stable river plan is a conceptual one put forward because no plan has come forward which attempts to address all performance standards. The plan alternatives must have the geomorphic assumptions reviewed, any design cross-section must be modeled for sediment transport capabilities, and critical shear stress and shear stresses need to be computed to determine if excessive erosional or deposition may occur which impacts water quality, fish habitat or passage or invasive plant maintenance. 4. The Agencies have said that they are extremely concerned that the tributaries projects are not being adequately coordinated with the main stem project and coordinated with upper watershed projects. We are particularly concerned that potential future sediment loads from Salsipuedes Creek could overwhelm the mainstem river's transport capacity. 5.We have read the Curry report about the geomorphic history of the river and "misfit stream channel system" with great interest. We do not want our design proposal to be misconstrued as a natural river restoration nor an attempt to re-create historic conditions. They are not. Our proposal only claims to design a flood control engineering project which has greater resiliciency to respond to desirable sediment transport, and lower shear stress on levees and stream channel banks. The addition of floodplains and channel lengths are recommended for this added resiliency. Repeat :they are not an attempt to restore a historic channel. 6. The required performance standards for fish and wildlife are: Steelhead : (See attached Steelhead performance standards presentation prepared by Patricia Anderson, California Department of Fish and Game Other Species 7. Balance sinuosity, valley slope and sediment to support a more resilient system and provide channel slopes required for fish passage. Roughness Values -Habitat Definitions: Mannings n roughness coeffiecnts are import ant hydraulic measuring units. The Agencies are asked to comment on various regimes of roughness on a Reach and Sub Reach Basis. The Agencies and Corps are in agreement with the definitions contained in the (attached -ftp site reference) (powerpoint on Roughness coefficients)

8

9