SALT LAKE CITY
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES
Red Butte Creek Riparian Corridor Study
Public Workshop 3
May 14, 2009
Facilitated by BIO-WEST, Inc.
Workshop Presentation Outline
• Review of Workshops 1 and 2
–
–
–
–
–
Purpose/Need of Study
Study Plan and Schedule
Riparian Area Definition
Riparian Corridor Functions
Baseline Assessment
• Recommended Types of Improvement Projects
• What is our collective vision for the Red Butte
Riparian Corridor
Why is SLC Conducting This Study?
• To assess current
conditions
• To determine desired
future conditions
• To identify
opportunities
for restoration
and remediation
of Red Butte Creek
Why is SLC Conducting This Study?
• To use the information,
data, and maps
developed during the
study to inform
planning, permitting,
and administrative
processes of the
Riparian Corridor
Overlay District
Ordinance (RCO)
What Will the Riparian Corridor
Study Management Plan Include?
• Statement(s) of desired future
conditions
• Identification of restoration and remediation
projects
• Cost analysis and ranking of projects
• Identification of project funding mechanisms
• Presentation of best management practices
• Inventory of GIS-based information
• Continuation of public outreach
What Does a Riparian Corridor Study
Involve?
Salt Lake City Public Utilities
BIO-WEST
Planning & Public Outreach
public workshops (four)
subcommittee/stakeholder meetings
(quarterly)
web site comment form
Baseline Condition Assessment
vegetation
stream condition
Historical and Current Trend
Assessment
Management Plan / Desired Future Conditions
Timeline and Milestones
Identify Improvement Projects
Field
Evaluation
Fall 2008
Public
Workshop 1
Historical
Trend
Assessment
Winter 2009
Public
Workshop 2
High Flow
Field
Evaluation
Spring 2009
Public
Workshop 3
Draft and Final
Mgt. Plans
Summer 2009
Public
Workshop 4
Riparian Area Definition:
• Zone of influence between aquatic and
upland areas
• Sometimes defined as including channel,
floodplain, and transition zone
(Illustration by G. Zaimes; based on BLM 1991).
Riparian Corridor Functions:
• Wildlife and Aquatic Habitat
– 60% of vertebrate species in arid
Southwest rely on riparian areas
(Ohmart and Anderson 1982)
• Shading
and Water-Temperature
Control
• Aesthetics
• Recreation and Open Space
• Floodplain Storage
and Flood Damage Reduction
Riparian Corridor Functions:
• Wildlife Travel
Corridors/Connectivity
• Organic Matter Inputs
• Stream Stability/Safety
• Pollution and Nutrient
Filtration
• Storm Water
and Irrigation Water
Conveyance
Baseline Condition Assessment
Baseline Condition Assessment
Baseline Assessment Results
•Review
Aesthetics Function – Litter
• Wildlife Habitat Function – Invasive
Plants
• Filtration Function – Lack of shrub
and understory cover
• Stability Function
– Erosion from storm runoff and drain
outfalls
– Scour around concrete
– Culverts narrower than channel width
– On-going stream channel adjustments
– Altered hydrology
Improvement Projects: Working
Toward Solutions
• Riparian Corridor Projects
– General Projects
•Appropriate at any scale
– Local-scale Projects
•Relevant to specific individual
locations or features (storm drain,
culvert, etc.)
Figure from SLCO 2009
– Reach-scale Projects
•Stream bed and bank stability should
be addressed at this scale
• Watershed-scale Projects
Riparian Corridor-scale Projects
General Projects : Stream Cleanup
• Volunteer stream cleanup
– Organize a group to pick up trash along specific
portions of the riparian corridor
• Mechanized trash cleanup
– Heavy, over-sized items requiring mechanical
equipment to remove
• Stream adoption
– http://www.adoptawaterbody.utah.gov/
• Continued public outreach
From adoptawaterbody website
General Projects: Weed Management
• Weed Management and Revegetation
– Improve Habitat and Filtration Functions
• Weed-Management Techniques
–
–
–
–
–
Physical
Cultural – replant with desirable species
Biological
Chemical (herbicides)
Salt Lake County Natural Areas Plan
•Includes detailed information sheets by species
http://www.recreation.slco.org/planning/natural.html
General Projects : Weed
Management
General Projects : Weed
Management
• Non-native invasive species common
in riparian corridor but not on State
or County “noxious weed” lists
– English ivy and periwinkle
•Shallow root systems = poor stabilization
•Low stem density = poor filtration
•Exclude other plants
•Habitat for rodents
–
–
–
–
Siberian elm
Russian olive
Tamarisk
Tree of heaven
General Projects: Revegetation
• SLC Riparian Corridor Recommended Plant List
– Four lists according to mapped vegetation
community type
– Canopy, shrub, understory species
– Species appropriate for sun, shade, part sun/shade
• Planting Techniques
–
–
–
–
Site and seedbed preparation
Seeding/planting guidelines
Protection from herbivory
“Fire-wise” plants –
http://www.utahfireinfo.gov/prevention/firewiseplants.pdf
General Projects: Revegetation
• SLC Riparian Corridor Recommended Plant List
Canopy
Growing Conditions
Species Name
Narrowleaf cottonwood
(Populus angustifolia)
Chokecherry
(Prunus virginiana )
Peachleaf willow
(Salix amygdaloides )
Netleaf hackberry
(Celtis laevigata )
Utah juniper
(Juniperus osteosperma )
Douglas fir
(Pseudotsuga menziessi )
Twoneedle pine
(Pinus edulis )
Water birch
(Betula occidentalis )
Bigtooth maple
(Acer grandidentatum )
Gray alder
(Alnus incana )
Sun
X
Shade
Part Sun/Shade
Community Types
Bigtooth
Gambel Oak Box Elder Maple
Forest
Forest* Forest**
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Narrowleaf
cottonwood
Forest***
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
General Projects: Revegetation
• General techniques appropriate for slopes 3:1
and flatter
• Use geotextile for 3:1 to 2:1
• Steeper than 2:1 requires structural/ engineered
techniques
General Projects: Revegetation
• These general revegetation techniques are
recommended for:
– Areas where invasive species have been removed
– Areas disturbed by construction activities or utility
installation
– Areas impacted by foot traffic, where future traffic has been
redirected or otherwise addressed
• NOT adequate for:
– Slopes steeper than 2:1
– Areas that are unstable due to stream erosion processes
– Areas that are unstable due to poorly controlled runoff
• Need to understand why an area is not well
vegetated
General Projects: Bioengineered
Slope Stabilization
• Use on slopes 2:1 or steeper
• Can be applied at various scales
when slopes to be treated
are above the AHWL
• When slopes extend to the AHWL
and below, treatments should be
applied at the reach scale and
incorporate toe protection and grade
control!
General Projects: Bioengineered
Slope Stabilization
General Projects: Bioengineered
Slope Stabilization
Photos from NCHRP 544
• Tiered vegetated cellular
grids
Local-scale Projects: Outlet
Protection
• Recommend rock
and vegetation
rather than concrete
• Stabilize conveyance
channel as well as outlet
Local-scale Projects: Outlet
Protection
• Provide a stable path over entire distance
from pipe outlet to creek
• Vegetated rock-lined swale is recommended
to provide some water quality treatment
• Where possible, avoid locating outlets within
the active channel where they are subject to
scour and channel change
Local-scale Projects: Outlet
Protection
• Techniques
appropriate for:
– new storm drain
outfalls
– retrofits of existing
outfalls that are
in poor condition
– high-priority locations
for retrofits are
identified on project
maps
Local–scale Projects: Stream
Crossings
• These
recommendations
are applicable
to new crossings
and crossing
replacements
• Bridge spanning
full width
of channel and
active floodplain
Local-scale Projects: Stream
Crossings
• Box, arch, or large-diameter
culvert with natural
substrate bottom
• Open-bottom or bottom
“fitted” with rock substrate
• Improved stability,
conveyance, connectivity,
and habitat functions
relative to small-diameter
culverts
• Reduced risk of clogging
Deer Creek Highway 189 crossing
Reach-scale Projects: Bed and
Bank Stabilization
• Use in areas
within the AHWL,
where conditions
are affected by streamchannel adjustments
– streambed lowering
– bank scour
– channel migration
Reach Projects: Bed and Bank
Stabilization
• Should implement
comprehensively through
reach from “hard point”
to “hard point”
• “Local” scale approaches
in adjusting reaches are
unlikely to be long lasting
• “Local” scale stabilization
often just sends the
problem elsewhere
Reach Projects: Bed and Bank
Stabilization
• Things to avoid:
– Treatments that protrude into the active channel
and reduce width between banks
– Concrete or other smooth, impervious treatments
– Use of “hard” (nondeformable) bank treatments
within acceptable meander zone
– Use of “hard” bank treatments above toe and
lower bank zones
Reach Projects: Bed and Bank
Stabilization
• DO:
– Give the stream as much width to adjust as possible
– Incorporate vegetation to the greatest extent
possible
•Aesthetics
•Habitat
•Filtration/Water Quality
– Protect toe of bank to expected scour depth
– Incorporate grade control with bank stabilization
Reach Projects: Grade Control
Reach Projects: Toe Protection
• Subexcavate to maximum depth of scour
• Install rock sized to be immobile during flood
flows
Reach Projects: Bank Stabilization
Watershed-Scale Projects
• Applicable within and
beyond riparian area
• Attempt to halt or reverse
some of root causes of
riparian corridor
degradation
Figure from FISRWG (1998)
•Alterations to hydrology
•Alterations to sediment regime
•Point and non-point source
pollution
Figure from SLCO (2009)
Watershed-Scale Projects
• Lower Red Butte Creek watershed is 32%
impervious
Watershed-Scale Projects
• Manage and reduce impervious surfaces
– County WaQSP document includes
recommendations
•Green roofs
•Bioretention swales
•Oil/water separators at gas stations
•Porous pavement
•Infiltration practices
– New development
•U of U Research Park area
•VA Hospital area
Figures from SLCO (2009)
Watershed-Scale Projects
• Retrofit existing development
– Seattle Public Utilities “natural drainage system”
program
– Convert curb and gutter systems to bioretention
swales, etc.
– Opportunities in your own yard
•Infiltrate driveway and rooftop runoff
Watershed-Scale Projects
• Improve instream flows
– Investigate opportunities to secure
and manage water rights for
instream flows
– Improve groundwater recharge
• Increase construction inspections
and enforcement of existing
stormwater regulations
– Reduce sediment/pollutant inputs
– Emphasize revegetation
Watershed-Scale Projects
• Conduct public awareness
campaign
– Coordinate with U of U, City
Parks, etc. to show creeks on
maps and web sites
– Neighborhood signs (e.g.,
“Yalecrest – Red Butte Creek
Watershed”)
– Road signs – “crossing Red
Butte Creek” etc.
– Storm drain stenciling
– Sidewalk imprints
Improvement Projects - Ranking
• Identify high- vs. low-priority locations for each type
of “local-scale” project (e.g., storm drains, culverts)
• Identify appropriate suite of projects for each reach
• Provide your input to determine which types of
projects are highest priority
Summary of Workshop Series 1:
Workshop Dates:
October/November 2008
• Red Butte attendees: 16
• Red Butte comments: 2
• Emigration attendees: 27
• Emigration comments: 9
Summary of Workshop Series 2:
Workshop Date: February
2009
• Red Butte Attendees: 24
• Red Butte Comments: 5
• Emigration Attendees: 42
• Emigration Comments: 3
What Is A Vision Statement?
• Defines desired or intended future condition
• Acts as a source of inspiration
• Provides clear decision-making criteria
• Describes what will be achieved
Features Of An Effective Vision
Statement:
• Is clear and unambiguous
• Creates a vivid picture
• Describes a bright future
• Uses memorable and
engaging wording
• Embodies realistic aspirations
• Aligns with values and culture
Red Butte Creek Vision Statement :
• Introductory text (. . . a source for inspiration)
• Supporting text (. . . desired future conditions)
• Concluding text (. . . how to implement)
Draft Vision Statement:
Introductory
• The Red Butte Creek riparian corridor is a highly
valued natural resource that provides a refuge from
the chaotic urban environment of the City. It is
appreciated by the community for its relaxing and
peaceful atmosphere, as well as for the visual and
auditory benefits of a free-flowing stream. The
riparian ecosystem is restored to the extent possible
and provides many of the essential functions of a
healthy natural ecosystem.
Draft Vision Statement: Supporting
• To reach this vision, the following riparian corridor
functions must be realized:
– a well-connected vegetative corridor provides a diverse
habitat for native wildlife
– healthy, mature vegetation provides a canopy to cool air
and water temperatures; mid-level vegetation and ground
cover allow for diverse wildlife habitat, erosion control,
and filtration of sediment and pollutants
– an uninterrupted flow of clean, clear water supports a
healthy cold-water fishery in the naturally perennial
segments of the creek
Draft Vision Statement: Supporting
– stream banks are stable but allow for natural stream
dynamics within acceptable limits for property owners
– the stream is recognized as a valuable asset by the
community, with trash or debris and noxious weeds kept
out of the stream bed and riparian corridor
– open space compliments the riparian corridor while
allowing for accessible public enjoyment of the stream
environment
– storm-water conveyances are upgraded to improve stream
stability and water quality
– culverts along the stream are replaced to reduce streamchannel constrictions, provide energy dissipation, and
improve stream-bed and bank stability
Draft Vision Statement: Concluding
These efforts should be accomplished cooperatively
between the City and Red Butte Creek ripariancorridor stakeholders, and property owners should be
given a significant opportunity to provide input and
implementation of proposed rehabilitation projects.
YOUR INPUT IS IMPORTANT!
• Identify improvement
projects that are
important to you.
• Suggest your revisions to
the draft vision statement
for the project.
• Ask project staff
questions.
Ways to Comment and Participate
• Workshop Response Form
• SLC DPU Website
(www.slch20.com)
• Contact SLC DPU:
Florence Reynolds
801-483-6864
florence.reynolds
@slcgov.com
THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING!
BIO-WEST Contacts:
Melissa Stamp
435.881.1549
mstamp@bio-west.com
Christopher Sands
435.752.4202
csands@bio-west.com