Heart of Arlington Neighborhood Association Johnson Creek Update

1. Heart of Arlington Neighborhood Association Johnson Creek Update November 15, 2011

2. Agenda • Introduction– Pete Jamieson, Director, COA Parks & Recreation Department • Discussion of Johnson Creek Federal Project – Amy Archambeau, USACE • Environmental / Engineering Challenges & Opportunities – James Thomas, HDR • Water Quality & Litter Management Efforts – Bill Brown, COA – Storm Water Executive Manager

3. Birth of a US Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Project Problem Perception Request for Federal Action Study of Problem & Report Preparation Report Review and Approval Project Authorization Project Implementation

4. “It Takes Two to Tango” Local Agency must request a project, be willing to partner with USACE Local Agency and USACE share costs to: Conduct study to develop a project Design project Build project When project complete, local agency assumes operation and maintenance responsibilities

5. Johnson Creek: Recent History (1990 – 1999) • 1990. USACE proposed construction of concrete-lined channels along substantial stretches of Johnson Creek. • 1995. The City of Arlington (COA) rejected USACE’s 1990 proposal. • Potential negative impact on recreation and economic development • Loss of wildlife habitat • 1997. COA adopted a more holistic alternative, the Johnson Creek Corridor Plan, to the 1990 USACE proposal. • Widely supported by community • Funding to implement plan not available • 1997 – early 1999. The COA began acquiring flood-prone properties and removing structures near Creek.

6. Johnson Creek: Recent History (1999-2001) • 1999. USACE study completed, • Project footprint established • COA-USACE signed agreement for design, plans, and specs to remove flood-prone structures, restore ecosystem • 142 structures were identified for removal. • 2000. Removal of remaining structures (not previously removed by the COA) begun. • 2001. Removal of the structures identified in the 1999 Federal projectwas largely complete. All but three of the flood-prone structures had been removed by yearend. • 2001. Design of ecosystem restoration component begun.

7. Johnson Creek: Recent History (2004 – 2007) • 2004 – 2006. Dallas Cowboys announced move to Arlington • Proposal for new stadium approved by citizens • Master plan for stadium area and Vision of Conservation Plan published • COA suspended further work on 1999 Federal Project • Flood prone structures had been acquired, all but 3 demolished • Majority of lands for ecosystem restoration had been acquired • November 2007. Legislation passed to modify the 1999 Federal project to reflect concepts of Vision of Conservation Plan.

8. Johnson Creek: Recent History (2008) • 2008. Work by COA and USACE to develop plan compatible with 1999 original authorization and new legislation. Plan Objectives are: • Maintain Flood Risk Management benefits gained by 1999 project (buy-outs) • Look for ways to stabilize streambanks and reduce sedimentation • Improve water quality • Restore aquatic and riparian ecosystems in and around Creek • Enhance recreational opportunities • Document the plan in a Integrated Feasibility Study/ Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

9. Johnson Creek: Recent History (2008 – 2009) • 2008 - 2009. Document Existing and Future Without Project conditions • Comprehensive inventory of conditions in and around the creek: • Hydrologic – Amount of water in Creek • Hydraulic – What water is doing • Geomorphic – How channel may migrate • Biologic – Animal and plant life, both desirable and undesirable • Identify problem areas – where erosion and deposition occur, bank instability • Forecast what is likely to happen if nothing is done

10. Johnson Creek Feasibility Study • 2010 – 2011. New agreement negotiated between COA and USACE to cover study (approx 3 years) • Budget and schedule presented to COA City Council • Five organizations collaborating: COA, USACE, three consultants. • Develop plan for Creek in Federal project areas • Identify and fully disclose impacts of plan, both positive and negative • Comply with all requirements of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

11. Johnson Creek Project: Next Steps • January 2012: Agreement signed, Study begins • August 2012: Complete preliminary exploration of measures to address ecosystem restoration and flood risk management problems and opportunities • February 2013: Complete detailed investigations to refine and optimize plan components, determine effects. • September 2013: Identify recommended plan (balance benefits against negative impacts).

12. Project Conclusion • March 2014: Complete project document, Integrated Feasibility Report/Environmental Impact Statement (IFR/EIS) • April – October 2014: Final Review Period (both External and Public Reviews) • December 2014: Feasibility Study complete • If funding available, Design (plans & specs) and Construction would take another 3 – 4 years.

13. Environmental / Engineering Challenges & Opportunities • Channel migration, erosion, and sedimentation • Small stabilization projects vs. system approach • Exotic plant species • Water quality – Bill Brown to cover

14. Background – Channel Evolution

15. Channel Migration • Channel migration is natural • Erosion and sedimentation rates in equilibrium = dynamically stable • Channel migration rate accelerates with increased flow • Channel will adjust to balance flow, slope and sediment transport

16. Channel Migration – Small Project Issues • Today’s quick fix = future channel obstruction • Create scouring conditions • Impacts downstream landowners Johnson Creek, Reach 5 Johnson Creek, Reach 6

17. Opportunities for Stabilization & Restoration • Alternative analysis must consider effects to reach and system • Reach = segment with similar flow, slope and substrate characteristics • Effects include range of items (flow, bank condition, habitat, etc.)

18. Channel Stabilization Alternatives Wide Channel Section • More land required • Larger construction disturbance • Requires public control of land (purchase / easement) • Lower construction cost per unit Coffee Creek, Edmond, OK

19. Channel Stabilization Alternatives Narrow Channel Section • Less land required • Smaller construction area • Requires public control of land (purchase / easement) • Higher construction cost per unit Fort Branch, Austin, TX

20. Exotic & Invasive Species • Impact native habitat • Tree & shrub species • Areas in excess of 3,000 stems / acre • Introduced by: • Yard waste • Flood waters • Wildlife

21. Exotic & Invasive Species • Control is a challenging combination • Education • Chemical, mechanical & manual control • Ongoing maintenance

22. Project Area • Refer to map

23. Questions?

24. City of ArlingtonStormwater ManagementPast, Present, & Future

25. Overview • Evolution of Stormwater Management in Arlington • Water Quality Background for Johnson Creek • Pollution Prevention & Control

26. Historic Problems • Comprehensive land use planning & site design standards did not adequately incorporate watershed and stream protection considerations. • No centralized responsibility for stormwater management. • Significant funding shortfall for addressing stormwater management.

27. Arlington Watersheds

28. Stormwater Management • Stream channels straightened • Channels Paved or Piped • Collect stormwater and get it away quickly!!!

29. Watershed Drainage Change

30. Problem Statement • Urban encroachments increase volume and velocity of stormwater runoff entering the streams. • Exceeding conveyance and storage capacity leaves stream banks prone to erosion and failure.

31. Flow Changes due to Urbanization

32. Floodplain After Filling And/Or Increased Runoff

33. Channel Erosion

34. Erosion Problems

35. 2005 Citizen Policy Review Committee Stormwater Charge • Stormwater Pollution • Erosion & Sedimentation • Flooding • Debris in Streams & Creeks • Aging Infrastructure • Funding

36. Summary of the 2005 CPRC Recommendations • Create a Comprehensive Stormwater Plan • Develop Policies for addressing Stormwater Issues • Expand Stormwater System Preventative Maintenance Program • Address Funding Issues

37. City Response to CPRC • Retained a consultant to develop a Comprehensive Stream Management Plan • Stream inventory • Erosion risk identification • Addressed Funding Issues • Consolidated Stormwater Responsibilities

38. Stormwater Management Funding • October 2007 implemented a 4 year Stormwater Utility Fee adjustment • Equalized fees for residential and non-residential properties • Based upon impervious area • Funds Stormwater Management Administration, Operations, Maintenance, & Capital Projects

39. Stormwater Management Administration • Stormwater Management re-organized under Public Works & Transportation • Administration, Operations, Inspections, & Educational Outreach under Stormwater Executive Manager • Promote uniform Stormwater Management Vision

40. Programmatic Vision • Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program addressing water quality & quantity • Establish a program addressing: • Administration & Management • Maintenance • Watershed Planning • Public Information & Education • Regulatory Enhancements & Guidance

41. Stream Management Program • Stream Reach Inventory • Stream Cleaning • Initial Stream Reach Maintenance • Routine Stream Reach Maintenance • Emergency Stream Reach Maintenance • Stream Bank Stabilization & Restoration • Education Outreach

42. Changing Stormwater Management • Traditional Method • Convey stormwater quickly from site to stream • New Paradigm • Integrate green design • View stormwater as a resource • Manage stormwater on-site • Reduce pollutant loads to water bodies

43. Water Quality • City Required to monitor water quality in streams. • Cooperate in North Central Texas Regional Stormwater Monitoring Program. • Three monitoring locations on Johnson Creek. • Johnson Creek at Matlock Road • Johnson Creek at Meadowbrook Park • Johnson Creek at East Copeland Road

44. Water Quality Data • Data for 17 constituents including BOD, pH, TSS, N, P, & Heavy Metals • Data consistent with other Metroplex Urban Streams • Johnson Creek does NOT currently appear on the EPA 303(d) list of Impaired Streams • Data available from the North Central Texas Council of Governments – Cooperative Wet Weather Monitoring

45. Stream Pollution Sources • Home Vehicle Maintenance • Vehicle & Pressure Washing • Household Hazardous Wastes • Lawn & Garden Care • Pet Waste • Litter & Dumping

46. Vehicle Maintenance • Use funnels or pumps to avoid spills • Don’t dump used oil and antifreeze in the storm drain • Clean up spills • Fix leaks

47. Lawn & Garden • Don’t dump yard waste in the storm sewer or stream. • Before fertilizing your lawn, test to soil to determine what is needed. (http://soiltesting.tamu.edu/) • Consider composting your grass clippings. • Apply materials per instructions.

48. Pet Wastes • Dispose of Pet Waste Appropriately • Scoop the Poop • Don’t dump kitty litter in storm drain or creek • Don’t dump flea dip solutions into storm drains

49. Litter & Dumping • Urban drainage systems are designed to take stormwater to the stream. Runoff carries litter.

50. Prevention • Put trash in appropriate receptacle. • Recycle • Don’t put your garbage bag in the street gutter. • If you see someone dumping in the storm drain or creek, report it: • garbage, construction materials, and bulky items to Arlington’s Code Compliance hotline at 817-459-6777. • dumping of liquids or spills in creeks and streams to Pollution Prevention Hotline at 817-459-6599.