CC - Item 6A - Enhanced Watershed Management Program E M F
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
CIVIC PRIDE STAFF REPORT
/NCCRI'oRATED,g59
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JEFF ALLRED, CITY MANAGER
DATE: JUNE 9, 2015
SUBJECT: ENHANCED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
SUMMARY
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (Board)
adopted an updated National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES),
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit, Order No. R4-2012-0175,
effective December 28, 2012. This MS4 Permit is a set of regulations, control measures,
and programs aimed at preventing the pollution of storm water and urban runoff within
Los Angeles County. The Permit applies to municipalities who operate a storm sewer
system within Los Angeles County and 84 of the 88 cities in the County are party to this
permit. Prior to the issuance of the MS4 Permit effective December 28, 2012, all
agencies were operating under a Permit issued in 2001. By comparison, the newly
updated MS4 Permit contains more stringent water quality regulations but enables a
collective approach to the NPDES issue.
In June 2013, the City Council approved the City's participation in a group, consisting of
sixteen (16) other cities and Los Angeles County, to develop an Enhanced Watershed
Management Program (EWMP) as the City's chosen mechanism of compliance with the
MS4 Permit. The Enhanced Watershed Management Plan is a multifaceted approach
to manage stormwater and improve water quality throughout the region. The draft plan,
which was prepared by a team of consultants, is ready for submittal to the Board for
approval.
Attaining compliance with MS4 permit through the implementation of an EWMP requires
jurisdictions to implement Green Streets Best Management Practices (BMPs) which
divert stormwater runoff from gutters into retention mechanisms such as curb cuts or
bio-swales that allow for soil infiltration.
Staff Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Receive and File this report
2. Adopt Resolution 2015-38 — Approving a Policy of Implementing Green Streets
Best Management Practices
ITEM NUMBER: L J'
City Council Meeting
June 9, 2015
Page 2 of 7
DISCUSSION
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (Board)
adopted an updated National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit, LARWQCB Order No. R4-
2012-0175, effective December 28, 2012. This NPDES permit is a set of regulations,
control measures, and programs aimed at preventing the pollution of storm water and
urban runoff within Los Angeles County. Prior to this update in December 2012, the
most current MS4 permit was adopted in 2001. There are some substantial differences
between the permit adopted in 2001 and Order No. R4-2012-0175, especially in regard
to compliance with the permit.
NPDES Permit Compliance
The NPDES Permit, Order No. R4-2012-0175, allowed for two options for compliance
with the permit: compliance with the numeric standards included in the permit language
or through the development of a watershed management plan.
The directive to comply with the permit as adopted is specified in section VI.A.4. of
Order No. R4-2012-0175:
4. Responsibilities of the Permitees
A. Each Permittee is required to comply with the requirements of this Order
applicable to discharges within its boundaries. Permittees are not responsible for
the implementation of the provisions applicable to other Permittees. Each
Permittee shall:
i. Comply with the requirements of this Order and any modifications thereto.
As an alternative to strict compliance with the permit as adopted, the Board included the
provision of a watershed management plan as an option for compliance with Order No.
R4-2012-0175. The watershed management plans are described in section VI.C.1:
C. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS
1. General
a. The purpose of this Part VI.0 is to allow Permittees the flexibility to develop
Watershed Management Programs to implement the requirements of this
Order on a watershed scale through customized strategies, control measures,
and BMPs.
b. Participation in the Watershed Management Program is voluntary and allows
a Permittee to address the highest watershed priorities, including complying
with the requirements of Part V.A. (Receiving Water Limitations), Part VI.E
(Total Maximum Daily Load Provisions) and Attachments L through R, by
customizing the control measures in Parts III.A.4 (Prohibitions — Non-Storm
Water Discharges) and VI.D (Minimum Control Measures)
An Enhanced Watershed Management Plan (EWMP) is a comprehensive assessment
of the conditions of the watersheds that the City drains to, and based on those
conditions, prepares a detailed plan to achieve pollution reduction goals. As described
above, participation in a Watershed Management Program, as opposed to compliance
City Council Meeting
June 9, 2015
Page 3 of 7
with the order as adopted, allows the City to work in a collective manner towards the
goal of reducing pollutants in storm water runoff. The City, aided by Willdan Engineering
who serves as the City's technical consultant for NPDES, recommended the
development of an EWMP as our compliance mechanism. Traditionally, the City has
opted to work in coalitions or regional approaches to managing storm water through
participation in groups like the Coalition for Practical Regulation, the Los Angeles Permit
Group, regional monitoring activities for TMDL compliance, and the recent City
Manager's group organized through the City of Signal Hill and the League of California
Cities to study potential funding mechanisms. Historically, the City has recognized
savings of cost and staff time through these collective approaches.
The strict implementation and compliance with the permit as adopted would involve the
achievement of numeric water quality standards, no adaptive management or iterative
process, and exposure to notices of violation from the Regional Water Quality Control
Board. As the permit was adopted, there was no apparent leeway or tolerances to the
numeric standards
Of the 84 Cities in Los Angeles County that are subject to this permit, seventy-four (74)
are part of groups that are developing EWMPs or WMPs, four (4) have approved
individual watershed management plans, and one (1) is proceeding with strict
compliance. Two (2) cities received notices that their submitted individual watershed
management plans were deficient and have since made efforts to join previously
established EWMP groups. Also, based on most the most recent data available four (4)
cities received notices that their submitted individual watershed management plans
were deficient and no further information is available regarding the compliance method
they are currently pursuing.
Upper Los Angeles River Enhanced Watershed Management Plan Group
The City of Los Angeles, serving as the lead agency, organized a group of seventeen
(17) cities, Los Angeles County Unincorporated area, and the Los Angeles County
Flood Control District to complete an Enhanced Watershed Management Program in
compliance with Order No. R4-2012-0175. This group is known as the Upper Los
Angeles River Watershed Group. An Enhanced Watershed Management Program, as
defined by the LARWQCB, is a plan that comprehensively evaluates opportunities,
within the program area, for collaboration among Permittees and other partners on
multi-benefit regional projects that attempt to retain all non-storm water and storm water
runoff. Additionally, the projects will emphasize other benefits such as flood control and
water supply replenishment.
The defined area for this program includes Los Angeles County Unincorporated Area,
Los Angeles County Flood Control District, the City of Los Angeles, the City of
Rosemead, and 15 other local cities. The fifteen other the cites are the Cities of
Alhambra, Burbank, Calabasas, Glendale, Hidden Hills, La Canada Flintridge,
Montebello, Monterey Park, Pasadena, San Fernando, San Gabriel, San Marino, South
El Monte, South Pasadena, and Temple City.
City Council Meeting
June 9, 2015
Page 4 of 7
The City of Los Angeles, serving as the lead agency for this group, executed a contract
with a consultant team, led by the firm Black and Veatch, to develop an Enhanced
Watershed Management Plan for the seventeen (17) cities and the Los Angeles County
entities. The total cost for the development of this plan had a not to exceed cost of
approximately $1,750,000 to be split amongst the group as a function of each agency's
aggregate area. The City of Rosemead, which represents about one percent (1%) of the
total project area, was responsible for approximately $16,000 towards the development
of this plan.
Enhanced Watershed Management Plan
An Enhanced Watershed Management Plan (EWMP) is a planning document that will
direct the stormwater management activities for the City of Rosemead through 2037.
The document focuses on identifying water quality priorities, the development of
appropriate control measures, and completing a reasonable assurance analysis. In
developing the EWMP, the water quality priorities highlight the pollutants and
waterbodies that are not achieving water quality standards. Consultants compiled and
analyzed more than 170,000 records of water quality monitoring data to compile three
categories of water quality priority: whether there is an existing Total Maximum Daily
Load (TMDL) for this pollutant or water body, whether there has been a water quality
exceedance in the past ten (10) years, and whether the stormwater system is a source
of these pollutants. Using the identified water quality priorities, control measures were
developed to address these impairments. These control measures include a number of
strategies and Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be implemented on a watershed
scale to address the water quality priorities. The control measures include Low Impact
Development (LID), which are practices that capture and infiltrate or treat stormwater
runoff at the parcel level, Green Streets, which are the addition of bio-retention and bio-
filtration infrastructure parallel to roadways, and the development of Regional Projects
which are designed to retain or infiltrate a large volume of stormwater from an extensive
runoff area. The Reasonable Assurance Analysis (RAA) is an analysis, using water
quality data and modeling, to demonstrate that the chosen control measures will
address the water quality issues. The main emphasis of the EWMP is the utilization of
BMPs to retain and infiltrate all non-storm water runoff and 85% of all stormwater runoff
into the ground, preventing the pollutants from entering the waterways.
The draft EWMP, which will be submitted to the Board on behalf of the group on June
28, 2015, includes a comprehensive plan for addressing the issue of stormwater, as
described in the permit. The EWMP includes a battery of control measures, including
BMPs, LID strategies, and a number of regional projects all aimed at achieving
compliance with existing TMDLs and the NPDES Permit. Included in the EWMP is an
engineer's cost estimate for the implementation of this plan from the time of adoption
through 2037. The cost estimates include all measures necessary to achieve full
compliance with the current NPDES Permit as well as the existing TMDLs for metals
and bacteria. The cost included for the implementation of this EWMP for the period of
implementation through final compliance with the Bacteria TMDL in 2037 is
approximately $6 Billion.
City Council Meeting
June 9, 2015
Page 5 of 7
The cost included in the plan is one technical opinion of the cost to manage the volume
of storm water runoff that the plan establishes. This cost will vary widely as the city
makes decisions regarding implementation. For example, the estimate presented
contains a heavy dependence on Regional Projects on Private land, meaning land
would need to be acquired for the purpose of water retention and infiltration. If the City
were to choose to use its park system, or other public land, to accommodate infiltration
projects, a substantial cost saving would be realized.
The City of Los Angeles, which represents the largest land area in the plan, is estimated
to be responsible for $3,819,520,000 (62.6%) of the total cost of the plan over the
duration. The cost estimate for the City of Rosemead over the life of the plan is
$110,110,000. This cost estimate includes the expense for the City's compliance with
the previously adopted Metals and Bacteria TMDL's, which the City would have been
liable for regardless of chosen compliance path, as well as the implementation of the
EWMP.
The components that contribute to the City's total estimated cost include:
Function Estimated Expense
Low Impact Development $ 720,000.00
Regional BMPs on Public Property $ 660,000.00
Green Streets $ 19,740,000.00
Regional BMPs on Private Property . $ 88,990,000.00
TOTAL $ 110,110,000.00
As mentioned earlier, these costs represent a technical consultant's estimate of
potential costs over the duration of the implementation of this EWMP. These costs are
believed to be a conservative estimate that include the implementation of the most
robust plan that might be required under this EWMP. As the City and group move
forward with the implementation of this EWMP, there will be a number of
implementation choices that could allow for cost savings. Here is a description of the
estimated costs associated with the EWMP:
• The Low Impact Development (LID) costs would come from the need to retrofit
existing City facilities and infrastructure to conform to the requirements of LID.
These retrofits could range from the installation of rain barrels to capture rain
water, the replacement of existing pavement with porous or permeable
pavements, to the potential addition of onsite retention basins.
• The cost of Regional BMPs on Public Property relates to the City's estimated
cost to contribute towards BMPs that will be built on public property to capture
and infiltrate run off. The EWMP has identified twenty (20) signature projects
and a multitude of smaller projects all aimed at developing infiltration basins on
public land. The City's estimated cost of $660,000 would be for contribution to
projects with direct benefit to the City of Rosemead. Although this plan is
undertaking a regional approach to stormwater infiltration, agencies are only
responsible for the cost of projects with direct benefit to the agency.
City Council Meeting
June 9, 2015
Page 6 of 7
• Green Streets involve the retrofit of existing or the addition to new infrastructure
of improvements and mechanisms that are designed to help capture and
infiltrate storm water. Examples of Green Streets projects involve the addition of
bio-swales or openings in the curbs to allow the collection and infiltrations of run
off. Additionally, the use of porous or permeable surfaces would be included in
Green Streets solutions.
• The cost associated with Regional BMPs on private property relates to the need
to infiltrate runoff into the ground and the lack of potential public property on
which to complete these activities. As with the Regional BMPs on Public
Property, these projects would involve the construction of infiltration or retention
basins to capture this run off. The largest potential expense is in the form of land
acquisition on which to complete these activities. As the plan is implemented,
costs savings could be recognized were the City able to use existing park or
open space or reach agreements with other entities that have an availability of
open space, such as schools.
Once the Enhanced Water Shed Management (EWMP) plans are submitted, the focus
of the Upper Los Angeles River Watershed Management Group (ULARWMG) and the
other public agencies that have submitted similar plans will shift to funding these
programs. At least one group has been established, led by the City of Signal Hill and
supported by the League of California Cities, to develop and review any and all potential
stormwater funding mechanisms. The Los Angeles Region is facing billions of dollars in
stormwater costs and lacks a sustainable way to fund them. This group, which has
retained a technical consultant, is in the process of developing several scenarios and
alternatives to push forward with a large scale funding mechanism. Aside from
developing and reviewing potential funding mechanisms, the cities and other public
agencies party to the Los Angeles MS4 Permit will continue to appeal to the Los
Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board and the State Water Quality Control
Board regarding the extreme costs associated with the implementation of the MS4
permit.
Green Streets
The implementation of Green Streets Best Management Practices (BMPs), which
creates stormwater retention facilities along the public right-of-way, is an important
component of the MS4 permit. Green Streets systems receive runoff from the gutter via
curb cuts or curb extensions to retain and infiltrate it through bio-swale and native or
engineered soil. The use of other mechanisms, such as street trees and permeable
pavement, encourage the infiltration of runoff into the ground. Green Streets BMPs have
been demonstrated to provide benefits in addition to stormwater management that
include pedestrian safety and traffic calming, a street tree canopy, heat island effect
mitigation, and the beautification of the infrastructure.
As a component of the EWMP, the City of Rosemead is required to adopt Green Streets
BMP Policies, which encourage the City to pursue the implementation of green streets
practices. The policy indicates that the City will pursue these activities wherever feasible
in regards to cost and available area or on street projects that add more than 10,000
City Council Meeting
June 9, 2015
Page 7 of 7
square feet of new impermeable surface are. The policy expressly indicates that
standard maintenance projects, such as road slurry or overlay and reconstruction
projects that maintain original line and grade would not be subject to green streets
provisions. The adoption of this policy directs the Public Works Department to evaluate
the addition of green streets components to the infrastructure where financially and
spatially feasible.
FINANCIAL REVIEW
The City of Rosemead's Cost for the development of the EWMP to this point has been
approximately $16,000.00. In the Proposed Fiscal Year 2015-2016 Operations and CIP
Budget, $180,000 has been budgeted for NPDES operations which includes permit
activities, cost shares, and technical consulting. An additional $200,000 has been
budgeted for the construction of catch basin inserts as mandated by the Los Angeles
River Trash TMDL. The City will need to review all financial options going forward for
the ongoing funding of NPDES related activities.
PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS
This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process.
Prepared By: Submitted By:
51e
Sean Sullivan Matthew E. 1-48wkesworth
Acting Public Works Manager Assistant City Manager/
Acting Director of Public Works
Attachments:
A. Resolution 2015-38—Green Streets Best Management Practices Policy
B. Executive Summary— Upper Los Angeles River Enhanced Watershed Management Plan
C. Section 9 of Draft EWMP — EWMP Implementation Costs and Financial Strategy
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-38
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA
ADOPTING A POLICY OF IMPLEMENTING
GREEN STREETS BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
WHEREAS, the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit (Order No.
R-2012-0175) was adopted by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board on
November 8, 2012 becoming effective on December 28, 2012, and
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemead elected to comply with the provisions of the MS4
Permit through the implementation of an Enhanced Watershed Management Plan, and
WHEREAS, the implementation of an Enhanced Watershed Management Plan
requires cities to demonstrate policies that specify the use of Green Street strategies on
the public right of way have been developed, and
WHEREAS, Green Streets are enhancements to street and road projects to improve
the quality of stormwater and urban runoff through the implementation of infrastructure that
retains and infiltrates this run off through infiltration, bio-treatment, xeriscaping parkways,
and street trees, and
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemead is committed to implementing Best Management
Practices for stormwater management along transportation corridors and the City right of
way.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the CITY OF ROSEMEAD does hereby
resolve as follows:
1 . The Public Works Department shall implement Green Streets Best Management
Practices for publically owned street and road projects that add 10,000 square feet
or more of new, impermeable surface area.
2. The Public Works Department shall, whenever financially and spatially feasible,
incorporate Green Streets components into infrastructure projects.
3. Routine maintenance projects, including slurry seal, road resurfacings, and road
reconstruction that maintains the original line and grade, are exempt from the Green
Streets Best Management Practices implementation.
4. The Public Works Department will implement the Green Streets Best Management
Practives according to the Enhanced Watershed Management Plan and the
USEPA's Managing Wet Weather with Green Infrastructure Municipal Handbook:
Green Streets
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 9th DAY OF JUNE 2015.
Margaret Clark, Mayor
ATTEST:
Gloria Molleda, City Clerk
Executive Summary
The Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System(MS4) Permit Order No. R4-2012-0175 (Permit)for Los
Angeles County provides an innovative approach to Permit compliance through development of
Enhanced Watershed Management Programs (EWMP).Through a collaborative approach,an EWMP for
the Upper Los Angeles River(ULAR)Watershed Management Area(EWMP area)was developed by the
ULAR EWMP Group.The ULAR EWMP Group is comprised of the cities of Los Angeles(lead coordinating
agency),Alhambra,Burbank,Calabasas,Glendale,Hidden Hills,La Canada Flintridge,Montebello,
Monterey Park,Pasadena,Rosemead,San Fernando, San Marino,South El Monte,South Pasadena,and
Temple City and the County of Los Angeles(Unincorporated County)and the Los Angeles County Flood
Control District(LACFCD).By electing to comply with the optional compliance pathway in the MS4
Permit,the ULAR EWMP Group has leveraged this ULAR EWMP to facilitate a robust,comprehensive
approach to stormwater management for the Los Angeles River watershed to address the priority water
quality conditions in the EWMP area.
The planning area for the ULAR EWMP is the largest of all the EWMPs being developed in the Los
Angeles(LA)region,representing 485 square miles of watershed and over 50 miles of mainstem LA
River from its headwaters to just above the estuary.The LA River watershed has been subject to
numerous water quality planning and compliance efforts,and the EWMP leveraged those efforts and
identified additional projects to address water quality issues in the Upper LA River.
The vision for development of the EWMP was to utilize a multi-pollutant approach that maximizes the
retention and use of urban runoff as a resource for groundwater recharge and irrigation,while also
creating additional benefits for the communities in the ULAR watershed.This EWMP presents a toolbox
of distributed and regional watershed control measures to address applicable stormwater quality
regulations.Controlling pollutants in stormwater is a major challenge,and the EWMP Group members
have been working towards improving stormwater quality for many years by implementing numerous
stormwater capture projects across the watershed. State and federal regulations establish compliance
timelines to address water quality issues,and this EWMP lays the path forward for implementation of
additional water quality improvement projects.
For example,the Los Angeles River watershed is
subject to a Total Maximum Daily Load(TMDL)for
metals that requires compliance by 2028 and a \
bacteria TMDL that requires compliance by 2037. 0_ Measures
High legvels of metals can negatively impact aquatic y Reasonable A s uran�
life(e.g.,fish)in the rivers,creek and estuary;
bacteria concentrations can pose a ipp
potential health risk to people that recreate in the scheduling
watershed.This EWMP plan has been prepared to Monitorin
g,Assessment
address water quality issues and comply with the Adapt've ma
nagemenend
Permit requirement and timelines in a quantitative
manner.
ES.1 Elements of the EWMP
The objective of the EWMP Plan is to determine the network of control measures(often referred to as
best management practices [BMPs])that will achieve required pollutant reductions while also providing
Upper LA River EWMP ES-1 Draft May 2015
Executive Summary
multiple benefits to the community and leveraging sustainable green infrastructure practices.This
EWMP includes the following elements:
ES.1.1 Water Quality Priorities
The identification of Water Quality Priorities(Section 3 of the EWMP)was an important first step in the
EWMP Plan development process.The Water Quality Priorities highlight the pollutants and waterbodies
that are potentially not attaining water quality standards.The Water Quality Priorities are a driver of the
control measures in the EWMP.For example,if a water quality objective is not being attained,additional
pollutant reduction is required and thus more or larger control measures are needed to achieve those
reductions.Over 170,000 data records of water quality monitoring data were compiled and analyzed to
determine three categories of Water Quality Priorities based on whether TMDLs have been developed
for waterbody-pollutants,whether water quality exceedances have occurred in the last 10 years,and
whether the stormwater system is a likely source of these pollutants.The water quality prioritization
process of the Permit determines the water body-pollutant combinations(WBPCs) that will be
addressed by the EWMP.The Permit defines three categories of Water Quality Priorities:
• Category 1 are pollutants subject to an established TMDL.
• Category 2 are pollutants on the State Water Resources Control Board 2010 Clean Water Act
Section 303(d) List of Impaired Water Bodies or those constituents that have sufficient
exceedances to be listed.
• Category 3 for pollutants with observed exceedances that are too infrequent to be listed,and
parameters that are not considered typical pollutants.
The applicable TMDLs are the highest priority for stormwater quality compliance,and thus scheduling
for addressing Water Quality Priorities was developed based on TMDL milestones(i.e.,interim and final
numeric limits)and other representative Regional Board-adopted TMDLs.The scheduling of EWMP
implementation is based on the milestones of the applicable metals,toxics and bacteria TMDLs,as
follows:
• Achieve a 31 percent milestone for the Los Angeles River Metals TMDL by 2017;
• Achieve a 50 percent milestone for the Los Angeles River Metals TMDL by 2024;
• Achieve final compliance(100 percent milestone)for the Los Angeles River Metals TMDL by
2028;
• Achieve final compliance for the Los Angeles/Long Beach Harbors Toxics TMDL by 2032;and
• Achieve final compliance for the Los Angeles River Bacteria TMDL by 2037.
ES.1.2 Watershed Control Measures
The Permit requires the identification of Watershed Control Measures,which are strategies and BMPs
that will implemented through the EWMP,individually or collectively,at watershed-scale to address the
Water Quality Priorities.Section 4 of the EWMP describes the regional projects and Section 5 of the
EWMP describes the distributed BMPs.The total network of Low Impact Development(LID),green
streets and regional BMPs is referred to as the EWMP Implementation Strategy.The BMP capacity to be
implemented by 2037 has the equivalent capacity of 20 Rose Bowl stadiums.For EWMP development it
was important to establish nomenclature/definitions of the various control measures.Distributed and
regional control measures make up the EWMP Implementation Strategy(see figure below for an
illustration of distributed versus regional approaches).
Upper LA River EWMP ES-2 Draft May 2015
Executive Summary
1 40
401 N
' * \
Illustration of Regional(left)and Distributed(right) BMP Approaches
The three main categories of structural BMPs include low-impact development,green streets,and
regional projects,as defined below:
• Low-Impact Development:distributed structural practices that capture,infiltrate,and/or treat
runoff at the parcel,normally less than 10 tributary acres(see LID illustration on next page).
Common LID practices(discussed in Section 5)include bioretention,permeable pavement,and
other infiltration BMPs that prevent runoff from leaving a parcel.Rainfall harvest practices such
as cisterns can also be used to capture rainwater-that would otherwise run off a parcel-and use
it to offset potable water demands.The types of LID incorporated into the EWMP are the LID
ordinance,residential LID,and LID retrofits of public parcels.Since the vast majority(nearly 70
percent) of runoff from the developed portion of the watershed is generated from impervious
areas on parcels,LID is a natural choice as a key EWMP strategy to treat runoff from parcel-based
impervious areas.LID can be viewed as the"first line of defense"due to the fact that the water is
treated on-site before it runs off from the parcel and travels downstream.
8
01.;
st ow
♦
Illustration of LID implemented on a parcel(arrows indicate water pathways)
Upper LA River EWMP ES-3 Draft May 2015
Executive Summary
Green Streets:distributed structural
Los Angeles 4
practices that are typically implemented County
as linear bioretention/biofiltration -ro 4 (�
installed parallel to roadways(see �` lit)Ni �
,- l -1
illustration of a green street on the next t II
County `¢
page).These systems receive runoff f'
from the gutter via curb cuts or curb rl r • !+ t,,,f
extensions(sometimes called bump P• r tA,.: , g d 4
outs)and infiltrate it through native or " f �; =V� 111111pj. I lila
engineered soil media.Permeable ELI
pavement can also be implemented in ." "
tandem or as a standalone practice,such ,tom°- :
as in parking lanes of roads.As shown in It ,- °
the figure to the right,a high percentage + s „a
of streets are planned for green street Green Street Volume Utilization I IP
retrofits for the EMWP Implementation 0%-25% i' r'
Strategy.Green streets have been MiW z5%- %
IN 75
50%-75% Fr
demonstrated to provide"complete I=75%-100%
streets"benefits in addition to City Boundaries , r
ED EWMP Boundary
stormwater management,including County Boundaries
pedestrian safety and traffic calming,
street tree canopy and heat island effect mitigation,increased property values,and even reduced crime
rates.
t ^ Regional projects: Regional projects are
,,. E :41"0,", j ...K centralized facilities located near the
,.*, 04 .J downstream ends of large drainage
' �e'4. `i � areas(typically treating 10s to 100s of
r acres;see illustration on the next page).
t� '• lam
y t f t Regional projects receive large volumes
• ° • of runoff from extensive upstream areas
•�: , •Z o■ • and can provide a cost-effective
ca:An a• • • mechanism for infiltration and pollutant
1:4:, ;• reduction..Runoff is typically diverted•a 9 ,
•, •■ to regional projects after it has already
..11., entered storm drains..Routing offsite
` ► t runoff to public parcels(versus treating
e z surface runoff near its source,as with
'-„ green streets and LID)often allows
regional BMPs to be placed in cost-
-Waterbody � effective locations.The ULAR EWMP
EWMP Boundary
EWMP Regional BMPs includes over 120 regional BMPs(see
• Medium Rarity figure to left),including multi-benefit
o High High regional projects that retain the storm
Very Hgh Rt«lry ' l
water volume from the 85th percentile,
24-hour storm.The EWMP also includes
regional projects on private land to
assure pollutant reductions are achieved.
Upper LA River EWMP ES-4 Draft May 2015
Executive Summary
� A
ro
Illustration of a green street(arrows indicate water pathways)
1
11
Illustration of a regional project(arrows indicate water pathways)
ES.1.3 Reasonable Assurance Analysis
A key element of each EWMP is the Reasonable Assurance Analysis(RAA) (presented in Section 6),
which was used to quantitatively demonstrate that the EWMP Implementation Strategy will address the
Water Quality Priorities.While the Permit prescribes the RAA as a quantitative demonstration that
control measures will be effective,the RAA also uses a modeling process to identify and select potential
control measures to be implemented by the EWMP.The Watershed Management Modeling System
Upper LA River EWMP ES-5 Draft May 2015
Executive Summary
(WMMS)is the basis for the modeling system used to conduct the RAA for the ULAR EWMP.WMMS is
specified in the 2012 MS4 Permit as an approved tool to conduct the RAA.The LACFCD,through a joint
effort with U.S.Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA),developed WMMS specifically to support
informed decisions for managing stormwater.
The RAA demonstrates the calibrated modeling system is able to accurately predict flows and pollutant
concentration in the LA River watershed.The RAA was developed based on complying with the
applicable criteria for"limiting pollutants"during 90th percentile storm conditions.Limiting pollutants
are the pollutants that drive BMP capacity(i.e.,control measures that address the limiting pollutant will
also address other pollutants).The limiting pollutants for ULAR are as follows:
• Wet weather-zinc and E.coli:according to the modeling analysis and review of monitoring data,
control of zinc and E.coli requires BMP capacities that are the largest among the Water Quality
Priority(WQP) pollutants,and thus control of zinc and E.coli has assurance of addressing the
other ULAR wet weather Water Quality Priorities.The RAA for ULAR first identifies the control
measures to attain zinc limits(during the zinc critical condition)and then identifies additional
capacity,if any,needed to achieve E.coli limits.
• Dry weather-E.coli:among all the pollutants monitored during dry weather at mass emission
stations in LA County,E. coli most frequently exceeds receiving water limitation(RWLs).During
monitoring"snapshots"of over 100 outfalls along the LA River,over 85 percent of samples
exceeded limits for E.coli during dry weather through the Bacteria Source Identification Study
along the Los Angeles River(CREST,2008).Among the dry weather WQP pollutants,achievement
of dry weather RWLs for E.coli will be the most challenging.
The RAA was used to select the BMPs in the EWMP Implementation Strategy based on three primary
elements:
• Opportunity-Where can these BMPs be located and how many can be accommodated?
• System Configuration-How is the runoff routed to and through the BMP and what is the
maximum BMP size?
• Cost Functions-What is the relationship between BMP volume/footprint/design elements and
costs?
The WMMS considered millions of BMP scenarios and the EWMP Implementation Strategy was
selected based on the most cost-effective scenarios,while incorporating the input from the EWMP
Group related to the needs and opportunities within the communities.
ES.1.4 Detailed EWMP Implementation Strategy and Compliance Schedule
The EWMP Implementation Strategy(presented in Section 7) is the"recipe for compliance"of each
jurisdiction to address Water Quality Priorities and comply with the provisions of the MS4 Permit.The
EWMP Implementation Strategy includes individual recipes for each of the 18 jurisdictions and each
watershed/assessment area-Los Angeles River above Sepulveda Basin,Los Angeles River below
Sepulveda Basin,Compton Creek,Rio Hondo,Verdugo Wash,Arroyo Seco,Burbank Western Channel,
Tujunga Wash,Bull Creek,Aliso Wash,Bell Creek,McCoy-Dry Canyon,and Browns Canyon Wash.
Implementation of the EWMP Implementation Strategy will provide a BMP-based compliance pathway
for each jurisdiction under the MS4 Permit.
Upper LA River EWMP ES-6 Draft May 2015
Executive Summary
The EWMP Implementation Strategy is expressed in terms of[1] the volumes of stormwater and non-
stormwater to be managed by each jurisdiction to address Water Quality Priorities,and[2]the control
measures that will be implemented to achieve those volume reductions,as follows:
• Compliance Targets:for MS4 compliance determination purposes,the primary metric for EWMP
implementation is the volume of stormwater managed by implemented control measures.The
stormwater volume to be managed is considered the BMP performance goal for the EWMP.
• EWMP Implementation Strategy:the network of LID,green streets and regional BMPs that has
reasonable assurance of achieving the Compliance Targets is referred to as the EWMP
Implementation Strategy.The RAA modeling framework has been used to quantitatively
demonstrate that the EWMP Implementation Strategy will address the Water Quality Priorities.
The EWMP Implementation Strategy identifies the location and type of control measures to be
implemented by each jurisdiction for final compliance by 2037,which includes addressing all
Water Quality Priorities including the limiting pollutants zinc and E. coli.The LID,green street and
regional projects that will address the Water Quality Priorities is a network of control measures
with the equivalent capacity of approximately 20 Rose Bowl stadiums.As shown in the figure
below,for the set of BMP to be implemented across the entire ULAR EWMP area by 2028,regional
projects on public land make up 26 percent of the total control measure capacity.LID and green
streets each make up 14 percent and 30 percent respectively.The EWMP Implementation
Strategy will be validated and updated over time following review of water quality monitoring
data through an adaptive manaegement approach.
4% 1%
LID(ordinance) LID(existing/planned) 4%
LID(public retrofits)
5%
LID(residential program)
31%
Regional BMPs(private)
30%
Green streets
18% ,
Regional BMPs(High)
24- 93 projects
Regional BMPs(Medium)
19 projects
6%
Regional BMPs(Very High)
16 projects
The EWMP Implementation Strategy is ultimately a recipe for compliance for each jurisdiction and
subwatershed in the EWMP area.A total of i,n9 subwatersheds (see figure at top of next page)are provided
a specific set of LID,green street and regional control measures.The BMP density is higher in some areas
[dark blue] because either[1] relatively high load reductions are required,or[2] BMPs in those areas were
relatively cost-effective(e.g.,due to high soil infiltration rates).The EMWP includes tabular versions of the
map to the right in detailed appendices for each jurisdiction.
Upper LA River EWMP ES-7 Draft May 2015
Executive Summary
The total capacity of LID,green Y,
streets and regional BMPs to be
implemented by each jurisdiction by -
2037(the final compliance date for
addressing E co/i)is shown in the A.a'=.,
bar chart at the bottom of this page. '' ( '" '�`'r`{Oft
The strategy varies by jurisdiction a
depending on the pollutant g ;l 4/ r Ns '
reduction requirements and BMP
1y i
P references.The top panel groups * ' Al4 '
the BMP types into LID,green
streets and regional BMPs,while the
bottom panel provides more ,01.4s- t,
resolution for the BMP sub- ~�- a `'
categories. >, s `' ' 9
_ !.
The pace of implementation for the ULAR EWMP Jurisdiction 601 :,, -
EWMP Implementation Strategy is BMP Capacity(inches) ' ,
rapid due to the compliance dates <=0.2 ,
specified in the LA River Metals '0'2 °'4 tt
TMDL(interim milestones in 2017 - >as-as 4 44, =e' N
and 2024),Los Angeles Harbor - '°•S ■
Toxics TMDL(final compliance by 2032)and Los Angeles River Bacteria TMDL(final compliance by
2037).The scheduling of BMPs across all 18 jurisdictions to be implemented to achieve those
milestones/compliance dates is shown in the figure on the next page).
a tID ■streets .Regional Tet1111010adry
,Y s00 �" 2,500
it EWMP Implementation Strategy for Final Compliance by 2037 510 3,065 r
1• 400 2,000 t
n 240 -',
a 300 262 1.500
s p
173 1
m 200 60 us 109
2.000
a .. 79 66 72 Sl S< Q q
300 A M :-. al , 30 500 1
al = 00 f .m
JI 4 ....ii W no nal � 0
0
I •2 x o r 8 o a g e g L
I
. i f, x s; a „ E I sf i 8
a s1R
aLL a L a a W o B 'S §
a
700 m Regional BMPS(private) 3,500
E m Regional BMPs(Medium) ' 3,065 •S
b 600 Regional 664PS(Nigh) 3.000 d
Regional BMPs(Very HO) 510 kl
X 500 ■6roen sent 2.500
LIDIp,bI(residential program)
1pu
400 11 btic retrofits) 2.000
um LID(e.ISGng/planned) a
300 240 262 mu OD(ordinance)
1,500 s
i! 200 173 lu II —Implementation—Implemematwn Cost t 000 m
N 79 30 ■I 61
■ 56 sl 54 500
72
A 100
0 5._ !� aES� ® mil am. 0 S
N C r e 4 7, & n W 2 n 9 Z QQ
t « C T 1 S
c t
2 m t u 1., •a, R ,2 c r 3 I § Si 1 a ',8
a " ll 34 1 2 a s a a g a
Contributing EWMP Jurisdictions
Upper LA River EWMP ES-8 Draft May 2015
Executive Summary
F 6,000
2017 2024 2028 2032 2037
5,000 Milestone Year
•Total Regional BMPs
4,000
a •Green Streets
3 3,000 ■Total LID BMPs
m2,000 • Residual Toxics
Source Control
1,000 262 Measures
Q 2
O ut u
m V1 N C
2 to
m
Interim Final
Upper Los Angeles River EWMP
ES.1.5 Adaptive Management Framework
One of the key components of the EWMP is the incorporation of an Adaptive Management Approach for
evaluating monitoring data and"lessons learned"or experience gained during implementation to
evaluate EWMP implementation progress.The Permit specifies that adaptive management process will
be revisited every two years to evaluate the EWMP and update the program.The EWMP strategy will
evolve based on monitoring results by identifying updates to the EWMP Implementation Plan to
increase its effectiveness.
ES.1.6 EWMP Implementation Costs and Financial Strategy
The costs to implement the EWMP will require orders of magnitude increases in stormwater program
funding.The capital costs to address Water Quality Priorities by 2037 is estimated at over$5.7 billion,
with total operations and maintenance costs exceeding$210 million per year once fully implemented
(see table below).Expenditures for the EWMP Implementation Strategy will be coordinated with other
regional efforts to improve habitat,promote greenways and increase access to the LA River and its
tributaries.In order to garner community support for financing the costs,the multi-benefits of the LID,
green streets and regional projects will be quantified including improved aesthetics,increased
recreational opportunity,water supply augmentation and climate change resiliency.The financial
strategy presented in this EWMP outlines a set of multiple approaches that allows each jurisdiction to
consider and select the strategies that best fit their specific preferences.
31%Metals TMDL 50%Metals TMDL 50%Metals TMDL
Present to 31% Milestone(2017) Milestone(2024)to Milestone(2024)to
Metals TMDL to 50%Metals Final Compliance Final Compliance Total at Final
Milestone(2017) TMDL Milestone with Metals TMDL with Bacteria TMDL
(2024) (2028) (2037)
Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr
168.78 17.01 458.65 55.27 2,889.50 176.91 2,580.94 210.84 6,097.87 210.84
Costs in units of$million
Upper LA River EWMP ES-9 Draft May 2015
Section 9
EWMP Implementation Costs and Financial
Strategy
The purpose of this section is to present costs for constructing,operating and maintaining the control
measures in the EWMP Implementation Strategy,along with the financial strategy for addressing
those costs.For the purposes of the EWMP,the financial strategy is defined as the strategic options
available to the Group members for financing the program costs associated with the MS4 Permit.The
section provides an overview of the following components of the EWMP financial strategy:
• Estimates of costs to construct,operate and maintain control measures(9.1);
• Assessment of existing stormwater program costs and funding sources(9.2);and
• Identification of financial strategies for financing program costs(9.3).
9.1 EWMP Implementation Costs
The purpose of this section is to present the order-of-magnitude cost estimates for the EWMP
Implementation Strategy.The estimated program costs were developed using the methodology
described in Section 6.3.3.The general approach for cost estimate is based on"cost functions"that
describe cost as a function of BMP size parameters(volume,depth,area,etc.).Details on the cost
function methodology is provided in the documentation for the WMMS model
(http://dpw.lacounty.gov/wmd/wmms/res.aspx).The cost functions used for this EWMP are
presented in Table 9-1,which have been updated from those in the original WMMS39.The cost
functions are based on generic,modular cost functions developed specifically for LA County.The cost
functions40 encompass planning,design,permits,construction,O&M,and post-construction
inspection,where applicable.Cost estimates are applicable only for the modeled BMP configurations
specified in Section 6 and Appendix 6.D.Note that costs do not account for inflation,interest,or time-
value of money.
The costs for structural BMPs provided here are considered to be planning level only(order of
magnitude),and can be refined as EWMP implementations progresses with the use of actual BMP
implementation costs.Costs for enhanced MCMs and other institutional BMPs have not been included
here and are in addition to the Capital and O&M costs.
39 The O&M cost estimates were further refined based on interviews with municipal maintenance staff in Southern
California(City of San Diego and Tetra Tech,2011;Caltrans,City of La Mesa,City of Lemon Grove,City of San Diego,
County of San Diego,and Unified Port of San Diego,2013).Routine maintenance was assumed to occur annually,while
intermittent maintenance activities were assume to occur every four years.Replacement costs were not considered
under the assumption that systems will be properly maintained and functional throughout and beyond the
implementation schedule.
40 While the cost functions in Section 6 were based on 20-year costs,this section separates the annual O&M costs from
the capital costs to allow for cost estimates over time.For the RAA cost optimization,20-year costs were used to ensure
that O&M costs were considered when deeming a BMP scenario to be cost-effective.
Upper LA River EWMP 9-1 Draft May 2015
Section 9•EWMP Implementation Costs and Financial Strategy
Table 9-1.Summary of Annualized BMP Cost Estimation Formulas
Formulas For Estimating Total Costs 1
BMP
Category BMP Types Capital Costs Annual O&M
Cost=17.688(A)+2.165(Vt)
Bioretention with Underdrain +2.64(Vm)+3.3(Vu) Cost=2.54(A)
Bioretention without Underdrain Cost=9.438(A)+2.165(Vt)+ Cost=2.54(A)
2.64(Vm)
LID and
Green Residential LID Cost=4.000(A) --
Streets Permeable Pavement with
Underdrain Cost=33.594(A)+3.3(Vu) Cost=1.74(A)
Permeable Pavement without
Underdrain Cost=25.344(A) Cost=1.74(A)
Pump Cost=56,227*(Pump Capacityrh)+$1,207,7362
ReRegional Regional Cost=10.01(A)+2.296(Vt)+
B Re ional Project on Public Parcel Cost=1.918(A)
BMPs 2.8(Vm)
Regional Project on Private Parcel Cost=139.01(A)+2.296(Vt) Cost=1.918(A)
+2.8(Vm)
1-Formulas describe annualized life cycle costs including routine and intermittent O&M using the following variables:(A)is
the area of the BMP footprint in square feet,(Vt)is the total volume of the BMP in cubic feet,(Vm)is the volume of the BMP
soil media in cubic feet,and(Vu)is the volume of the BMP underdrain in cubic feet.
2-The resolution of WMMS output precludes the certain estimation of pump station quantity and capacity.Note that
incidental costs associated with pump station operation will likely be incurred during implementation.
9.1.1 EWMP Implementation Costs by Control Measure Type and
EWMP/TMDL Milestones
The total estimated costs for all control measures in the EWMP Implementation Strategy(LID,Green
Streets,and Regional)are shown in Table 9-2.The capital and O&M costs are reported for the same
milestones detailed in the EWMP Implementation Strategy.The implementation cost schedule relies
on initial capital costs to achieve the control measure capacities at the milestone year,and then
recurring annual O&M costs are accumulated over the compliance time frame.
Table 9-2.Total Costs by Milestone for each ULAR EWMP Group member($millions)1(Part 1)
31%Metals TMDL 50%Metals TMDL 50%Metals TMDL
Present to 31% Milestone(2017) Milestone(2024)to Milestone(2024)to
Metals TMDL to 50%Metals Final Compliance Final Compliance Total at Final
Agency Program Milestone(2017) TMDL Milestone with Metals TMDL with Bacteria TMDL
(2024) (2028) (2037)
Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital 0&M/yr
LID 0.08 0.36 0.73 0.00 1.17
Streets 2.73 7.48 19.67 0.00 29.87
Alhambra Regional 7.45 9.14 0.17 0.00 16.77
Private 0.00 0.00 62.80 49.86 112.66
Subtotal 10.26 1.19 16.97 3.17 83.37 6.52 49.86 7.18 160.47 7.18
LID 0.19 1.38 4.28 0.00 5.86
Streets 1.45 7.45 22.18 0.00 31.08
Burbank
Regional 0.83 3.26 2.02 0.00 6.11
Private 0.00 0 30 0.00 1 74 104.42 6.55 98.59 7.84 203.01 7.84
Upper LA River EWMP 9-2 Draft May 2015
Section 9•EWMP Implementation Costs and Financial Strategy
Table 9-2.Total Costs by Milestone for each ULAR EWMP Group member($millions)1(Part 1)
31%Metals TMDL 50%Metals TMDL 50%Metals TMDL
Present to 31% Milestone(2017) Milestone(2024)to Milestone(2024)to
Metals TMDL to 50%Metals Final Compliance Final Compliance Total at Final
Agency Program Milestone(2017) TMDL Milestone with Metals TMDL with Bacteria TMDL
(2024) (2028) (2037)
Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr
Subtotal 2.47 12.09 132.90 98.59 246.06
LID 0.29 0.11 0.20 0.00 0.61
Streets 0.41 0.29 0.38 0.00 1.08
I
Calabasas Regional 0.72 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.74
Private 0.00 19.85 84.72 6.57 111.13
Subtotal 1.43 0.14 20.28 0.44 85.29 1.60 6.57 1.69 113.57 1.69
LID 0.00 0.16 2.83 0.00 2.99
Streets 0.06 5.18 49.50 0.00 54.75
Glendale Regional 0.00 2.25 5.94 0.00 8.19
Private 0.00 0.05 28.94 198.26 227.25
Subtotal 0.06 0.01 7.64 0.93 87.21 8.36 198.26 10.97 293.17 10.97
LID 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Streets 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.06
Hidden j
Hills Regional 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Private 3.52 3.76 3.78 0.00 11.06
Subtotal 3.52 0.05 3.79 0.10 3.80 0.15 0.00 0.15 11.12 0.15 _.
LID 0.00 0.13 0.14 0.00 0.27
Streets 0.39 1.82 3.30 0.00 5.50
La Canada Regional 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.12
Flintridge
Private 0.00 0.05 27.41 41.53 68.99
Subtotal 0.39 0.05 2.13 0.29 30.84 1.06 41.53 1.61 74.89 1.61
LID 4.32 13.67 59.58 0.00 77.58
Streets 42.88 98.43 280.91 0.00 422.22
Los Regional 29.45 61.55 60.99 0.00 151.99
Angeles
Private 14.26 100.88 1,349.46 1,703.14 3,167.74
Subtotal 90.91 9.25 274.54 30.91 1,750.94 95.68 1,703.14 118.07 3,819.52 118.07
LID 0.48 0.83 3.76 0.00 5.07
Streets 2.07 3.11 15.54 0.00 20.72
Montebello Regional 1.59 2.48 3.60 0.00 7.67
Private 0.00 0.00 40.42 62.33 102.75
Subtotal 4.14 0.49 6.42 1.22 63.32 444 62.33 5.26 136.21 5.26
LID 0.02 0.03 0.12 0.00 0.16
Streets 1.83 3.22 13.84 0.00 18.89
Monterey Regional 1.42 3.08 3.30 0.00 7.80
Park
Private 0.00 0.00 64.32 36.05 100.38
Subtotal 3.26 0.37 6.33 109 81.57 3.94 36.05 4.41 127.22 4.41
LID 1.04 1.44 11.03 0.00 13.51
Pasadena
Streets 5.61 1.49 8.25 3.38 41.64 11.45 0.00 1248 55.49 12.48
Upper LA River EWMP 9-3 Draft May 2015
d i
y, O
1O N
p T
N n a0 00 .--1 N 0 V c
f0
R M O 00 M H N en L
•U c_ ,V
C LL co
C l"1 A
To
LL L O
-0 CO r p
• d ^ N r n t10 C b O tm0 ? tNO. t10 ~ u01 VV m O ^ t00 n N aN0 um1 t��1 n tn�f Vnf O Off c0,^ 1/1
to Y N H N O N O O O T N N N Y�1 OD N N O �"i t.1 rl n $ O O1 1 N M N .i N O
VI VI
O C
C E y
O — C u Q n a0. N 01 1 n O0 N
ro .-
� N g,'
111 O M en .i N 1n
O
n m n
CU E N s c o t °
O QO - O O O O O O N O O O '� � O p O O O O p 8
" co O 1 00 V a p p O of m T O
E d O2 L O 4 ^ O O O N N O O O N N O O O N N O O O ,y� N O O O N N O O O ,.a a O O O
y H
,g2 3
CL 2 E
0. N J _T
w O O Q 0 2 1111 Q CO CO o CO 1n
• L ,2 O A 2 40 00 O N N N .-I 11'1
01 W �_a T. m' 0
0 a : d o A o
o a « � d` yy pp (�
✓ ry L m 00 a°fi• .-I O o ON n N N o .-1 v1 Ln G (1n ,^,1 .1 N 0 d °^° R N O 0 1.N1 CO a tm0 °O1 N a N M °D V
N o a1 c .. m ^ m o 0 to o to o N m .i ry o
N I y '; 1 .NN1 O Ot O C. O o0 .-1 N O 0 m W 0 ti 0 CO N O .-I O ,.„, ,,,, O co .-1 .-1 ...1 O ti .i N N 41
I i I I I I 1 i ._i___ .I 1 i i I I i i I i i i i i l I I I i i i I i i
n o ti , g - aI q .i
R N 1 ^ ^
t 1-N y o -O'1 «ii d o
fp r d d N O •
I a gb2N , 1 I ■ 7 I 1 1 1 I I ■ I I I I a I 1 1 T-
O 0 2 m O 0 N O N O O O O - O .-1 N n l n 0 N 0 O 1 O 0° ta)0 ccoo u01 N M N 0 m 1 O 0 N On 000 O 1n en m .a r 1D 0 .1i 0 N 0 0 00 O 0 .-I 0 .-I O ( C O 0 of O of to O CO 0 .i O N H 0 .-I V O tG 0 to 0 0 N
CU C _ i_ f I i i I I i 1 L1 i i i i i i I1 L- 1 i I I i i _1__L_L_1__ i i i I
O
v"i n . .i n fn
0J O o a .i m in �N] pq
M 2_ o G G d O d 6
C w F •
C ... to C
.Q y C°1 I. I 1 0 44 m R 0 O ^ 0 00 0 01 °° 00 0 N 0 V1 0 0 to n 01 10 0 .i 0 m m 0 V1 0 0 0 0 O
M a 6 C to O .N-1 0 . m O 00 00 II O O O O O O N O 0 to 0 0 Ni O N 0 O 0 0 N O 0 0 O O O I O O , O CO
cri
0 I E I f 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 4- 1 1 1 ' - / 1 I 4 t 1 . —
G.
E To A 1 A R A A A c
co 2 c o G W A « C ^ c N C ^ A • 0 0 C N ^ C • A . C U.m ° C d m a C N C d !
O o O >m > a to a v > c m i a v m > a > d m > a d m > a w 0
O 6 H J N K d
N J h C d In J N cc d N J N K d to J VI C d N = VI G 6 N J H OL 6 N 41
N
01 v o ?+ o
w d L = •CL GI X m d E 0 f 5 0 0 y u v
`to a o LL c c ton V1 0 r Q.
I.- C N N 1 Q.
D
Section 9•EWMP Implementation Costs and Financial Strategy
Table 9-2.Total Costs by Milestone for each ULAR EWMP Group member($millions)1(Part 1)
31%Metals TMDL 50%Metals TMDL 50%Metals TMDL
Present to 31% Milestone(2017) Milestone(2024)to Milestone(2024)to
Metals TMDL to 50%Metals Final Compliance Final Compliance Total at Final
Agency Program Milestone(2017) TMDL Milestone with Metals TMDL with Bacteria TMDL
(2024) (2028) (2037)
Capital 0&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital 0 8M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr
LID 0.98 2.03 12.74 0.00 15.76
Streets 7.57 11.66 82.50 0.00 101.73
Uninc.LA Regional 8.46 13.05 20.25 0.00 41.76
County
Private 9.96 9.24 116.45 156.40 292.07
Subtotal 26.98 2 14 35.98 5 36 231.95 20 72 156.40 22 77 451.31 22.77
Total 168.78 17.01 458.65 55.27 2,889.50 176.91 2,580.94 210.84 6,097.87 210.84
1 O&M costs for each milestone includes cost from previous milestone(i.e.the costs are cumulative)
2 Cost estimates for the City of South El Monte include only those portions draining to Rio Hondo. Costs for the
portions of the City of South El Monte that drain to the San Gabriel River are presented in Appendix 1B.
9.1.2 EWMP Costs by Tributary Area
The EWMP costs are presented for each tributary/assessment area in Table 9-3.
Table 9-3 Total Costs for each Subwatershed in the ULAR EWMP Area($millions)(Part 1)
I
Aliso Wash Arroyo Seco Bell(reek Browns Canyon Wash Bull Creek I
Agency
t
Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr
Alhambra 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Burbank 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Calabasas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Glendale 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hidden Hills 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
La Canada Flintridge 0.00 0.00 52.41 1.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Los Angeles 242.13 7.29 22.08 2.18 72.92 1.46 169.72 3.64 225.91 7.33
Montebello 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Monterey Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Pasadena 0.00 0.00 26.03 1.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Rosemead 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
San Fernando 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
San Gabriel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
San Marino 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
South El Monte 0.00 0.00 2.97 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
South Pasadena 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Temple City 8.52 0.11 18.30 1.25 1.27 0.02 16.83 0.22 6.10 0.54
Uninc.LA County 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 250.65 7.40 122.03 6.33 74.64 1.49 186.55 3.86 232.01 7.87
Upper LA River EWMP 9-5 Draft May 2015
Section 9•EWMP Implementation Costs and Financial Strategy
Table 9-3 Total Costs for each Watershed in the ULAR EWMP Area($millions)(Part 2)
Burbank Western Compton Creek Los Angeles River- Los Angeles River- McCoy-Dry Canyon
Agency
Channel Reach 2 Reach 6 Creek
Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr
Alhambra 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.50 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Burbank 150.35 512 • 0.00 0.00 95.71 2.73 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Calabasas 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 113.57 1.69
Glendale • 3.22 0.13 0.00 0.00 142.49 5.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 i
I
Hidden Hills 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.67 0.14
La Canada Flintridge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 •
Los Angeles 83.69 2.27 291.60 16.32 1,222.66 38.34 727.71 20.55 177.79. 3.03
r-
Montebello i 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Monterey Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 i 0.00 11.26 0.31 i 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Pasadena 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.48 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Rosemead 0.00 r 0.00 0.00 i 0.00 i 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
San Fernando 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
San Gabriel • 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
•
San Marino 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 i 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
South El Monte 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.65 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
• South Pasadena 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
i
Temple City ' 0.00 0.00 125.13 ' 8.54 102.41 3.55 17.25 I 0.23 14.39 0.19
Uninc.LA County 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 • 0.00 0.00
•
Total 237.27 7.52 416.73 24.86 1,639.32 52.82 • 744.97 20.77 316.42
•
•
Upper LA River EWMP 9-6 Draft May 2015
Section 9•EWMP Implementation Costs and Financial Strategy
Table 9-3 Total Costs for each Watershed in the ULAR EWMP Area($millions)(Part 3)
Rio Hondo Tujunga Wash Verdugo Wash Total at Final
Agency
Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr Capital O&M/yr
Alhambra 121.97 6.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 160.47 7.18
Burbank 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 246.06 7.84
Calabasas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 113.57 1.69
Glendale 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 147.21 4.91 293.17 10.97
Hidden Hills 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.12 0.15
La Canada Flintridge 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.32 0.39 74.89 1.61
Los Angeles 0.00 0.00 564.58 15.38 18.72 0.29 3,819.52 118.07
Montebello 136.21 5.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 136.21 5.26
Monterey Park 115.96 4.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 127.22 4.41
Pasadena 206.86 11.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 235.37 12.48
Rosemead 110.11 3.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 110.11 3.76
San Fernando 0.00 0.00 29.65 0.80 0.00 0.00 29.65 0.80
San Gabriel 80.40 3.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 80.40 3.32
San Marino 47.70 3.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.70 3.19
South El Monte 6.47 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.09 2.10
South Pasadena 47.56 3.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.56 3.47
Temple City 97.90 6.52 5.64 0.15 37.57 1.46 451.31 22.77
Uninc.LA County 80.44 1.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 80.44 1.77
Total 1,051.58 49.48 599.87 16.33 225.83 7.06 6,097 87 210.84
9.1.3 Unit Capital Costs by Parcel
The EWMP costs will have a significant impact on each jurisdiction.In determining the impact to each
jurisdiction,it is possible to conduct a high-level calculation of dividing the capital costs by the
number of parcels in the watershed.The estimate number of parcels in the ULAR EWMP area is
770,655.At a total capital cost of$5.80 billion(through 2037),the calculated unit capital cost is
$7,913 per parcel.It should be noted that this is a very coarse metric.Parcels vary in size dramatically
throughout the cities and the county,and ultimately costs will likely be developed relevant to parcel
size,parcel imperviousness,and possibly other factors.
9.2 Existing Stormwater Program Costs and Funding
Sources
Each jurisdiction in the ULAR EWMP area has existing recurring costs associated with stormwater
activities.Table 9-5 is a summary listing of existing costs and associated revenue source based on the
results of a survey of Group members.It is assumed that the recurring costs will continue,and costs to
implement the EWMP will be in addition to those costs.The Financial Strategy is focused on
developing a set of options to address the expected additional costs,and does not address funding
requirements for existing stormwater programs.
Upper LA River EWMP 9-7 Draft May 2015
Section 9•EWMP Implementation Costs and Financial Strategy
Table 9-4.Existing Stormwater Program Costs for ULAR EWMP Group
Existing
Utility
Total Costs
Jurisdiction (Yes/No) Funding Source Description of Costs ($)
Alhambra No General Fund Management,O&M and —$980k/yr
Capital
Various Funding Street Sweeping,
Burbank No Sources Inspections,Connections, ^'$3.8M/yr
TMDLs,and O&M
Glendale No General and Management,O&M and I '$750k/yr
Enterprise Funds Capital
O&M and Capital,Planning,
Los Angeles Yes Stormwater Fund Enforcement and "'$30M/yr
Monitoring
Montebello No Water Fund Management and Catch —$120k/yr
Basin
Monterey Park No General O&M,Street Sweeping and —$5.3M/yr
Fund/Grants Trash Collection
South Pasadena No General Fund Management,
O&M and —$250k/yr
Capital
Temple City No General Fund Management,O&M and ^'$90k/yr
Capital
Management,Outreach,
Unincorporated LA '80M/yr
County Yes General Fund inspection,enforcement, (County wide)
monitoring •
9.3 Financial Strategies
The costs to implement the EWMP will require orders of magnitude increases in stormwater program
funding.The capital and operating costs for EWMP control measures are large and will span decades.
Expenditures for the EWMP Implementation Strategy will need to be coordinated with other regional
efforts to improve habitat,promote greenways and increase access to the LA River and its tributaries.
In order to garner community support for financing the costs,it will likely be necessary to quantify the
multi-benefits of the LID,green streets and regional projects including improved aesthetics,increase
recreational opportunity,water supply augmentation and climate change resiliency.The financial
strategy to fund the LID,green streets and regional projects in the EWMP will require a coordinated,
regional approach.It will be important for each jurisdiction to have the opportunity to customize the
financial strategy to the preferences of its community.As such,the financial strategy presented in this
EWMP outlines a set of multiple approaches that allows each jurisdiction to consider and select the
strategies that best fit their specific preferences.The detailed financial strategy for EWMP costs will be
highly dependent and vary by jurisdiction.
The following are high-level alternatives that can be examined for each jurisdiction or the entire
EWMP Group.The alternatives are categorized by type.Acknowledgement is given to Storm water
Funding Options-Providing Sustainable Water Quality Funding in Los Angeles County,a report
authored by Ken Farfsing and Richard Watson dated May 21,2014.
Upper LA River EWMP 9-8 Draft May 2015
Section 9•EWMP Implementation Costs and Financial Strategy
9.3.1 Grants
The financial strategies associated with grants available to the EWMP Group include the following:
Description
Apply for grants through the recently passed Prop 1—2014 Water Bond.Over$400M is available for stormwater capture,
IRWMP and urban creek restoration projects.
Apply for other grants(state and federal)for stormwater improvement,beach water quality improvement,and green
infrastructure projects.(e.g.Prop.84,CBI,etc.)
9.3.2 Fees and Charges
The financial strategies associated with fees and charges available to the EWMP Group include the
following:
Description
Use existing revenue streams for stormwater/water supply/flood control projects to support stormwater quality projects
AB 2403—Use new state law to pass rate increase for stormwater projects that have a water supply benefit and minimize
the Proposition 218 process.
Use revenue generated from a Stormwater Impact Fee(or"In-Lieu"Fee)to comply with LID ordinances to fund mitigation
bank for regional projects.
Increase solid waste management fees to cover the cost of enhanced street sweeping and other measures to reduce trash
for compliance with TMDLs.
Consider adopting water conservation fees that would provide funding for reducing irrigated runoff in order to both
conserve groundwater and reduce dry weather pollution.
Continue to pursue a county-wide stormwater parcel tax initiative(modified after the 2012 Clean Water Clean Beaches
Initiative).This could be tied to AB 2403 too.
Consider assessments on car rentals since some of the pollution in our waterways is from cars driven on local streets.
9.3.3 Legislative and Policy
The financial strategies available to the EWMP Group that require legislative or policy changes include
the following:
Description
Develop stormwater retention credit trading market to use private equity.
Ask the Metropolitan Water District(MWD)of Southern California to reevaluate their approach for managing the Local
Resource Program(LRP)to fund stormwater capture and use projects that offset the use of imported water supplies.
Adopt SB 485 to allow Los Angeles County Sanitation District to manage stormwater including collection of stormwater
fees
Pursue pollutant source control legislation patterned after SB 346 that either limits pollutants of concerns in products(e.g.
copper in brake pads,or zinc in tires)or assesses a fee on those products that can be used by local governments to
mitigate those pollutants.
Form Special Assessment Districts and fees tailored to the Watershed Management Groups.
Explore the use of Enhanced Infrastructure Finance Districts tailored to the Watershed Management Group,as outlined in
recently adopted(2014)California legislation SB628.
2014 Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014(WRRDA).Various funding opportunities should be explored.
Upper LA River EWMP
Section 9•EWMP Implementation Costs and Financial Strategy
9.3.4 Future Steps
The financial strategies mentioned herein are options for funding sources,some or all of which will
need to be implemented to develop a comprehensive financial solution.Future steps include:
• Development of public support for financial strategies through outreach efforts
• Creation of inter-jurisdiction EWMP financial working group
• Development of a more formal Stormwater Program Financial Plan which would typically
include the following components:
- Implementation of New Fee or Charge;
- Establishment of New Enterprise Fund;
- Cash and Debt Financing;
- Operating and Capital Reserves;
- Cash Flow Modeling.
The EWMP Group as a whole,as well as individual Group members are currently prioritizing and
selecting the specific financing strategies that best fit their needs.
Upper LA River EWMP 9-10 Draft May 2015