safer bay project
play

SAFER Bay Project Len Materman, Executive Director San - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority SAFER Bay Project Len Materman, Executive Director San Francisquito Creek area floodplains and projects East Palo Alto Menlo Park Palo Alto Approximate number of parcels in the 100-year


  1. San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority SAFER Bay Project Len Materman, Executive Director

  2. San Francisquito Creek area floodplains and projects East Palo Alto Menlo Park Palo Alto Approximate number of parcels in the 100-year floodplains = Creek floodplain only (3,500 parcels) = Bay floodplain only with 3’ Sea Level Rise (over 2,700 parcels) = Overlap of creek and Bay floodplains (2,200 parcels)

  3. January 2015 king tide

  4. North of Hwy. 84 near Dumbarton Bridge

  5. Infrastructure Assets San Francisco Bay • Key highways • Regional wastewater treatment plant • Regional electrical facility • Regional postal facility • Regional airport • Corporate HQ & new development

  6. LIDAR of the mid-Peninsula S.F. Bay East Palo Alto Menlo Park 100-year tide (11’) Elevation + 2’ freeboard = <13’ + 3’ SLR = 13-15.9’ At least 13’ now, Palo Alto = >15.9’ Enable 16’

  7. SAFER Bay Project Protect 5,000 properties & major infrastructure, restore marshes, connect communities through trails Two counties and three cities. 11 miles of shoreline with 11 reaches that include 24 options. Each alternative includes all reaches and only one option per reach. Construction may occur in two phases (1 FEMA floodplain, 2 SLR) and may be geographically or temporally separable.

  8. SAFER Bay Project Objectives • Reduce risk of coastal flooding and remove properties from FEMA 100-year floodplain (including freeboard) and 3 feet of Sea Level Rise. • Utilize marshes for flood protection in a way that restores and sustains marsh habitat in coordination regional efforts. • Expand opportunities for recreation and community connectivity in coordination with regional and local efforts. • Minimize future maintenance requirements. • Create partnerships with entities whose assets could be protected. • Ensure objectives can be met regardless of neighboring action/inaction.

  9. SAFER Bay Project Constraints • Cost • Utility infrastructure • Viewshed • Tidal marsh wetlands • Endangered species habitat • Roads, trails & flight path • Interior (stormwater) drainage • Property within and adjacent to levee alignment • Hazardous waste and landfill sites

  10. Public Draft Feasibility Report SAFER Bay Project Strategy to Advance Flood protection, Ecosystems and Recreation along San Francisco Bay East Palo Alto and Menlo Park (Task Order 1) October 2016 Available at sfcjpa.org San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority 615 B Menlo Avenue Menlo Park, CA 94025

  11. SAFER Bay Public Draft Feasibility Report for EPA & MP 101 PROJECT AREA Reach 1, Option 1 REACH 1 Reach 1, Option 2 Reach 2, Option 1 REACH 4 Reach 2, Option 2 REACH 5** REACH 2** Reach 3, Option 1 Reach 4, Option 1 & 2 Reach 5, Option 1 REACH 3 Reach 5, Option 2 Reach 5, Option 3 Reach 5, Option 4 REACH 7** REACH 6* Reach 6, Option 1 Reach 6, Option 2 Reach 7, Option 1 Reach 7, Option 2 Reach 8, Option 1 Reach 8, Option 2 Reach 9, Option 1 REACH 8** Reach 9, Option 2 * Reach 6 has been merged into Reach 5 ** Dropped Options shown in Grey ¯ 19 options over 9 reaches covering 7 miles 0 2,000 REACH 9** Feet 1 inch = 2,000 feet of shoreline. Each alternative includes all SAFER Bay reaches and only one option per reach. Feasibility Report Project Reaches and Options

  12. SAFER: Screening options and evaluating alternatives • Multiple options were developed in each project reach (or area). • Each option was screened for how well it satisfies project objectives or violates constraints. • Remaining options in each reach were then combined into four project-wide alternatives (low cost, habitat, recreation, and combination of objectives or “optimized alternative”) that maximize key objectives. • Alternatives were then scored against four factors: construction cost and constructability, ecosystem restoration, operation and maintenance, and recreation. • The optimized alternative ranked highest.

  13. PUBLIC DRAFT FEASIBILITY REPORT EAST PALO ALTO and MENLO PARK Table 9. Feasibility Evaluation Factors and Consideration Scoring Metrics Feasibility Scoring Matrix and Calculation Low Cost Restoration Recreation Optimized Evaluation Factor Wt % Considerations Wt% Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Construction Cost 30% Construction Cost 50% 2.6 2.0 2.0 2.5 and Constructability Lifecycle Cost 5% 4.4 3.9 3.9 4.3 Construction Schedule 5% 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.9 Construction Considerations and Access 20% 3.6 3.8 3.8 3.6 Real Estate Acquisition 20% 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.7 2.7 2.9 Operation and 20% O&M Cost 30% 4.4 3.9 3.9 4.3 Maintenance Debris and Sediment Management 30% 4.3 3.8 3.8 4.1 Passive/Active 20% 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 Flood Fighting Accessibility 20% 3.1 2.6 2.6 2.9 3.9 3.5 3.5 3.7 Restoration 30% Acres of Enhanced Tidal Marsh Habitat 40% 1.5 1.8 1.8 1.8 Interagency Coordination 20% 3.0 3.4 3.4 3.1 Potential Impacts/Mitigation Requirements 40% 4.1 4.5 4.5 4.6 2.9 3.2 3.2 3.2 Recreation 20% Bay Trail 50% 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.4 Interpretive/Viewing 50% 3.3 3.6 3.6 3.4 2.8 2.9 2.9 2.9 Total Alternative Score 100% 3.1 3.0 3.0 3.2 Overall Ranking Order: 2 3 3 1 Alternatives Options by Reach 6 2 Reach 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 2365 Iron Point Road, Suite 300, Folsom, CA hdrinc.com 1 Lowest Cost Op 1 Op 1 Op 1 Op 1 Op 1 X Op 2 Op 2 Op 1 P 916-817-4700 40 Restoration 1 2 Op 2 Op 1 Op 1 Op 2 Op 4 X Op 2 Op 2 Op 1 3 Recreation Op 2 Op 1 Op 1 Op 2 Op 4 X Op 2 Op 2 Op 1 4 Optimized Op 1 Op 1 Op 1 Op 2 Op 4 X Op 2 Op 2 Op 1 X Not applicable

  14. Marsh Road area WATER CONTROL STRUCTURE WATER CONTROL % STRUCTURE 3,120' " ) * % * SECTION B " ) * * WATER R E D W O O D C I T Y CONTROL M E N L O P A R K STRUCTURE EXISTING OPTION 2 BAY FRONT 920' LEVEE AND FLOOD WALL ) " CANAL * MOBILE HOME PARKS (UNINC) * % WITH FLOOD GATE AT E. BAYSHORE RD % Pond ) 1 ¡ E. BAYSHORE RD SECTION A ' 0 0 % R 8 E D 1 ) ¡ W O O EXISTING ATHERTON D C I T Y CHANNEL CULVERT OPTION 1 % FLOOD WALL WITH FLOOD GATE AT HAVEN AVE

  15. Bedwell Bayfront Park Tying into Bedwell Bayfront Park Pond WATER CONTROL EXISTING R4 STRUCTURE GATE STRUCTURE " ) * * WATER CONTROL STRUCTURE Pond R5 1,400' SECTION A ' EXISTING " ) * 0 * 0 8 GATE STRUCTURE + Pond SECTION B JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS EXISTING CULVERT Pond WATER CONTROL + STRUCTURE S5 " ) * * Pond R3 1,160' CHRYSLER PUMP STATION EXISTING BAY FRONT CANAL

  16. North of Hwy. 84 Pond R3 Pond S5 % 4,200' % S E C T I O N

  17. RAVENSWOOD SLOUGH Pond % 1,760' R3 % % % OPTION 1 FLOODWALL 940' OPTION 2 LEVEE 1,540' Facebook % Campus SECTION RAVENSWOOD PUMP STATION Facebook HQ %

  18. % % OPTION 3 (DROPPED) LEVEE/FLOODWALL % 360' WRAPPED UNDERNEATH Pond HWY 84 R1 FLOODWALL % Dumbarton OPTION 1 Bridge CONSTRUCT LEVEE FLOOD GATES ' 0 ' 0 2 1 1 9 , 3 , 1 % ) 1 % % ¡ OPTION 4 CONSTRUCT LEVEE % 1340' 780' % OUTBOARD OF POND SF2 1,100' % % 2 % Pond 4 % 0 ' SECTION B Pop-up floodwall R2 % % % TIDE GATE ) " % L SECTION C 1,280' 2,115' CA SR 84 4,300' % % 1,090' % % ) " Pond L % OPTION 2 (DROPPED) SF2 % TIDE GATE RAISE HWY 84 955' % 1,700' % FLOODWALL SECTION A 400' % % % % % SFPUC Green option: RAVENSWOOD % 2,105' STATION 1,050' BIKE PATH • More cost effective e % • Enables tides in R1, R2 OPTION 4 1 RAILROAD , 8 FLOOD GATE 0 MENLO PARK 0 EXTEND RAVENSWOOD EAST PALO ALTO Pink option: ' " ) % Ó PUMP STATION OUTFALL SECTION D % BENEATH NEW LEVEE • Protects all of Hwy 84 OPTION 1 RAILROAD 2,160' FLOOD GATE " ) Ó • Protects SFPUC pipe % • Enables tides in R1, R2, SF2 %

  19. WATER CONTROL STRUCTURE MENLO PARK O T L % A O A L " ) * P T * S Fordham St. E A SECTION Coordination with potential loop road, 1,470' development of RAVENSWOOD OPEN SPACE PRESERVE parcels north of % * ) " * % Bay Road, and WATER CONTROL STRUCTURE 960' OPTION 2 planned Bay Road LEVEE improvements 391 DEMETER STREET * ) " * % % WATER CONTROL % 600' % STRUCTURE 1,240' Cooley Landing COOLEY LANDING % ) 1 ¡ Existing path EPA properties

  20. RAVENSWOOD Cooley Landing OPEN SPACE COOLEY PRESERVE LANDING % Coordination with S E C T I O N development of parcels south of 1,080' Bay Road and planned Bay Road improvements % OPTION 2 % SETBACK LEVEE LAUMEISTER MARSH 1,080' WATER CONTROL Runnymede St. STRUCTURE Existing % * ) " * levee trail EPA properties

  21. REPLACE EXISTING STORMWATER OUTFALL % Runnymede St. SECTION FABER TRACT RUNNYMEDE DRAINAGE DITCH 2,800 OPTION 1 LEVEE San Francisquito Creek Existing levee trail % O'CONNOR PUMP STATION EPA side

Recommend


More recommend