Transcript Darlin

Department of Water Resources
Urban Streams Restoration Program
Working Together To:

Restore Watersheds

Reduce Property
Damages

Renovate Town Centers
Traditional Stream Management

Historically delegated to single purpose
agencies with specific goals (i.e. flood
control, water conveyance, mosquito
abatement, minimizing creek corridor to
maximize development).

Ecosystem health generally a priority only
in park areas.
Limitations of Single Purpose Flood
Control Projects

High costs

Long timeframes

Maintenance costs

Little regard for environmental quality

Possible violation of environmental laws

Unsafe during high water events

Potential fragmentation of communities
USRP Program Background

Created in response to limitations of singlepurpose flood control projects and traditional
stream management practices

Enabling legislation: Urban Creek Restoration
and Flood Control Act of 1985

Authorized DWR to make grants and provide
technical assistance to local governments and
organizations for multi-objective projects
Program Objectives

Assist communities in reducing damages
from stream bank and watershed
instability and floods

Restore environmental and aesthetic
values of streams

Encourage stewardship and maintenance
of streams by the community
Potential Benefits of
Urban Stream Restoration

Reduce flood damage and erosion

Re-establish fish and wildlife habitat

Improve water quality

Increase groundwater recharge

Provide educational/recreational opportunities

Provide focal point for urban revitalization

Encourage community stewardship
Projects Funded by USRP

Creek cleanups

Bioengineering bank stabilization

Vegetation management

Channel reconfiguration to improve
geomorphology

Land/right of way purchases

Daylighting
Case Studies

Dry Creek, Roseville

Fresno River, Oakhurst

Poinsett Park, El Cerrito
Dry Creek, Roseville

2-phase project consisting of an erosion
assessment/management plan and restoration

Channel reconfiguration, bank stabilization and
revegetation at three key sites

Improved fish passage

Collaborative effort between the City of Roseville
and the Dry Creek Conservancy
Project Location
After
Darling Way Site
Before
Adelante Site, Before
Adelante Site, After
Fish Passage Improvement

Adelante
 Spawning

gravels and resting habitat
Downstream of Darling Way site
migration access – modifications to
banks and stream around sewer line
 Easier
Fish Passage
Before and After
Before
After
Fresno River, Oak/China Creeks,
Oakhurst
Fresno River, Oak/China Creeks,
Oakhurst

Project Background
–
Rural foothills community near Yosemite
–
Development around waterways destabilized banks and
increased flood damage to surrounding homes and
businesses
–
Oakhurst River Parkway Committee formed to address
issues
–
Funding and restoration activities pursued in a
community-wide effort, with assistance from multiple
agencies, businesses, and citizens
Project Activities
• stream restoration
• erosion control
• trail system stabilization
• creek clean-ups
• vegetation management
• community education
Before, ~1996
After, June 2000
Poinsett Park, El Cerrito
Poinsett Park, Project Background

City’s storm drain system inadequate, resulting in
localized flooding

City commissioned study to evaluate pipe conditions
and develop master plan of corrections

Local residents approved $6.3 million bond to finance
repairs

City chose stream restoration alternative over pipe
repairs in some locations

Short-term increased costs for restoration, but longterm decreased costs for pipe repairs

DWR grant was to finance a demo “daylighting” project
at Poinsett Park for the restoration alternative
Before, 1995
After, 2000
Healthy Streams,
Vibrant Communities
USRP Contact Information

Sara Denzler, Program Coordinator
(916) 651-9625, [email protected]

Susan Oldland, Central CA Contact
(916) 651-9626, [email protected]