The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1995-11-07 - AGENDA REPORTS - SC RIVER PARK PROJ REPORT (2)AGENDA REPORT City Manager Approval . Item to be presented by: Rick Putnam, Director CONSENT CALENDAR DATE: November 7, 1996 SUBJECT: SANTA CLARA RIVER PARK PROJECT REPORT DEPARTMENT: Parks, Recreation, and Community Services In January 1995 the City of Santa Clarita contracted with the Cal Poly Pomona Foundation to conduct public meetings, perform research, and study the Santa Clara River for potential River Park locations. Included in their scope of work was the development of criteria and the evaluation of undeveloped lands to create a prioritized list of park sites and to provide recommended uses compatible with the resource. The final draft was received and reviewed by staff and presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission on September 7, 1995. The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the draft report and recommended that it be forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and a finding of consistency for the 23 prioritized park sites. The Parks and Recreation Commission unanimously supported a motion requesting that the City Council adopt the report to be used by the Department of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services as a conceptual guide for acquisition and development of a Santa Clara River Park(s). On October 17, 1995 the report was presented to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission reviewed the report and unanimously supported a finding of General Plan consistency for the 23 park sites and a recommendation for adoption of the Santa Clara River Park Project report by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION 1. City Council receive for review the Santa Clara RiverPark Project report; and 2. Schedule at the next regular City Council meeting on November 14, 1995 an opportunity for public comment. REP:JMI.dis cou=d 1 ag606jmi Agenda Item—&- ,11 I D I J I Prepared for. City of Santa Clarita Department of Parks, Recreation and Community Services June 1995 SANTA CLARA RIVER PARK PROJECT 606 Studio Design Team: Peter F. Kasten Michael Kirchmann, Jr. Bartholomew D. Telep Lisa Ann Squiers Don Colburn 606 Studio Principals: John T. Lyle, FASLA Jeffrey K. Olson, ASLA 1' Joan Hirschman, ASLA STUIcb Joan M. Safford, ASLA ��\ GRADUATE PROGRAM 9 DEPARTMENT OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 0 CALIFORNIA STATE POLYTECHMC. UNIVERSITY, POMONA V� rl J _, I J ;i J �j "TWO KINDS OF LANDSCAPES ARE WORTH LOOKING AT - THOSE THAT MAN HAS NEVER TOUCHED, AND THOSE IN WHICH MAN HAS GAINED HARMONY." Pau! B. Sears �J 606 STUDIO, DEPARTMENT OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE. GRADUATE PROGRAM CALIFORNIA STATE POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSrrY. POMONA July 6,1995 City of Santa Clarita Department of Parks, Recreation and Community Services 23920 Valencia Blvd. Suite 120 Santa Clarita, CA 91355 3601 WEST TEMPLE AVENUE POMONA. CA 91766 (909)669-3964 '1 Attn: Mr. Joseph M. Inch J Re: Santa Clara River Park Project Report, Final Draft Dear Mr. Inch: The Santa Clara River Park Project final draft is submitted by the 606 Studio to the City of Santa Clarita Department Jof Parks, Recreation and Community Services in completion of agreement # 99-037 between the City of Santa Clarita and The Cal Poly Pomona Foundation Incorporated. As the Project Manager for this pioneering effort to develop a river corridor park and integrated trail system in the City of Santa Clarita, you have experienced the community's positive support for the Santa Clara River Park Project, The 606 Studio is pleased to have worked with you and the city staff and the community in this effort. j' This document has been created to guide park site selection and design over the next two decades. We hope that a strong relationship continues between the city staff and community and the 606 Studio over that period and beyond.. Yours sincerely, The 606 Studio Design Team �I Peter F. Kasten Michael Kirchmann, Jr. Bartholomew D. Telep Lisa Ann Squiers Don Colburn -1 J J .J .v J ACKNOWLEDGMENT The 606 Project Team expresses their appre- ciation to the City of Santa Clarita Depart- ment of Parks, Recreation and Community Services for having the courage to believe in us. Joe Inch and Ellie Kane deserve a special thanks for always being there and contributing their knowledge. Thanks to our classmates and faculty at Cal Poly Pomona for their friendship, encour- agement and ideas. Much gratitude to our friend T. J., from whence came our energy. Most importantly, we extend a sincere thank you to our families and friends for their patience, support and understanding throughout this program. Santa Clara River Park Project L� .L F L Santa Clara River Park Project L' LJ TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgment........................................................ i Conclusion .............................................................................. 67 Table of Contents ......................................... ! Appendices.............................................................................. 69 Introduction................................................................. 1 Appendix One: Site Selection Process...................................... 69 Purpose............................................................................ 1 Appendix Two: Community Participation .............................. 79 u` Document Organization.................................................. 2 Appendix Three: Alternative Expansion Areas....................... 85 Appendix Four: Regional History ............................................. 87 RiverSetting................................................................ 3 Appendix Five: River Parks...................................................... 89 JEcosystem......................................................................... 3 Appendix Six: Park Site Descriptions...................................... 93 Regional Scale Watershed ............................................... 4 Appendix Seven: Individual Research ...................................... 117 �j Local Scale River Corridor .............................................. 4 Site History as a Guide to Sustainable Design Time Scale........................................................................ 8 by Peter F. Kasten.............. ...............119 ...................................... ^� River Character............................................................ 9 Southern California Riparian Management Intermitten 9 by Don Colburn.......................................................................127 Fluvial Process................................................................. 15 Recognizing the Subtle Differences in Defining the Term I Vegetation communities .................................................. 17 "Sustainable" in Economics and Landscape Ecology LJby Lisa Ann Squiers................................................................139 Park Site Selection....................................................... 21 Design of Corridors for Human Activity Selection Process ........................................:.................... 21 and Wildlife Habitat Site Prioritization............................................................ 22 by Michael Kirchmann, Jr ........................................................ 143 Concept and Guidelines ............................................. 29 Reclaimed Wastewater as a Source of Design Concept.....................................................:........ 29 Recreational Water in Arid Environments Design Guidelines ...................................... 34 by Bartholomew D. Telep ....................................................... 149 !I SPark Site Desi ...... 45 References................................................................................155 Valley Oak Park.............................................................. 45 DiscoveryPark................................................................ 53 LostCanyon Park........................................................... 59 n Santa Clara River Park Project lij iv Santa Clara River Park Project I; L: LIr I I 'IF4� .4 « �0 n .ateire 's. I i J r -J U �J I Purpose The Santa Clara River Park Project is the first step in a 20 -year effort to develop open space park land along the Santa Clara River. The purpose is to identify sites for park acquisition and develop design concepts rooted in the understanding of the natural processes and functions that shape this land- scape. This river park plan aims to integrate ecological concerns with human use. "Ecological integrity is vital to the sustainability of both natu- ral communities and human society." (Smith, 1993) The goals for the Santa Clara River Park Project are: •Preserve the natural character of the Santa Clara River for future generations. • Create a model park system that provides protection and enhance - INTRODUCTION ment of the natural character of the river and allows for recreational use by the community of Santa Clarita. • Integrate human activity with the environment in a way that fosters an understanding of the whole eco- system and the processes within it. The Santa Clara River Park Project is a synthesis of environmental and cultural factors that influences this landscape. The development of this plan is predi- cated in the understanding and evalua- tion of the context of the Santa Clara River in geographic and temporal scales, from the ecosystem to park site location. The setting (regional, local, cultural) and character (intermittency, fluvial process, vegetation pattern) of this environment are analyzed and formulated into design concepts. These concepts provide for a sustainable design that protects the natural river character as well as provides for recreational experiences. Santa Clara River Park Project Sustainable design for the Santa Clara River Park Project focuses on the following objectives: • Allow the river to follow its natural function and restrict development within the floodplain. • Encourage infiltration to ground water sources. • Increase habitat diversity through restoration and preservation for benefit of the ecosystem. • Enhance the recreational experience of nature viewing. • Enhance the movement linkages of wildlife species. • Create a safe environment for bicy- clists, equestrians and pedestrians. The identity of the Santa Clarita Valley is embedded in natural processes and landscape patterns. Distinct vegetation communities found along the river corridor are products of the intermittent character and fluvial actions of the river. The valley is at the confluence of several diverse California plant communities. Coast live oaks, remnants of a past landscape pattern, are reminders of a natural heritage associated with the region. 2 Santa Clara River Park Project The reduction of the oak woodland is an example of the abrupt change human activities can have on the landscape. Awareness of this identity connects the observers to their surroundings and fosters an appreciation of the link be- tween humans and their environment. The river park plan focuses on ecologi- cal considerations and social benefits of park development along the river corridor. Increased development and urbanization have led to a decline in natural open space areas. The conse- quences of these actions are less habi- tat, less diversity and less protection of water resources. The continual decline of these factors ultimately affects the ecological health of the entire ecosystem. The social benefits of a river park plan are numerous. A growing urban population has led to an increased demand for outdoor recreation. The linear quality of river corridors lends itself to move- ment oriented activities such as jogging and bicycling. A river park plan ties various components within a commu- nity together and offers an alternate route through the city. Experiencing nature is important to the spiritual and psychological well-being of society.. The Santa Clara River Park Project integrates ecology and design into a plan that contributes to the health of the natural and human environments. Document Organization This document is divided into six sections: River Setting, River Character, Park Site Selection, Concept and Guide- lines, Park Site Design, and Appendices. Section 1: River Setting River Setting explores the river through geographic and temporal scales. The relationship between the various scales is established. Section 2: River Character River Character describes the natural processes and the vegetation patterns. Section 3: Park Site Selection Park Site Selection examines the site prioritization process and culminates in a ranked site listing. Section 4: Concept and Guidelines Concept and Guidelines integrates natural process and pattern analysis into a design concept for the river park plan. Guidelines are developed and applied to three site designs. Section 5: Park Site Design Park Site Design explores three site designs at different locations along the river corridor. Appendices Appendices contains individual research topics as well as additional research germane to the project. C=.. =J ELI L. ]L �: I= C•_ l C=� �J t►t ; Tr Y �. •� t j�. 1yy�rr y ^ Ir `. a, �a +: n,... :•: � 't•T15 :': v yy Y ''A.:.r i : i .: ! • rr.:� J sh „Lit S( s, f �•• i + J� i l: }k r Tf,Y�� `f ..{� 1 �. •4 `, �T :yAz 1 `A�� ,ii �, •7Jl .. � � as 1 f a 1 T r RIVER SETTING D Ur -j l n J .- I 1j r ,J rj u The Ecosystem The context of the Santa Clara River exists at many levels, from the ecosystem through the regional to the local scale. This context has been altered by the forces of human activity and, in recent years, by rapid development. It is important to understand the geographi- cal and time -scale relationships in order to comprehend the processes that shape the river's dynamic character. The river plays an important role in the regional ecosystem. An ecosystem can be defined as a "community of organ- isms interacting with one another and with the chemical and physical factors making up their environment." (Miller, 1991) Nutrients are continuously cycled through the living and non- living parts of the environment and "converted to useful forms by a combi- nation of biological, geological and chemical processes." (Miller, 1991) RIVER SETTING The southern California ecosystem is composed of diverse biological commu- nities in an environment ranging from deserts to mountain peaks to the ocean shore. The mild temperature supports this diversity, limited principally by the dry, seasonal nature of the Mediterranean climate. One of the main forces that drives this ecosystem is the hydrologic cycle. The Hydrologic Cycle The Santa Clara River, while appearing to rest in a dry state most of the year, is part of a continuous energy transfer system. Solar energy drives the hydro- logic cycle in which the river serves as a key part. The hot dry summers and winter rains of predominantly dry southern California provide this inter- mittent river with a more diverse role than that of continuously flowing rivers. The riverbed, when not carry- ing flood waters, serves as an extended field for desert vegetation. Riparian Santa Clara River Park Pmje t 3 communities flourish beside sage scrub species. Mature cottonwoods survive while less hardy vegetation succumbs to the Flood -drought cycle. The contrasts abound in time and space as the river serves its role in the hydrologic cycle. The river is the main conduit of surface water within the watershed, but it is only one segment of a cycle that sus- tains the regional biota. The natural cycle is modified by various human efforts: primarily, concentrated water with- drawal, developed hard surfaces, flood control channelization, water importa- tion, and vegetation management. Regional Scale: The Watershed The Santa Clara River is located in Los Angeles County in southern Califor- nia, see Figure 1.1. A convenient and natural boundary used to describe a region is the watershed. The Santa Clara River watershed is defined by the Transverse Ranges: the San Gabriels, the Santa Susanas, the Topatopas, and the Santa Ynez Mountains. These ranges have formed as the Pacific Plate collides with the North American Plate along the San Andreas Fault. Today, the Transverse Ranges have all shifted 90 degrees and are now aligned along an east -west axis, the only east -west trending mountains in California. The Santa Clara River watershed encom- passes an area of approximately 2150 square miles, see Figure 1.2. 4 Santa Clara River Park Project The Santa Clara River flows approxi- mately 84 miles, from its headwaters on the northern side of the San Gabriel Mountains, westward through the Santa Clarita Valley, over the Oxnard Plain with its agricultural fields and citrus groves, and eventually empties into the Pacific Ocean just south of the city of Ventura at McGrath State Beach. The main stem is fed by tributaries exiting lateral canyons along its com- plete length. The principal tributaries located to the west of Santa Clarita include Castaic Creek, Piru Creek, Sespe Creek and Santa Paula Creek. Local Scale: The River Corridor The project area encompasses the 14.5 - mile linear reach of the river within the city of Santa Clarita. The riverbed within the city boundaries has a total elevation change of 550 feet, ranging from approximately 1600 feet above sea r7 1' 1✓ �I i' I located to the west of Santa Clarita include Castaic Creek, Piru Creek, Sespe Creek and Santa Paula Creek. Local Scale: The River Corridor The project area encompasses the 14.5 - mile linear reach of the river within the city of Santa Clarita. The riverbed within the city boundaries has a total elevation change of 550 feet, ranging from approximately 1600 feet above sea r7 1' 1✓ �I Upper Watershed Boundary {. -. - `i' �t same Garib i r Paws y Project Area ec mnsre !V r rrf�Complete Watershed Boundary .J brae /\ Figure 1.2 4"do n to ' 1 level at the eastern end, and gently sloping down to 1050 feet at the west- ern boundary under the Interstate -5 freeway. This translates into an aver- age river flow gradient through the city of 0.8 per cent. The project area lies between Tick Canyon on the east to Interstate -5 on the west. The river, as it exits the project area, carries water from 408 square miles of watershed, the eastern 20 per cent of the Santa Clara River drainage area. This upper water- shed is indicated on the overall water- shed diagram, see upper diagram of Figure 1.3. This topographic perspective, at a 10 times vertical exaggeration, outlines the upper watershed on the surround- ing terrain. The flat high desert is seen in the upper right, The rectangle in the lower left outlines the Santa Clarita Valley, illustrated in the expanded topographic perspective, at a 20 times vertical exaggeration, shows the many tributaries merging with the main stem within the project area, see lower diagram of Figure 1.3. The principal streams join the river through Sand Canyon, Mint Canyon, Bouquet Canyon, South Fork and San Francisquito Canyon. The perspective clearly demonstrates that Santa Clarita occupies a wide alluvial valley along the river. The Santa Clara River is a gravel bed river, typical in the southwestern United States, dry much of the year, but ca- pable of spreading floodwaters over its banks periodically. The sedimentary load carried by the river has created an alluvial base up to 200 feet deep, prin- cipally in the riverbed, forming a near surface aquifer. A much deeper aquifer also supplies much of the area's water. The project area is mainly within the floodplain as determined by the Fed- eral Emergency Management Agency, (FEMA 1989), see Figure 1.4. Most of the park sites are on the floodplain, avoiding the floodway, see inset on Figure 1.4. The floodway consists of those portions of the channel and floodplain required to allow flood flows to pass without a significant increase in flood height. ,J Santa Clara River Park Project w.. iq ry lAN i _•.d a 7 lab e fS-t Floodplaln FEMA ` Fbadway LA County Dapt Pub Works a � 1 l � ie S i` 1. , .a _ ,.�.✓jJ rk F� �`o� � vi �. � `^wryer , e. � � 'I Ii� -'� � � ia� .. '- i_ { 7 •, SANTA CLAM FttT RNER PARK Project Area: Floodplain and Floodway - Figure 1.4 0 gab ," I'M 0 PROTECT 606 Studio • Department of Landscape Architecture • California State Polytechnic University, Pomona June 1995 Recent Time Scale The natural ecosystem of the Santa Clarita Valley has been altered by human activity. Settlement patterns have transformed the landscape from the agricultural setting of early Spanish missions to more recent rapid suburban development. (See Appendix Four, Regional History, for more detail.) Throughout history, the Santa Clarita Valley has been the hub of trade between coastal and desert inhabitants as well as northern and southern California. This activity has been facilitated by the east -west orien- tation of the Transverse Ranges. Human activity has been affected by the intermittent rainfall pattern. For example, the dry years of the 1870's are reported to have influenced land hold- ings throughout the valley, as agricultural failures resulted in defaulted mortgages and opportunistic land acquisitions. Santa Clara River Park Project The early land purchases of Henry Mayo Newhall (1852-1882) were inspired by the land bargains available to those with money to invest during this period. Newhall's purchase of Rancho San Francisco was a secondary result of the crop failures in the Santa Clarita Valley during the 1870's. Even grazing became limited without irrigation. In recent times, agricultural production has been supplanted by suburban develop- ment. Increased population growth in Los Angeles spread into the Santa Clarita Valley. Demand for housing and commercial development has transformed a large portion of open space. This pressure is being applied to open space along the Santa Clara River. Santa Clarita, however, still retains a large portion of the natural river presence, but the task is to protect this character and create a self-sustain- ing system that fuses the natural and the built environments. Summary Comprehension of the temporal and geographic scale at various levels facilitates the understanding of change in a landscape. Change can be gradual, as in climatic shifts due to geomorphic process over millions of years, or it can be abrupt, as human influences tend to be over a shorter period of time. Natu- ral processes function at the various geographic scales connecting the site to the larger system around it. The land- scape function and patterns are evident in the river character. Intermittency, fluvial actions and the vegetation communities exemplify the exceptional character of the Santa Clara River. These elements are discussed in detail in the following section. �M V i' 1- }� M �• rpmw. i � r .'_• 4 I ,11 LJ 17 Landscape patterns, such as those expressed by vegetation, are directly connected to the hydrological forces that influence the Santa Clarita Valley. Intermittency and fluvial process (bar formation and braiding) are prominent among the forces that describe the river's character. These natural river processes and the associated vegetation communities are described in detail in the following section. Intermittency The river character is formed principally by the regional rainfall pattern and the landform. The mountainous watershed stores little water during rainfall. The upper regions, over 5,000 feet in elevation, store some precipitation in snow, but most of the 406 square miles draining into the Santa Clarita Valley generate rapid runoff carrying silt, sand, rocks and boulders down the many streams. The Santa Clarita Valley RIVER CHARACTER is a wide spot in the river course, where several tributaries join the river. Within the project area, 55 per cent of the contributing watershed is served by tributaries, and 45 per cent lies east of the city along the main stem. The valley is a concentration of stream junctions routing water to the sea, depositing and rearranging alluvium. The gravel alluvium in the valley forms an upper aquifer that is highly influenced by rainfall cycles which, in turn, influences the biological processes evident in the river and adjacent lands. A persisting river character is intermittency. Over seasons, years, decades and longer periods, the river exhibits abundance of both water and drought. The varied water presence determines the timing and duration of vegetation opportunities. The water movement redistributes the riverbed alluvium, changing the locations for vegetation. Powerful floods appear r, Santa Clara River Park Project 9 periodically within the varying cycle, scouring the bottom and causing the vegetation to begin anew, playing a role much as fire does in other landscapes. Rainfall The intermittency of the river is driven by the rainfall pattern over time. Intermittency exists at all time scales, represented over centuries, decades and seasons. The reconstructed 360 - year California rainfall record does not necessarily represent the conditions in the Santa Clarita Valley, but does indicate the variability that can be expected over time, see Figure 2.1. 45 40 m 35 e u 30 C 25 20 a 15 N 10 5 0 O r0 - Rainfall 65 Year Average w 40 t 35 30 25 .E 20 15 to s o N t0 O Q m N rG O Q m N r0 O Q m N t0 N N N til til Q Q u'] rn � t0 {O n r t` m m T Year Figure 2.2 The long-term rainfall patterns contain the shorter term cycles that are more familiar to human experience. IAL Rainfall 1901-1963 Average Figure 2.1 rn O O O Y) O LL7 O w7 O N O Itl O N 1n n O N � n O N N n O N V7 Year 10 Santa Clara River Park Project Data from Fntts, 1980 Data from Los Angeles county Department of Pudk Works Ranfall Records 1922-1986 Contemporary references to drought symbolize the perception that periods of low rainfall are disturbances in a period of normal rainfall. Low rainfall years are a regular occurrence in southern California. As shown in the 65 -year Santa Clarita Valley rain gauge record, Figure 2.2, they are not disturbances, but are a normal part of intermittency. The 65 -year annual rainfall average for the valley is about 13.4 inches. A common below average rainfall year of nine inches is a drought only for human induced biological systems dependent upon a consistent, not intermittent, water supply. Rainfall data used herein are from the Dry Canyon station, which provided continuous recording for 65 years. The annual amounts correspond very closely to the less continuous data from a gauging station in the center of the valley. As the watershed extends to elevations of J I J 7- 71, J I I r, J 12 to _ a 0 6 W cc m 4 u � 2 0 m m m m m m M o 0 0 0 O o LL ¢ ¢ M Months, Three Precipitation Years (October t to September 30) Figure 2.3 Data from los Angeles County Department of publw Works Rainfall Records 1967-1970 5,000 feet, annual rainfall expectations vary across the upper watershed and exceed 30 inches in the higher reaches. A reasonable assumption is that the amounts may vary, but the year to year profiles for the total watershed are well represented by the data used. Each ten-year span usually contains several consecutive years of low rainfall between years of above average rainfall. Observing the rainfall data from 1922 to 1986, stretches of three below-average years interrupted by one or two years of above average is the dominant mode; however, the years 1945 to 1957 saw eleven of twelve years below average and five had a greater than four inch deficit. Average is not "normal." Only 20 percent of the time is rainfall within two inches (11.4 to 15.4 inches) of average. Dry years and potential flood years are emphasized by these departures from the average and intermittency takes on an exaggerated image. Intermittency is "normal." The fundamental cycle is the annual winter rain and summer dry periods typical of this region. This is the only "dependable" cycle within intermittency, although its year-to-year magnitude is the variable, as illustrated in the cycle that shows a heavy rainfall year between two low rainfall years, see Figure 2.3. The biological systems in and along the river are adapted to the intermittent water availability. Their adaptation must be not only to the rainfall, but to the water storage mechanisms, inundations, and water's dynamic flow forces. The rainfall cycle occurs on a larger dry/wet time scale. Another layer exists under this with different time scales. Groundwater accumulation is gradual, while floods can be sudden. Groundwater and surface flow are components of the intermittent character. Groundwater The mountainous upper watershed stores little groundwater, but the alluvium in the lower streams and particularly in the Santa Clarita Valley allow considerable subsurface water movement and storage. This creates a river whose bottom is its top, where water flows beneath the dry riverbed. The near surface aquifer in the Santa Clarita Valley is in the 200 -foot deep alluvium. Scores of water well records provide water level history for a period of about 65 years, but data continuity over time and along the length of the project area is lacking. Numerous well records were studied and compared to determine trends and typical phenomena. In general, the water table is lower on the eastern end of the project and rises considerably near the western end. Near surface water currently promotes significant woody vegetation west of Bouquet Canyon. Historical data indicate that this area's water may also recede more deeply in severe dry periods. The San Gabriel Santa Clara River Park Project 11 fault crosses the river in this region and appears to affect the stability of the water table, although there is some inconsistency in this data. The fault line appears to cause an anomaly in the behavior of the water table compared with the more regular levels found elsewhere along the project. One well's record, No. 7148, was selected to represent the groundwater variation with time, for correlation with rainfall, see Figure 2.4. Well No. 7148 is in the east central part of the project area. This well was chosen for its long-term data availability and its clear variation pattern. The single point data for each year was taken during the dry time, September to November. During some years only a single data point was available in this period, and when several were recorded, the one representing a stable condition was chosen. As an operating well, the water level in No. 7148 reflects a local drawdown which may exaggerate the depression in dry times. This well is typical, but along with time -oriented intermittency, well data exhibits spatial intermittency, varying from site to site. The data presented clearly depict a sinking water table during dry years, with rapid rebound during an above average rainfall year. The pattern here is clear, and it is similar for all wells studied, even though many wells display a less distinct pattern. 12 Santa Clara River Park Project Figure 2.4 Preclp (cm) 0 Water Table. Well No. 7148 Vegetation must keep pace with the consistently receding water if it is to survive. Soil moisture may not be completely absent above the water table, but the sand and gravel alluvium have low moisture retention. The receding water line establishes a necessary plant growth rate and indicates the need for a succession of above-average rainfall years to insure early survival of slower growing species. This riparian environment includes Great Basin sagebrush, reflecting the annual cycle and the fast surface drainage. The more water- needy riparian plants, such as cottonwood and willow, are present where near surface water exists and where a series of favorable water years allowed sufficient time for maturation in a receding water condition. Mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia) indicates another trace of intermittency, the repeated disturbances in this water course. Year Data from Los Angeles County Department of PublK: Works Rwfal Records and Well Records, 1930-1986 Surface Flow Flood forces and inundation are episodes of irregular but inevitable occurrence. Total annual rainfall is not the indicator of a year's flood severity. Rain falling intensely for two or three days produces floods, as in 1969. Note that the total rainfall for that year was large, but not as great as in years of unremarkable flooding, see Figure 2.5. Large water volumes in short time spans cause high river levels and immense water flow forces. The volumes cause inundations and spreading beyond the average river edges. Many plants cannot survive inundation, while others, normally above the saturated riverbed, do not tolerate consistently wet roots. All vegetation in the path of the moving water is subject to the direct force of the water and accompanying debris, in addition to the fluvial effects as the water erodes 100. 0 60. LL a60, a � n � 40, 20. I— N V O. ; _ -20. .S 3 a c -40. m -60. -foo. Figure 2.4 Preclp (cm) 0 Water Table. Well No. 7148 Vegetation must keep pace with the consistently receding water if it is to survive. Soil moisture may not be completely absent above the water table, but the sand and gravel alluvium have low moisture retention. The receding water line establishes a necessary plant growth rate and indicates the need for a succession of above-average rainfall years to insure early survival of slower growing species. This riparian environment includes Great Basin sagebrush, reflecting the annual cycle and the fast surface drainage. The more water- needy riparian plants, such as cottonwood and willow, are present where near surface water exists and where a series of favorable water years allowed sufficient time for maturation in a receding water condition. Mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia) indicates another trace of intermittency, the repeated disturbances in this water course. Year Data from Los Angeles County Department of PublK: Works Rwfal Records and Well Records, 1930-1986 Surface Flow Flood forces and inundation are episodes of irregular but inevitable occurrence. Total annual rainfall is not the indicator of a year's flood severity. Rain falling intensely for two or three days produces floods, as in 1969. Note that the total rainfall for that year was large, but not as great as in years of unremarkable flooding, see Figure 2.5. Large water volumes in short time spans cause high river levels and immense water flow forces. The volumes cause inundations and spreading beyond the average river edges. Many plants cannot survive inundation, while others, normally above the saturated riverbed, do not tolerate consistently wet roots. All vegetation in the path of the moving water is subject to the direct force of the water and accompanying debris, in addition to the fluvial effects as the water erodes 7 J `) ❑ PeakFlow, cis Annual Flow, of 100000-- cfs (cubic feet per second) of (acre-feet) v 80000-- 3: 0 60000 J LL LL - 40000 �c 20000 m c a 0 CL CD Cl) m rn w to m r a 1• o m rn l['1 UY lD N f0 tp c0 � r� �- m aD aD oD n J I Figure 2.5 and deposits soil. Most vegetation may be removed with the scouring of moving water. Well emplaced, sturdy trees may be shattered by moving boulders. Sometimes strong, but supple trees of a particular size will bend and survive, such as young cottonwoods that can sprout from bent, buried but still rooted remains. The 1969 flood that destroyed the Soledad Canyon Road bridge is recalled by many local citizens. Its flow of 31,000 cubic feet per second under the Interstate -5 bridge represents an event calculated to have a probability of occurrence of 2% in any year (a 50 -year flood). Figure 2.6 relates the likelihood of flows up to the 100 -year event (Tettemer & Assoc.,. p. 21, 1993). The fluvial effects, even in mild flood events, redistribute the gravel bars in this Year Data from los Angeles county Department of Public Works Hydrographic Records 1950-1993 riverbed. This removes some vegetation and creates revegetation opportunities in other areas. Vegetation modifies the fluvial geomorphology by anchoring soil. The irregular occurrence of the floods of various intensities, and the chance occurrence of successive high rainfall years Sao 0 o ao eo so ea rso n RNum Period (years I Figure 2.6 Data from Tettemer, 1993 operate as counterforces that determine whether plant growth can achieve gravel bar stabilization. Even a well stabilized gravel bar is temporary in view of the likelihood of a severe flood episode. The Santa Clara River does not flow as do other rivers in flat terrain. Alluvial deposits across the width of the valley indicate that the river was not always confined to its present course. Within the study area it is a wide, gravel bottom river with a gradient of 0.8 percent, descending about 45 feet per mile. (By comparison, the Mississippi River descends at about six inches per mile.) Wide bed, low flow and modest gradient are characterized by a braiding form in the river bottom streams. The river width and bottom contours are formed by the occasional extreme high flows, but even years of above average rainfall usually fill the river bottom with many intertwining flow paths. These are evident at scales from the river size itself down to patterns a few feet across.. These patterns and the resulting forms are discussed in the next section. Summary Intermittency is summarized in Figure 2.7 on the following page. Rainfall, groundwater and surface flow are represented in charts that depict the different time scales. ISanta Clara River Park Project 13 Rainfall Intermittency Three Time Scales C� b d ua uu Annual Pronounced wet- dry seasons Decades Yw Alternating drought and surplus rw. br o.r+a Centuries Decade long droughts Historic average is lower than present River Flow Intermittent Flow Volume and Surge Annual flow correlates with rainfall total Peak flow related to short term intensity Years SAINTh CRA RNER PARK PROJECT 5O s 40 VIN0,111 ,30 MOO 2 0 O`401 0 Well NO. /1413 Alluvial Aquifer Saugus Formation Percolation in River Bed Gabriel Fault Watershed 406 Square Mile Drainage Water Table Rise and Fall of Surface Aquifer Declines smoothly in dry times Rebounds quickly with high rainfall Intermittency Summarized - Figure 2.7 L 606 Studio • Department of Landscape Architecture • California State Polytechnic University, Pomona • June 1995 o� tees o Js9�d5 i J r-, J J 7 '_l rl I Fluvial Processes Bar Formation Process Seasonal rains and storm events move in mostly swift, wide, shallow rivulets and tend to recharge much of the water in the sandy alluvium. Water carries with it debris, including sand and gravel, which is deposited along the inside curves of the river. Islands of sand and gravel, called lateral bars, gravitate toward the middle of the riverbed. These become detached medial bars due to continual erosion and deposition as water flows through the river, see Figure 2.8. Bars tend to be proportionately six times longer than they are wide. The size of soil and rocks in the bar formation are arranged in a hierarchical relationship. Larger pieces of gravel settle first out of the water flow and smaller pieces of gravel and sand settle behind. Seeds from plants can embed here in this wet but Figure 2.9 protective environment. Many of the detached medial bars in the Santa Clara River are full of vegetation. As mentioned in the intermittency section, vegetation can modify the surface flow by anchoring soils and developing over time into bar formations. These forms can be wiped out by large storm events, and thus the bar formation process begins once again. Braiding A typical characteristic of the Santa Clara River within the Santa Clarita Valley is its braided form. Braiding is especially concentrated within the city of Santa Clarita. Braided patterns are legible in both the pedestrian and aerial views, see Figure 2.9. Their patterns imply that water is available at the surface during dry summer months. The long lines of darker -toned soils give the appearance of wet waterlines. �— '� --• Lateral Bar ` . •. rJ Summary Intermittency and fluvial actions are examples of the natural functions Detached Medial Bar f associated with the river character. Their affects are reflected in the vegetation patterns along the river corridor. The next section describes in detail the Figure 2.8 plant communities that are a response to these processes. Santa Clara River Park Project is J d X1ed iaArA eieO erueS 9 l �I 11 1 Vegetation Communities Vegetation patterns and plant communities along the Santa Clara River are natural expressions of the region's intermittent water regime and the fluvial processes. The Natural Diversity Data Base, a computerized descriptive inventory of California's vegetation communities developed by the California Department of Fish and Game, offers the most refined categorization of California plant communities. Of the 375 communities identified within the state by the data base, nine are present along the river corridor within the city of Santa Clarita. The following descriptions are adapted from Michael Holland's Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California, 1986. Plant communities are described from the outlying chaparral inward to the deepest channels of the river. Chamise Chaparral Easily identified by almost pure stands of chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), this community is the predominant chaparral type in southern California. Compared to other chaparral communities, this community grows on shallower, drier soils at lower elevations. Buckwheats (Eriogonum spp.), sages (Saliva spp.) and yucca (Yucca whipplei) are also common. Ceanothus Crassifolius Chaparral California lilac (Ceanothus crassifolius) and chamise dominate this community. Most plants are six to nine feet high and typically have stiff gray -green leaves. The ceanothus tend to die out after about forty years. There is much more leaf litter than in Chamise Chaparral. A fire - dependent community, Ceanothus Crassifolius Chaparral blends with Chamise Chaparral on drier sites and coast live oak or Englemann oak woodlands on relatively wetter sites. This is a very common community along the coastal (cismontane) side of southern California mountains. Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub Low, mostly semi -woody shrubs from two to six feet high dominate in this community. It is typically less dense than chaparral communities and other coastal sage scrub communities closer to the coast. Bare ground underneath and between plants is common. Growth and flowering occur in late winter and spring soon after rain storms. The majority of the plants tend to be drought deciduous during the summer and fall months. This community responds to fire by crown sprouting at the plant base. Signature species include white, purple, and black sages (Salvia apiana, S. leucophylla, S. mellifera), California sagebrush (Artemisia californica) and yucca (Yucca whipplei intermedia). Non-native Grassland Varying from dense to sparse cover, this community is composed of exotic grasses that range in height from a few inches to three feet. Existing examples of native annual wildflowers (forbs) are often intermixed with the exotics. Growth, flowering and seed set occur almost exclusively during the winter and spring. Rare is the plant that lives through the hot dry summer and fall months. This community is usually located on grazed or disturbed clay soils and moist or waterlogged areas. Oaks are sometimes found nearby on moister, better -drained soils. Big Sagebrush Scrub Plants in this community tend to be two to six feet high and mostly soft -woody shrubs. These areas are often sparse and dominated by Great Basin sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata). Growth generally occurs in spring, with flowering lasting into summer and early fall. This is a widely distributed community throughout the western United States. Santa Clarita is the farthest west this community is found. It occurs on a wide array of soils and terrain, including rocky, well -drained slopes to fine textured valley soils with high water tables. Rabbitbrush (Crysothamnus nauseosus) and various types of stipa grasses are also common species in this particular community. Santa Clara River Park Project 17 Southern Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest Historic references indicate that the Santa Clarita Valley was filled with valley oak (Quercus lobata) and coast live oak (Q. agrifolia). Although these woodlands are no longer present, a few extant oak individuals along the Santa Clara River indicate that this community could sustain itself given the opportunity to do so. Coast live oaks grow in a variety of plant communities in southern California. The Oak Riparian community is characterized as having a higher number of herbs as as an understory than shrubs in comparison to other riparian communities. This is an unusual circumstance, compared to other riparian communities. This community prefers bottomlands and outer flood plains along larger streams in fine grained rich alluviums. Other species include poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), Mexican elderberry (Sambucus mexicana), and toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia). Southern Cottonwood - Willow Riparian Forest Dominated by cottonwoods (Populus fremontii and P. trichocarpa) and willows (Salix spp.), this multilayered forest community has few tree species. The community tends to be tall, open, with broacileaved winter -deciduous trees. 18 Santa Clara River Park Project The understory is usually shrubby willows. The locations of this community are sub -irrigated areas frequently overflowed and scoured by floods. Floods create requisite conditions for dominant species germination, i.e., expanses of area free from leaf litter and having maximum solar exposure. Periodic severe flooding removes this community, which quickly reestablishes itself. As a result, the community species tend to exhibit a uniform age. Along the Santa Clara River, the riparian forest provides more diverse habitats and greater biomass production relative to adjacent communities. Southern Cottonwood- Willow Riparian Forest, Southern Willow Scrub and the Alluvial Scrub community are considered to be sensitive communities because so much of their habitat has been removed by agricultural and urban development. Southern Willow Scrub Several willows (Salix spp.) characterize this community. The willows tend to grow in dense thickets with scattered cottonwoods and sycamores (Platanus racemosa). Loose, sandy or fine -gravelly alluvium deposited near stream channels during floods typify the community's growing requirements. This community is considered to be an intermediate successional type between Mulefat Scrub and the later successional community, Southern Cottonwood -Willow Riparian Forest. Alluvial Scrub This community is described by Ted L. Hanes et al., in an article entitled "Alluvial Scrub Vegetation in Coastal Southern California." The community is unique to southern California and occurs along and within outwash fans and riverine deposits along the coastal side of the mountain ranges. The community is not described by Holland. The California Natural Diversity Data Base considers it a high priority for preservation because it is threatened by urban development and flood control structures. Alluvial Scrub is typified by a variety of drought -deciduous subshrubs and large evergreen woody shrubs that grow in sandy to rocky alluvium deposited by streams that experience episodes of severe flooding. The community is adapted to severe floods and erosion, nutrient -poor substrates and the presence of subsurface moisture. Alluvial Scrub is best characterized by three stages of successional development. "Pioneer vegetation is sparse and of low species diversity and stature, and found within the active stream channels or recently scoured stream beds; intermediate vegetation is rather dense and is composed mainly of subshrubs; and mature vegetation is composed of fully developed subshrubs and woody shrubs." (Hanes, p. 191, 1989) r F L L., r L lJ CI L r L L I 11 I I J i1 I I I There are several characteristics of Alluvial Scrub that are noticeably different from Coastal Sage Scrub. "Specifically: Alluvial Scrub has more mesic [plants that require more water than xeric, i.e. drought tolerant species] than most Ccoastal Sage Scrub stands; Alluvial Scrub consists of numerous evergreen shrubs, a diverse assemblage of subshrubs, and a springtime ground cover of annual wildflowers, whereas Coasta Sage Scrub vegetation is composed primarily of drought - deciduous subshrubs with sparse if any annual wildflowers; scalebroom (Lepidospartum squamatum), a shrub with high fidelity to alluvial substrates, is found throughout Alluvial Scrub communities, but seldom in Coastal Sage Scrub; species commonly found in chaparral or desert plant assemblages, such as California redberry (Rhamnus crocea), lemonadeberry (Rhus integrifolia), sugarbush (Rhus ovata), mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus betuloides), holly -leaved cherry (Prunus ificifolia), California juniper (Juniperus californica), and yucca (Yucca whipplei), are also common in the Alluvial Scrub but not in Coastal Sage Scrub; and small -stature riparian woodland species, such as California sycamore. (Platanus racemosa) and mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia) are laced through Alluvial Scrub stands along major drainages, but are not present in stands of Coastal Sage Scrub." (Hanes, p. 187, 1989) Additional identifying features of this community are manifested by the vegetation's interaction with flood - deposited alluvia. Flood intensity determines the three vegetation phases, along with soil substrate and moisture conditions. Floods, fire and human related disturbances can eliminate existing stands of Alluvial Scrub, and thus initiate new pioneer stands. Lack of sufficient soil moisture can prevent an intermediate stage stand from progressing to the mature stage. Mulefat Scrub This community is a very sparse, tall herbaceous riparian scrub dominated almost exclusively by mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia). Mulefat Scrub persists in areas that are frequently flooded; otherwise it is succeeded by other communities, namely Cottonwood Riparian. It is common along intermittent stream channels with coarse substrate and a moderate depth to the water table. Arcto/Madro Tertiary Geoflora There are a number of plant species along the river that are representatives of Arcto- and Madro-tertiary geoflora. Arcto-tertiary plants are species historically associated with wetter, cooler climates. Since the end of the last ice age, these plants have retreated to the northwest and higher elevations. River corridor examples include species associated with Southern Cottonwood -Willow Riparian Forests such as sycamores and alders. Madro-tertiary geoflora is also well represented in the river corridor. Such species represent the dry highlands of the deserts. These species have responded to the region's gradual warming and drying by migrating to the north and west. Junipers and cacti are examples of Madro-tertiary species. Character Summary The project team's understanding of the river character built the foundation for analyzing the river corridor for park site selection. The site selection process is explained in the following section. The natural processes are the basis for the design concept discussed in a later section.. Santa Clara River Park Project 19 20 Santa Clara River Park Project L C L L r L F. r L L 1); .40. AA -7� Lj imWL 40� 1); I I I 'I ,I r, 1J J J 'J Site Selection Process Background The Santa Clara River Park Project goals and objectives are driven by the issues of valley development, the river character and ecology, and the need for recreational space.. The combined objectives can be achieved by the inte- gration of natural habitat and recre- ational space in and adjacent to the river. The riverbed and adjacent lands are mostly privately owned; therefore, the city must obtain rights to use and preserve desired parcels. An ideal goal is to gain public ownership of the complete river corridor. A practical approach is to establish a land pur- chase program guided by a prioritized parcel list. Land will be acquired incrementally, as funds are appropri- ated over a multi-year span. The land will become public recreational space according to the river park plan whose concepts are presented in the body of PARK SITE SELECTION this document. The process described herein identifies and prioritizes candidate park sites. Overview The river corridor was analyzed to determine suitable park sites and appropriate uses. A series of three analytical steps were applied. The first step identified tentative sites, the second step clarified the site or zone boundaries and the final step ranked the sites, see Figure 3.1. The result is a ranked list of park locations that serves immediate needs and is a foundation for building a river park system. The first step involved mapping the physical attributes in and along the river floodplain. The project team analyzed attribute compatibility with appropriate recreational intensity. This resulted in site identifications that closely correlated with community Santa Clara River Park Project 21 _ Recreational Inventory Intensity Compatibility entative Sites -Quantified • Recreation s Intensity zany site Criteria Identification Site Ranked Sites Figure 3.1 workshop results (refer to Appendix Two, Community Participation). Four- teen initial sites were sequentially numbered west to east, along the river. This number was expanded to 19 and finally to 23, as site selection pro- gressed through steps two and three. In the second step, the project team analyzed multiple evaluation factors, for example, personal observations and workshop feedback at each identified site. This evaluation was performed with set criteria, such as visibility of site and river access, to establish zones for appropriate river park locations. Through further analysis the team de- fined smaller sites within these zones. Detailed information of the multiple evaluation factors and set criteria can be referenced in Appendix One, Site Selection Process. The third step in- volved ranking the sites as described in the following section. 22 Santa Clara River Park Project Site Prioritization The site selection process produced a total of 23 potential park sites for consideration. A system for evaluating each site was devised in order to priori- tize them for acquisition. The project team's intent in prioritizing sites was to give those sites which were most repre- sentative of the diversity and integrity of the river a higher ranking. The team considered the characteristics of the abiotic, biotic, and cultural (A B C) components, in addition to the commu- nity input. (Refer to the Concept and Guidelines section for further explana- tion of the three A B C components.) The criteria for evaluating each of the 23 selected sites served the project goals, mainly to provide recreational opportunities in the river corridor while maintaining the natural river habitat. As new park sites are considered for acquisition, this site prioritization process can be applied to update the priority list. Abiotic Component The important characteristics examined within the abiotic context included the general riverbed character and the extent to which the natural river pro- cesses and river forms were evident. Those potential park sites which most clearly exhibited river processes and forms were given a higher score because the goals of developing river awareness and education would be met at these sites. Characteristics included: • High fluvial activity, due to the river form. • Sand bar formation and braiding. • Evidence of erosion and deposition. • General absence of riparian vegeta- tion in riverbed due to high distur- bance and scouring. Biotic Component The biotic component consist of the vegetation communities. Preserving and enhancing natural habitat is a important objective of the river park plan. Characteristics included: • Significant native vegetation growth along the riverbank. • Sustainable conditions for contin- ued growth of vegetation (consis- tently high groundwater table). • Stands of mature trees such as cottonwoods and willows. • Riparian vegetation which extends partly into the riverbed and with- stands occasional flooding. Scoring for both the abiotic and biotic components was based upon the project team's personal surveys and site photo- graphs of the river corridor, in addition to recent aerial photographs repro- duced at a scale of 1 inch = 500 feet. If only one of the respective characteris 7 J I 71 J J J tics was evident, then that site received a raw score of one (1). If two of the respective characteristics were evident, then that site received a raw score of two (2). If three or more of the respec- tive characteristics were evident, then that site received a raw score of three (3). The abiotic and biotic scoring is displayed in Table 3.2, Cultural Component This component is defined as the part of the landscape which is dominated by human cultural activity. The cultural component contains six user -related categories. The scoring system of 0,1,2 or 3 was determined using criteria which are defined in the Cultural Component: Prioritization Criteria chart, Table 3.1 on the following pages. Community Input Scoring for the community input com- ponent was based upon comments, suggestions and recommendations received from the following groups representing various segments of the community (refer to Appendix Two, Community Participation for further explanation): • Community Workshop #2 • City of Santa Clarita, Parks and Recreation Commission • City of Santa Clarita, Parks and Recreation Staff Each site received a single point de- pending upon the total number of recommendations it received from the above three community groups. There- fore, a site received a minimum raw score of zero for no recommendations, up to a maximum raw score of three if all of the community groups selected it as a potential park location. Combined Scores and Site Priority List The raw score for the abiotic and biotic components andthe community input was changed to an adjusted score by multiplying by a factor of two. The. cultural component contained more Abiotic Biotic Component + Component (Adjusted Score) (Adjusted Score) Figure 3.2 individual categories than the other three components. The adjusted score weighed all components equally. These three adjusted scores and the one raw score (cultural component) were then added together to produce the total score for each site, see Figure 3.2 below. The highest possible total score was 34. Finally, ranking the sites' total scores in descending order resulted in the rec- ommended Site Priority List. Refer to the Site Prioritization Table, Table 3.2, and the Recommended Site Acquisition Priority Chart, Figure 3.3, for detailed information. The Final Ranked Sites: Location Map, Figure 3.4, displays these 23 sites along the river. The top six sites are 13, 2A, 14, 111-1, 5A and 9. Cultural Community �. Component ♦ Input (Raw Score) (Adjusted Score) Combined Scores (Total Score) Site Priority List (Total Score) ;I Santa Clara River Park Project 23 Cultural Component: Prioritization Criteria Trail Link (Precise evaluation is not possible since exact alignment of the proposed trails is unknown at this time): (0) No direct connection of the site to the proposed trail alignment. (1) Site is directly connected to the proposed trail alignment.. Table 3.1 Community Need (As defined in the Parks and Recreation Element of the Santa Clarita General Plan): (0) Site is within the service area of more than one existing park. (1) Site is within the service area of only one existing park. (2) Site is within the service area of one existing park, and is within an area needing only one future park site. Ease of Access (Accessibility to the site from nearby communities): (0) Site is more than one-quarter mile from the nearest paved road. (1) Site is less than one-quarter mile from the nearest paved road, but is not accessible by foot. (2) Site is less than one-quarter mile from the nearest paved road, and is easily accessible by foot. (3) Site is not within the service area of (3) Site is directly accessible from any existing parks, and is within an existing paved roads. area needing one or more future park sites. C C C F L C F- L r C! 24 Santa Clara River Park Project. C I 7 i� LJ I r� V 7 J I Development Potential (Likelihood that the proposed park site will be lost to future development):. (0) Site is not located within one-quarter mile of a proposed development. (1) Site is located within one-quarter mile of a proposed development. (2) Site is directly adjacent to a proposed development. (3) Site is located within the boundaries of a proposed development. Education Element (Includes both the proximity to schools and the education potential of the proposed park site) (0) Site is not within walking distance (greater than one-quarter mile) of a school, and the sum of the Abiotic and Biotic raw scores is less than or equal to three.. (1) Site is either within walking distance (less than one-quarter mile) of a school or the sum of the Abiotic and Biotic raw scores is greater than or equal to four. (2) Site is within walking distance (less than one-quarter mile) of a school and the sum of the Abiotic and Biotic raw scores is greater than or equal to four. (3) Site is directly adjacent to a school and the sum of the Abiotic and Biotic raw scores is greater than or equal to four. Visibility of Site (Average traffic volumes -ATV as reported by city traffic engineers): (0) Site is not visible from any existing roads. (1) Site is partially visible from a minor road (ATV less than 25,000 vehicles/day) and not at all visible from a major road (ATV greater than 25,000 vehicles/day). (2) Site is fully visible from a minor road (ATV less than 25,000 vehicles/day) or partially visible from a major road (ATV greater than 25,000 vehicles/day).. (3) Site is fully visible from a major road (ATV greater than 25,000 vehicles/day). Santa Clara River Park Project 25 ABIOTIC BIOTIC COMPONENT COMPONENT Table 3.2 26 Santa Clara River Park Project SITE PRIORITIZATION TABLE CULTURAL COMMUNITY a z z m m U U) ¢ d `0 0 N 0 a 1A-1 COMPONENT 4 1A-2 2 4 1 B-1 2 4 Ca 2 4 2A 2 4 c 1 2 3 v 0 0 ami m 5A d 4 a aEi 2 5C z 0 6A w o m 0 J 7 2 Q O> �= 0 1 O , 0 9 - ECa 4 > 2 4 ; 3 6 70 0 12 F U 2 0 w 3 > ¢¢ 1 1 2 0 1 2 7 1 1 3 0 1 3 9 i 1 2 3 1 2 10 0 1 3 2 1 2 9 1 1 3 3 1 2 11 1 1 3 1 1 3 10 0 1 2 3 1 3 10 1 0 3 1 1 2 8 1 2 3 2 2 2 12 1 2 0 0 1 2 6 1 2 2 2 1 2 10 1 3 0 0 1 0 5 0 3 2 0 1 0 6 1 3 0 0 1 0 5 1 3 1 0 1 0 6 1 3 2 0 3 0 9 1 2 3 0 2 2 10 1 2 3 0 1 3 10 1 1 3 0 0 3 8 0 0 3 5 -L-1 1 0 0 2 7 1 A23 2 2 3 12 -71-- 0 3 1 2 1 COMMUNITY INPUT a z z m m U U) ¢ d `0 0 N 0 a 1A-1 2 4 1A-2 2 4 1 B-1 2 4 1 B-2 2 4 2A 2 4 2B 1 2 3 0 0 4 2 4 5A 2 4 5B 1 2 5C 0 0 6A 0 0 6B 1 2 7A 1 2 78 1 2 8 0 0 9 2 4 10 2 4 11A 3 6 11B 0 0 12 1 2 13 3 6 14 1 2 SITE PRIORITY LIST m O C Q d a Z M to d 0 to r F 1 13 26 2 2A 25 2 14 25 3 1 B-1 2 4 3 5A 2 4 3 9 24 4 1 B-2 23 5 3 22 5 5C 22 5 10 22 6 1 A-2 21 7 2B 20 7 11A 20 8 1A-1 1 9 8 7A 1 9 8 8 19 9 7B 1 8 10 4 16 10 5B 1 6 10 6B 1 6 1 1 6A 1 3 11 12 13 12 11B 11 C r C I lJ C C C 34 32 30 28 26 24 a> 22 0 U0 20 V) ro 18 0 F 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 RECOMMENDED SITE ACQUISITION PRIORITY CHART m Q a r- Q M c� m U a cV m Q *- ¢ co m v m m ¢ N m r N r m N m to r a'. N ^ ¢' f`.. f` N w ID Site Number Figure 3.3 Santa Clara River Park Project 27 SITE 1A-1 SITE 16-2 SITE 2A SITE 2B SITE 5A SITE 5B SITE 7A SITE 7B SITE 8 SITE 9 SITE 12 Rankle 6 Rank 1 Renk 2 Rank 7 Rank 3 Renk 10 Rank 8 Rank 9 Rank 8 Rank 3 Rank 11 fo �ti' �^ '�S„« -. ' � • < ( � J �i �. - �. �;_ � �� ♦sem!( U Z� •b \ ; �� .�!�J 7i � � k y � fry � �"`i ,r g. U f r .5' _ W SITE IA -2 SITE 18-1 SITE 3 SITE 4 SITE 5C SITE 6A SITE 6B SITE 10 SITE 11A SITE 11B SITE 13 IF -SITE 14 Rank B flank 3 Rank 5 Renk 10 Rank 5 Rank 11 Renk 10 Renk 5 Rank 7 Rank 12 Rank 1 Rank 2 SANTA CLWA /� N RIVER PARK Final Ranked Sites: Location Map r%MrFor - Figure 3.4 0 2= 4= snag 121100 4 � 606 Studio • Department of Landscape Architecture California State Polytechnic University, Pomona • June 1995 PROJECT '•-..+ � CSM•'+`' �` 'aii` "4 4 Yom'? r x x y 0i itft • I �' ; n ..x ��4}r¢ Y; T p;•y A•p�'e�b•��.q�t e>.�� Y :IR�y �r A is -� ::,� �� ;� :•. �a� + ;: _' t^ li\A FA 40 + t A ,.< OOW f I J L, --, U I I rl J I '1 J Design Concept Strong landscape patterns are evident throughout the Santa Clarita Valley. The sporadic regional water regime is a primary determinant of the natural patterns in the region. The Santa Clara River's intermittent nature amply reflects the erratic character of the area's rainfall. The region's plant communities are essentially biological manifestations of the water regime. In brief, plant communities in the western United States are products of the abiotic processes more so than in wetter regions of the country (Johnson et al 1988). Plants in areas with high rates of precipitation function under circumstances of greater inter -species competition, while western plant communities are more uniformly influenced by climatic conditions. This is evident in Santa Clarita, where the abiotic processes of regional rainfall and the river's fluvial processes largely CONCEPT' AND GUIDELINES determine the character of the river's vegetation communities. The built environment is a key component of the Santa Clarita Valley landscape. Human cultural influences go well beyond structures and roads. Augmentation of land forms and stream courses and removal of native vegetation and introduced exotic vegetation play prominent roles in the valley's landscape. The A B C Pattern Three key components which are evident throughout the valley are: abiotic processes (A component); biotic processes (B component); and cultural activities of people that influence the landscape (C component). A B C is a consistent pattern throughout the Santa Clara River landscape. A transect of the river follows a letter sequence of C - B - A - B - C, see Figure 4.1. This sequence defines a consistent pattern along the course of the river. Santa Clara River Park Project 29 The Abiotic Component The A component is present throughout, but most readily identified in the lowest channels of the river. These areas are apt to be scoured and annually inundated. Consequently, the center of the river is sparsely vegetated. The Fluvial processes are clearly present, though. Gravel bars, scoured channels, carved pools, erosion and deposition are all clues of fluvial activity characterized by continuous dynamic change. The Biotic Component The B component can be found between the other two, with a certain amount of intermingling and overlap rather than distinct boundaries. Although the biotic qualities in the river corridor are products of abiotic actions, the biota or vegetation is the preeminent feature of the B component. Extant riparian vegetation communities articulate B locations in and along the river corridor. The Cultural Component The C component characterizes river corridor land furthest from the center of the river. Generally, these areas are or can be developed. Areas near the river that are essentially exotic plant communities are also part of the C classification. Non-native grasslands, heavily grazed, and cultivated areas are all expressions of the C component. The Gradation Pattern Gradation is the other projpinent pattern, see Figure 4.2. Whereas the A B C pattern delineates continuity, gradation articulates the array of distinctive river corridor qualities. This distinguished aspect of the valley stems from its location. Essentially, the valley is a geographic nexus, see Figure 4.3. The Santa Clarita Valley is at the confluence of a number of distinct California landscapes. Santa Clarita is a gateway to the San Joaquin Valley. Valley oak (Quercus lobata) is a signature tree of the San Joaquin Valley. The Santa Clarita area is the southern most range of this species. The Mojave desert looms large east of Santa Clarita. dlll� _ Biotic — % �tlllllt;. - i.. .,til � th, •�//, = .: Figure 4.1 30 Santa Clara River Park Project L L C L r L L C L LJ F L L I J I11 I J J J J Figure 4.2 Species from this area spill into the valley. Cholla cacti and Great Basin sagebrush are examples of species from the desert interior. Santa Clarita is also a gateway to the south, the Los Angeles basin. The basin is different from areas further north. Engelmann oak (Quercus Engelmannii) serves as an indicator of southern influences in the Santa Clarita Valley. Now largely displaced by development, the Engelmann oak did Cismontane Figure 4.3 Quercus lobate buercus9 a Engelmannii �Lj dpi 0 hal not naturally grow north of the Santa Clarita area. The maritime climate from the west strongly influences the Santa Clarita Valley. Coastal Sage Scrub and Chaparral plant communities are present throughout the valley. There are a number of plant species along the river that are representatives of Arcto-tertiary geoflora. River corridor examples include species associated with Southern Cottonwood -Willow Riparian Forest, such as sycamores and alders. Madro-tertiary geoflora is also well represented in the river corridor. junipers and cacti are examples of Madro-tertiary species. The Intergrade Pattern All of these distinct environments meld together in the Santa Clarita Valley. How they blend is of particular interest. The melding quality of the valley's vegetation is best described as a botanic gradation. This gradation is particularly evident along the river, see Figure 4.4. Valley and Englemann oaks are signatures of the north -south gradation. However, the strongest evidence of botanic gradation is from east to west, the orientation of the river. Within the city limits, the western portion of the river exhibits the tallest, densest, lushest vegetation. From Interstate -5 east, vegetation density decreases, and species such as Great Basin sagebrush, cacti and other plants from drier inland climates gradually supplant west side species. Design The A B C processes and the west -east gradation patterns comprise the design basis for park lands along the Santa Clara River, see Figure 4.5. This design can be expressed at a small neighborhood park site up to the length of the entire J .Santa Clara River Park Project 31 Figure 4.4 river corridor and beyond. The design relies on the use of prescribed signature vegetation species and vegetation communities in addition to other aspects of the river's natural phenomena. The A B C concept represents continu- ity. The Alluvial Scrub community is a botanical response to the river's fluvial processes (the A area). This community is a signature of the fluctuating fluvial processes in the river. In the deepest channels, frequent fluvial action stalls development of this community at a primary growth stage. Conversely, vegetation matures in areas of the river where it is subjected to less fluvial action. Alluvial Scrub is also a highly threatened vegetation community due to extensive development and channelization of southern California's riverine environments. Enhancement of remnant stands as part of park devel- opment along the river will help ensure the survival of this community. 32 Santa Clara River Park Project Cottonwoods are good indications of riparian conditions (the B area). Along the Santa Clara River, cottonwoods are restricted to areas with access to year- round water, but are not radically disturbed by annual fluvial activity. Restricted by fluvial activity, the ripar- ian vegetation, or the biotic response to abiotic conditions is the predominant feature of this zone. Both A and B are primarily located within the floodway or are within the bounds of the floodplain. The C area is the landscape dominated by cultural, i.e. human, activity. Coast live oak (Quercus agrijolia) is the most common native tree in the area. The species ranges well to the north and south of Santa Clarita. Large stands of oaks were removed for fuel and to make way for cultivation and urban development. Coast live oaks are a natural candidate for the signature species of the C area. They grow in areas outside of frequent fluvial activ- ity. Thus, these trees are natural articu- lations of the C areas. Park development also offers an excellent opportunity to reintroduce the oaks to the valley. C areas along the river are where cul- tural and natural processes mingle. Unlike the A and B areas, C areas can accommodate constructed park elements, since the area is less likely to be disturbed by flood waters. These areas provide ideal design opportuni- ties to acquaint the public with the natural processes of the river. Design in C areas essentially reflects a combi- nation of traditional park elements expressed in forms, shapes, patterns and materials borrowed both literally and symbolically from the river. There are many design applications within these design parameters. Common park elements include pathways, park- ing lots, playgrounds and park furni- ture. All of these elements can be developed, configured and arranged to abstractly suggest river forms. Such C E C L L I! L C L I LJ �1 n I i� forms include braiding, sinuosity, pools, riffles and bar formations.. In effect, this design process unites tradi- tional park elements with the unique natural processes of the Santa Clara River. Density of plantings is a key aspect of the gradation design. For instance, parks closer to the east zone would have a higher ratio of east zone plants to west zone plants. Density also applies to the spacing of plantings throughout the river corridor. Western parks accommodate denser plantings as opposed to eastern parks. Design articulation of the intergrade gradation pattern is expressed by planting design in the parks. Parks on the western end of the river corridor use plants from cismontane California more so than parks further east. Cismontane refers to plant communities on the coastal sides of southern California transverse mountain ranges. Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub and Southern Cottonwood - Willow Riparian Forest are the cismontane vegetation communities present in the river corridor. The same condition applies to the east zone except that transmontane, i.e. plant communities from the inland side of southern California transverse ranges, predominate the planting scheme. In between, park planting schemes incor- porate plants from both cismontane and transmontane plant communities. The extent of cismontane versus transmontane planting depends on the location of the park along the river corridor. Both continuity and distinguishing design applications can be expressed within one park site. Continued park land acquisition and development will fortify the design integrity of the A B C river corridor character. The river's botanic gradation and intergrade pat- terns will also become increasingly evident to park visitors as more parks are developed. A B C gradation and intergrade design sets a precedent for designation of a park system. Applying the A B C pattern establishes continuity within individual parks and between parks. The gradation aspect of the design allows for distinction within and be- tween parks along the river. Figure 4.5 v Biotic 0 01 Cultumi r(Coast Uve Oak] �■Cismontane r = Santa Clara River Park Project 33 Design Guidelines The expression of river processes and forms is embedded within park designs. The following descriptions and illustra- tions are guidelines that demonstrate design manifestations of river forms and processes. Inspiration is an explanation of a river form or process that is adapted to a park design element, interpretation. Inspiration: Gravel Bars Gravel bars, a predominant river form, exhibit a consistent pattern. Larger particles settle first, on the upstream side of the bar. Particle size becomes continually smaller as the gravel bar ex- tends downstream. Gravel bars tend to be five to six times longer than they are wide. 34 Santa Clara River Park Project Figure 4.7 Interpretation: Gravel bar forms can be suggested as park entrances or signatures, vegeta- tion demonstration designs, seating areas, parking lot designs, designation of circulation routes and cairns. Park Entrances Santa Clara River park entrances repre- sent a biotic interpretation of gravel bar form. A coast live oak cache symboli- cally establishes a park entrance, see Figure 4.8 J Figure 4.9 I I I J entrance, the sparser the understory planting, see Figure 4.9. Transmontane species gradually supplant cistmontane species further east. Planting of larger . understory species closer to the oak cache with a gradual decrease in spe- ' � cies size composes the rest of the gravel bar planting. Location of the oak cache toward the upstream side of the en- trance planting hints at the river's Figures 4.6 and 4.11. Coast live oaks are also the signature species of the C component of A B C design concept. Large stands of oaks were removed for fuel and to make way for cultivation and urban development. Oaks are the cultural reintroduction of a prominent Santa Clarita Valley landscape feature. Plantings underneath the oak cache demonstrate the gradation and inter- grade design concepts. Oak cache entrances toward the west end of the project area have relatively denser plantings of cismontane species, see Figure 4.7. The further east the park direction. A gravel bar planting scenario can be applied in other places in the parks that demonstrate native flora or the gradation and intergrade design concepts. Places to sit are basic park elements. Here, a literal arrangement of rocks in the form of a gravel bar is a park bench, see Figure 4.10. Figure 4.10 "1 Figure 4.11 Santa Clara River Park Project 35 Figure 4.12 Figure 4.13 Figure 4.14 36 Santa Clara River Park Project s Parking Lot Paved parking lot organization can parallel gravel bar sediment arrangement, see Figure 4.12. Paths/Trails Gravel bar plantings channel and direct activity to where it is desired and away from where activity is not wanted, see Figure 4.13. Trail Markers Cairns are used to mark trails across rocky, scoured landscapes. Develop- ment of cairn bars define path systems across scoured parts of the river. Cairns are usually tower -like; here they are configured to suggest gravel bars, see Figure 4.14. J rl LJ I I Inspiration: Riparian Vegetation Ribbons Riparian vegetation ribbons line the river's edges. In addition to being the most productive systems, riparian areas have the highest habitat value in the region. Interpretation: River Access Points Planting or enhancement of extant riparian ribbons designates acceptable access to the river so that other areas can be protected, see Figure 4.15 and Figure 4.16. Inspiration: Alluvium The river's porous surface materials can be adapted to park elements. Interpretation: Picnic Barbecue/Bench A gravel -lined barbecue prevents spread of unwanted flames. Hot coals are easily extinguished by raking them into the gravel, see Figure 4.17. Figure 4.15 Figure 4.16 Figure 4.17 f Santa Clara River Park Project 37 Inspiration: Infiltration Water is quickly absorbed by the river's gravel. Interpretation: Drinking Fountains A water fountain is lined with gravel. Excess water percolates into a perfo- rated pipe and then draines to nearby vegetation. A small-scale gesture such as this aptly represents the character of the river, see Figures 4.18 - 4.20. 38 Santa Clara River Park Project Figure 4.18 Figure 4.19 Figure 4. r-; J I I Jl Inspiration: Intermittency The porous river bed quickly absorbs intermittent pulses of rainfall as well as continuous flow from the mainstem and tributaries. The amount of water transported by the river varies from year-to-year, month-to-month, day-to- day and, in the case of the Santa Clara River, hour -to -hour. Interpretation: Water Fountains Fountains are common park attractions. Fountains along the Santa Clara River can suggest the processes of water movement or the resulting forms of water movement. A scale model of the Santa Clara River corridor's flow vari- ability will explain the mercurial river, see Figure 4.21. Placed alongside a wall, the water in a fountain demon- strates the effects of channelized river- sides. Use of one or a few random upwelling fountain pools is more abstract but will hint at the intermittent character of the river, see Figure 4.22. These fountains have practical func- tions. They should rely on disposed water, not imported city water. Urban runoff, gray water and water from nearby locations with good access to these water sources could function as catchment, storage and treatment systems. In the case of Discovery Park, Figure d the periodic abundance of unwanted upwelling groundwater could easily be incorporated into an upwelling foun- be used to establish vegetation. In any event, vegetation volunteers will make the process more emphatic. Figure 4.22 Santa Clara River Park Project 39 (� Inspiration: Deposition and Erosion River deposition and erosion patterns are evident throughout the river's course Interpretation: Paths Curves in paths are areas where erosion and deposition would take place if the Figure 4.23 path were a river. Exaggerated meander areas serve as nodes or pools for people to pause, see Figure 4.24. Tree plantings, Inspiration: Sinuous Patterns Meandering and sinuous patterns are evident when the river is filled with water and when it is dry. Interpretation: Paths Paths that suggest sinuosity funnel people through places. Sinuous paths are relatively narrow with no established place to pause. Paths that pass by sensitive or prime habitat areas are afforded protection by a sinuous design that encourages people to pass by. Meander areas invite people to slow down or pause. A meander in a path lends itself to development as a gathering place, see Figure 4.23. benches, and aromatic circular sage plantings behind benches delineate places to pass time, converse, or watch people. Plantings of true sages from cismontane plant communities in west- ern parks would contrast with transmontane plantings of Great Basin sagebrush in east -end sage circles. The difference reinforces the intergrade design concept. Figure 4.24, F L L C L 40 Santa Clara River Park Project r L r� �1 I I J I u Inspiration: Water Flux As volumes of water swell and subside, debris is deposited along the sides of the river's channel ways. The larger, coarser debris is deposited first. Deposited debris material becomes smaller and finer the closer it is to the most active areas of the river's water channels. Interpretation: Flux Pants Paths designed to reflect this process can accommodate fluctuating volumes of useis. Slower moving people also have room to move to the side if someone or something is moving too fast along the path, see Figure 4.25. A gradation of native grasses to large bunch grasses from the center of the path outward is one interpretation of this river process. Use of sands or gravels or different coarseness of paving materials also expresses deposition of debris, see Figure 4.26. u Figure 4.26 .414. I I I .4 r� 1 Figure 4.25 76 Santa Clara River Park Project 41 V Inspiration: River Patterns Gravel bars, riffle bars and braided channels create intricate but prominent patterns in the river. Interpretation: Paths A maze of paths that braid around abstracted riffle and gravel bars offers diversity, dynamism and a way to disperse activity as well as create intimate spots in large expanses, see Figure 4.27. ,t. Figure 4.27 42 Santa Clara River Park Project J 11 L� J I I Application The design concept and guidelines described in this section are applied to three park sites: Valley Oak Park, Discovery Park and Lost Canyon Park. These sites ranked high in site selection and represent the diverse character of the river corridor. Each site has a different combination of A, B and C components. Comparison between the designs illustrates the gradation character of river corridor plant communities and the intergrade planting scheme. Valley Oak Park has the densest planting scheme of all three sites. This site also uses more plants from cismontane plant communities than the other two sites. Lost Canyon Park is characterized by the sparsest planting design of species that are primarily from the transmontane plant communities. From the stand- point of gradation, Discovery Park is not as densely planted as Valley Oak Park but is more densely planted than Lost Canyon Park. Discovery Park, however, has the greatest diversity or mixture of species from both cismontane and transmontane plant communities. Gradation and intergrade can also be represented within each park. The A B C pattern demonstrates a cohe- sive design concept that embodies the character of the whole river corridor. The gradation aspect defines the diver- sity found in the valley and along the river. These three park designs exemplify the strong application of this concept, and the concept itself is grounded in the natural processes and patterns that form this environment. The application of this concept goes beyond these three sites. Design for the whole river corri- dor and future river park sites can be developed based upon the comprehen- sive scope of this concept, Santa Clara River Park Project 43 L L L L L L 44 Santa Clara River Park Project r I I .11 il . Lj 11 Amok. PV.^ PAII* :;fi ; ! -44 4$. q 1 4.-' 11 11 I iI Valley Oak Park Location The proposed park is located within a linear corridor, see Figure 5.1. The goal is to acquire the whole corridor for a park, but the design will focus on one specific site. The potential location for Valley Oak Park, formerly referred to as Site 5A, extends approximately one mile east from Bouquet Canyon Road. It is the most westerly of the model sites. The zone occupies the north edge of the riverbed. The distinguish- able riverbed varies from 300 to 400 feet in width and is about four feet below the adjacent land. No levees are present on the north side; however, the south side is bordered by the raised roadbed of Soledad Canyon Road. Immediately to the west, the river nar- rows to 120 feet when passing beneath the Bouquet Canyon Road bridge. PARK SITE DESIGN This site, among all those in the project corridor, appears to be the one most likely to have featured a valley oak woodland in the past, therefore it is named Valley Oak Park. Vicinity Analysis This long, slender configuration, which includes a planned trail location (Santa Clara River Trail), offers opportunities as a river -side, trail -side park and as a trial node. The positive attributes are: Existing cottonwood groves Flat river -adjacent land Valley oak remnants Accessibility Diverse in -river vegetation Extensive trail contact Santa Clara River Park Project 45 SANTA CLARA RIVER PAM PROJECT 11 Valley Oak Park: Vicinity Description - Figure 5.1 606 Studio Department 0f Landscape Architecture �74 Newhallfia ilk, V irt a a SANTA CLARA RIVER PAM PROJECT 11 Valley Oak Park: Vicinity Description - Figure 5.1 606 Studio Department 0f Landscape Architecture P°0e UNs per �! s�N i Geml�sod /. 0 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Edge IIIIIIVIIIg111111 River Trail Proposed River Floodway Boundaries Ownership Alluvial Scrub Non -Native Grasses Cottonwood Sycamore FW Valley Oak Coast Live Oak Fir o mo ao em Other features that the design must address: Traffic noise Speedway noise Existing spoil pile Major road construction Development pressure Noise must be accepted within this context. Although vegetation screening has minimal noise muffling properties, screening will visually provide a sense of separation from the background traffic drone. The existing spoil pile can be integrated into site design if it must remain. The slopes should be sculpted into forms resembling surrounding slopes and vegetated in a manner consistent with natural patterns, and can serve as a model for alternate slope appearance, contrasted to conventional planar grading, see Figure 5.2. IJiTfi7f{,N:. 4 .w4n.u...4MniItl MU......MbMYf.JWnb4J..0 The Newhall Ranch Road extension is shown in the City of Santa Clarita General Plan as a possible cross -city thoroughfare through this site. The park site design and location must be adaptable to allow coexistence with a major city street, using land remnants from development and construction. The park must retain contact with the trail; therefore the trail location is a key locating factor. The park site is completely within the river floodplain.. Future residential or commercial development would re- quire surfaced levees to modify the floodplain and resist flood forces; how- ever, levees would disrupt the natural connection between the in -river and adjacent -river park sections. This model park design can be adapted to an edge defined by a levee, but the concept's visual value, connections and underlying purpose would be diminished significantly. Figure 5.2 qg Santa Clara River Park Project The underlying purpose is to use the river as an extension of the recreational space, moving from the urban space to the river space through a unifying design. Remnants of valley oaks indicate that this may have been an oak savanna. The conditions of southerly exposure, flat alluvial bottom land, and nearby water source are the conditions favor- able to the valley oak. Historical ac- counts record their presence in the general area. Scattered individuals on site as well as some existing valley oak groves nearby are strong evidence that this tree species is appropriate in this location. The design will capitalize on the presence of the valley oaks. Site Design The site design exists at two scales. The large scale considers the full one - mile length as potential park space. The trail is the main feature and the existing cottonwood grove segments and oak remnants provide the design stimulus. The segments are to be ex- tended by planting and nurturing to create a continuous, natural edge be- tween the trail and the river bank. The other side of the trail, the inland side, is to be planted with flusters of valley oaks extending upslope from the trail edge. Chaparral shrubs, native to the general area, will complement the oaks. The smaller scale represents the indi- vidual park site, a node within the r C C L r- ,j� 1 L: .J n J U 'J J J I larger context. The major elements of the node are vehicle access, an entry signature, internal circulation, passive recreation opportunities, connection to the trail system, and riverbed access. The park design is represented at this scale. Initial evaluation determined that this river location was most appropriate to low- and medium -passive activities. It ranks high in biotic and cultural com- ponents. The park design considers this by providing activity areas adja- cent to the river, leaving the sensitive river habitat for the more passive use, and introducing the park users to the river through placement of river forms and river vegetation outside the riverbed, see Figure 5.3 and Figure 5.4. The design features four tree species that are representative of communities found in the river corridor. • Coast Live Oak: this evergreen oak appears farthest from the riparian centerline, on the adjacent hillsides, spilling out onto the alluvial plain. It is used at the park entry, bordering the roadway and in the parking lot. Valley Oak: this deciduous oak prefers more fertile and moist soils. It is found sparingly on the site, but probably was abundant along this flat riverside plain before agriculture dis- placed the native trees. Valley oak is used on the level park stretches, paral- leling the river between the coast live oaks and the trail. The valley oak is the unique feature of this park. The valley oak savanna should be extended along the complete mile -long river border.: • Sycamore: presently not found along the river in the project corridor, sycamores are appropriate to the ripar- ian setting and appear along the upper river and along tributaries. Sycamores are used along the main trail, shading the users moving along the paths, reminiscent of the moving streams preferred by this species.. • Cottonwood: presently populating the river edge, cottonwoods are also established at the head of gravel bars. The river edge groves are nurtured and extended into a continuous strip, pro- viding shade for trail users. Cottonwoods are also planted on the gravel bar forms. Site Design Elements The design for Valley Oak Park in- cludes a number of key elements. (See Design Guidelines in the Concept and Guidelines section, for detailed design descriptions and illustrations.) • Trails: the park serves as a trail stop and access point to the Santa Clara River Trail system. The trail design standards from the Recreation and Water Feature Study, 1991, are used as the reference for trail materials and dimensions. • Gravel Bars: appearing as major structures in the river, gravel bars represent the forces of water flow, and its intermittent nature. The bar form is re-created within the park to introduce the vegetation types and patterns found in the river. The bars are nor- mally raised, as islands. Inverted bars are used as sand pits for child play. • Rest Facilities: this park is a princi- pal trail stop. Facilities include drink- ing water, benches and restrooms. • Horse Hitching Area: the eques- trian trail is confined to the river edge, but includes an off -trail, shaded rest stop with a hitching post and water for horses. • River Access: pedestrian and eques- trian soft trails lead into the river through breaks in the cottonwood grove. Park Use The natural riverbed use should be limited to low -passive and moderate - passive activities such as: Nature viewing Photography Landscape painting Natural environment experiences Hiking Informal picnicking Pet exercising Santa Clara River Park Project. 49 LEGEND a. Coast Live Oak 9. Upwelling Fountain (Fig. 4,22) b. Valley Oak In. Drinking Fountain (Fig. 4.18) L c. Sycamore I, Cairn Trail Markers (Fig. 4.14) d. Cottonwood I Multiple Use Trail a. Gravel Bar (Fig. 4.27) k. Horse Hitch Area f. Sand Play Pit L Oak Cache Entrance (Fig. 4.6) L (D 7 iiL t 9 0, A A k SANTA CLAM FRER PAM Valley Oak Park: Model Site Design Figure 5.3 0 100 200 ► F PROJECT 606 Studio - Department of Landscape Architecture III, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona June 1995 L ,� I n J More active recreation may take place on the adjacent, more developed, cultural/ natural park space. The design encourages: Picnicking Nature interpretation Child play (sand boxes) As a trail node, the park also includes: Restrooms Water fountain Shaded seating area Trail side viewer seating Equestrian stop l Elevation A -A Figure 5.4 Design Summary Valley Oak Park is located near the western end of the river corridor. Referring to the A B C pattern concept, the planting scheme for this site would be dense (gradation pattern) and con- sist of cismontane plant communities (intergrade pattern). The site design for this park is located in the C area of the A B C pattern. This is represented using coast live oaks and valley oaks as the signature species. i �Sr'y X9.+7 �i•:� � I q•�a'�' �) G M MSIJ,;>,L',;r��J, ��y...h Santa Clara River Park Project 51 r t� C C L� r - r $Z Santa Clara River Park Project r I r1 J I 1 I :J J I Discovery Park Location Discovery Park, formerly called Site 9, is located in the central portion of the overall project area, approximately one-half mile west of Whites Canyon Road and one-third mile north of Soledad Canyon Road, see Figure 5.5. An anomalous groundwater condition exists here and in the residential neigh- borhoods surrounding the site. The groundwater table is seasonally high during the winter months, and in wet years can come to the surface. There- fore, this site is generally wetter than would be expected at this point along the river corridor. It is a triangular- shaped piece of land along the north edge of the riverbed. The distinguish- able riverbed varies from approxi- mately 500 to 700 feet in width and is only a foot or two lower than the park site. There is currently no levee sepa- rating this land from the riverbed; however, concrete levees have been constructed along the river's edge immediately to the north and south and along the opposite riverbank. Vicinity Analysis This site configuration offers direct access to the riverbed along the west side. The other two sides parallel single-fainily residential communities, although the adjacent houses are ori- ented with their backyards to this potential park site and are physically disconnected by tall fences and walls. The site's location away from direct access to major traffic routes and close proximity to residential development suggests opportunity as a neighbor- hood park. A large number of resi- dences are within walking distance, although direct pedestrian access is available only from a cul-de-sac in the northeast corner. Positive site attributes are: Existing cottonwood groves Existing native vegetation and wildlife habitat Flat river -adjacent land Proximity to residential neighbor- hoods Proximity to numerous schools Direct access to the proposed Santa Clara River Trail Other features which must be consid- ered in design are: Seasonally high groundwater Indirect accessibility from major roadways Limited park size restricted by residential development During wet weather years, groundwa- ter comes to the surface in the sur- rounding developments, and flows into the river. This surface flow is conveyed to the river via two large, concrete - lined storm drain channels, one at the southern end of the site and the other two blocks north of the site. This surface runoff also flows directly through the site along a small, unlined channel along the north side of the park site. Two additional potential parks are located on the other side of the river, one slightly to the west and one to the south of this site. Both are within walking distance and could function together as companion river parks during the dry season, when direct access across the riverbed is possible. Site Design The urban run-off, flowing to the river from the adjacent residential develop- ments via the concrete drainage chan- nel to the south, will be cleansed by flowing through a series of small ponds before entering the river. These ponds will be planted with various aquatic vegetation that can remove pollutants from the water, see Figure 5.6. The design features three tree species that are representative of communities found along the river corridor. • Coast Live Oak: placed in the highest and driest corners of the site, this oak species does not naturally tolerate wet soils. Its primary use is as a park entrance statement in the form of a gravel bar oak cache. Santa Clara River Park Project 53 RIVER PARK PROJECT Discovery Park: Vicinity Description Figure 5.5 Fl 606 Studio .• Department of Landscape Architecture S: River Edge Proposed River Trail Floodway Ownership Boundaries Concrete Levee Alluvial Scrub" Big Sagebrush Scrub Non -Native Grasses Southern Willow Scrub Cottonwood Fn r r, • California State. Polytechnic. University, Pomona 0 200 app 600 1 � \� 1 _A e0aptn'D1111W5p ►� RN v K LEGEND a. Coast Live Oak b. Sycamore j. Horse Hitch Area (Fig. 4.24) c. Cottonwood k. Run -Off Treatment Ponds d. Upwelling Fountain (Fig. 4.22) L Existing Native Vegetation e. Oak Cache Entrance (Fig. 4.6) m. Hiking Trail O \ P 1. Gravel Bar (Fig. 4.10) n. Equestrian Trail g. Picnic Grove (Fig. 4.17) o. Children's Play Area h. Flux Trail (Fig. 4.25) p. Cairn Trail Markers (Fig. 4.14) L Open Play Area q. Drainage Channel SAMA C[ARA RNER PARK PROJECT j Discovery Park: Model Site Design - Figure 5.6 0 zoo .pp r 606 Studio a Department of Landscape Architecture California State Polytechnic University, Pomona • June 1995 F L L 9 %, IF IW RII `rNr Nrr X-<', O `� nn NN IIL I/ffl (llyh (N(I rl r/I to � O lgtT,e .., .. 0 � If. Irlf IT, nx ml" LEGEND N911( n'rhr 4nai a. Coast Live Oak b. Sycamore ,IW r c. Cottonwood FIFO d. Upwelling Fountain (Fig. 4.22) JJ e. Oak Cache Entrance (Fig. 4.6) f. Gravel Bar (Fig. 4.10) g. Picnic Grove (Fig. 4.17) h. Flux Trail (Fig. 4.25) i. Open Play Area j . Horse Hitch Area (Fig. 4.24) O SANI'ACLARA r FeFr �� RNER PARK Discovery Park: Design Detail (NE Corner) - Figure 5.7 a 40 80 120 4 PROJECT 6Studio • Department of Landscape Architecture • California State Polytechnic University, Pomona • June 1995 • Sycamore: presently not found along the river in the project corridor, sycamores are appropriate to the ripar- ian setting and appear along the Santa Clara River and its tributaries in the upper watershed. Small clusters of sycamores are placed along the trails and drainage flow, reminiscent of the moving streams preferred by this species. A large cluster provides shade for the picnic grove. • Cottonwood: populating the river edge, cottonwoods can also be found at the head of gravel bars. The river edge groves are retained and additional groupings are planted along the informal hiking trail, providing shade for trail users and habitat for native wildlife. Site Design Elements The design for Discovery Park includes a number of key elements. (See the Design Guidelines section, for detailed design.) • Trails: the park serves as a trail stop and access point to the Santa Clara River Trail system. The trail design standards from the Recreation and Water Feature Study, 1991, are used as the reference for trail surface materials and dimensions. $g Santa Clara [fiver Park Project • Gravel Bars: appearing as major structures in the river, gravel bars represent the forces of water flow, material transport and debris accumu- lation. The bar form is re-created in various ways within the park to intro- duce the vegetation types and river processes and patterns. • Rest Facilities: as a principal multi- use trail stop, the park amenities in- clude benches, picnic groves under the shade of sycamore trees, drinking fountains and rest areas for both eques- trians and trail users. • Riverbed Access: winding through the site, a loop hiking trail allows access into the riverbed near the two ends of the park. This provides direct river connections to two other proposed river park sites during the dry season. Park Use The appropriate activities for the natu- ral riverbed and adjacent native vegeta- tion zone should be limited to low - passive and moderate -passive recre- ation. Activities include: Nature viewing and studying Photography Landscape painting Natural environment experiences Hiking Bird watching This area does not include many de- signed spaces but rather is retained in a more natural state with a loop hiking trail carefully interwoven through the existing native vegetation of Alluvial Scrub and Southern Willow Scrub. More active recreation may take place on the open grassy play area which occupies the eastern half of the site farthest away from the riverbed. This designed space encourages: Children's play (sand pit, interactive water fountain, play structures) Horseshoes Picnicking Santa Clara River Trail access Kite flying Design Summary Discovery Park is located in the central section of the river corridor. According to the A B C pattern, the planting scheme for this site should be moderate in terms of vegetation density and consist of both cismontane and transmontane plant communities (inter- grade pattern). L L L L L L L F V L Li 1 I I J 11 I; J I Lost Canyon Park Location Lost Canyon Park, formerly called Site 13, consists of 70-100 acres. It extends one-quarter of a mile west from Sand Canyon Road, see Figure 5.8. It is the most easterly of the model sites. The riverbed is constrained under the Sand Canyon Bridge but then fans out to a width over 1000 feet wide. No levees are present on either side of the river, and adjacent urban development is limited. Two major transportation corridors, the Antelope Valley freeway and the Southern Pacific Railroad line, border Lost Canyon Park, exposing it to tens of thousands of people per day.. The park site is familiar to most city residents because it is the former grounds of the annual "Frontier Days' festival. Vicinity Analysis The site is accessible from the Lost Canyon Road extension on the east, although parking is not clearly defined. The future interface between the exist- ing schools on Lost Canyon Road and park users will require Lost Canyon Road to be widened and extended to accommodate the additional vehicles. A portion of Lost Canyon Road also enters the site from the north, from Soledad Canyon Road. From this access point, Lost Canyon Road passes underneath the Antelope Valley free- way and splits in an east -west direction with the paving surface changing from asphalt to compacted dirt. The positive attributes of the site are: High acquisition potential River braiding Narrow flow within the riverbed Existing coast live oak grove Accessibility and visibility Scenic overlook opportunities Other features that the design must address are: Traffic noise Adjacent neighborhood Two access points 12-15 ft. tall slope protection fence Railroad maintenance access Water well maintenance access Wildlife linkage Existing equestrian services Site Design Lost Canyon Park is a large park that can accommodate the greatest number of park users at time. It offers a balance of smaller areas for individuals to experience solitude and restfulness, or nature study, often sought in a park setting. It also has the flexibility to host community -wide special events, weekend gatherings, and daily use. Lost Canyon Park can serve as a desti- nation along the city's trail system for group interaction and as an equestrian staging area. This park offers varied opportunities which begin at the pro- posed Trail, Information Center, where visitors can learn about the native landscape. Interpretive pamphlets describe the sensitive Big Sagebrush Scrub vegetation or the pioneer Allu- vial Scrub community. Trail exploration can begin on horse- back, bicycle or on foot from the Trail Information Center, with connections to established or informal trails, and the regional Santa Clara River Trail, see Figure 5.9. Families or groups can gather for picnics or festivities under the oak groves, get involved in group play such as frisbee or kite flying on meadow grass clearings, or participate in impromptu active sport play on sand volleyball courts. Spectators can enjoy the sport play from a shaded seat wall or by casually relaxing under the canopy of mature and revegetated oaks, see Figure 5.10 and Figure 5.11. The active equestrian community will find hitching posts and watering troughs under the shade of cottonwood trees, close to the riverbank at the proposed Lost Canyon Road turn- around. Supplies and horse feed, may be provided in the Trail Information Center. Equestrian trail riders are provided with separate trail experi- ences within the Big Sagebrush Scrub plant community close to the river's Santa Clara River Park Project 59 N`9h,�a`1 a SAWA CLARA RNER PARK PROJECT 1A See Figure 5.10 Lost Canyon Park: Vicinity Description - Figure 5.8 606 Studio 00 Department of Landscape Architecture w /-� ` a LJ N g A > SPRR uuunan111":Imuuullmmmnlnulluu N 1............. 111111111111.\\111\\ 1110111111\1111101\d1\➢l ��' l'plj Ill MEM River Edge Proposed River Trail Floodway Ownership Boundaries Alluvial Scrub 1 California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Big Sagebrush Scrub Non -Native Grasses Chaparral / Sage Scrub Cottonwood Coast Live Oak 0 2W 4W 6W pates o•. e' /•• 0 0. Y 0 i �° .''o. • t : � ;p!•. boo •••••� • n •. P, •__- ooWooDo :0000°oroj•/ 0 HistwiC Cemetery. p4pO...0-0o-.__-....... °pOO° °� 0" • ;O .0 0 0 0 • °•• .oco„ao° �• 0 4 0 0 aW2VppUoe°°`4°° • .amu- °. :.. ^r .e u't +'. °•.p.:•: a. • ..{o 0000e00000 �•ooeo .••'e sr P • aoo°.......... . o':�,r ,. •r!•:.0�'•'�ptOW '� ..•':`.'�.S'r P,000°4•-tl + °. .p.... . r..r- of •. '. '. �•. e: p C P r• o •/• •.o .!. rod'. '•e: •.R•. �I' OT ° Milhead \ Well,; e:{:'•/: �.:� :. opo° ..gyp � °o" • ��.'o: •. _o°° . nom... Bird Habitat 'Wing EgwMnan Stables SAMA CLAM RIVER PARK I Lost Canyon Park: Trail Connections - Figure 5.9 PROJECT ..•... Santa Clara River Trail °°°. Equestrian Trail ••••• Bicycle Flux Trail Hiking Trail 0 200 100 600 FFEf 1200 606 Studio • Department of Landscape Architecture • California State Polytechnic University, Pomona • June 1995 L C J I I I I I I 7 U I edge. The trail surface is compacted dirt, and not as soft or loose as the alluvial sand within the riverbed. Bicyclists can move swiftly across the site on the flux trail, which allows non bicyclists to move to the side of the paved surface when bike riders need pass. Hikers can explore the overlook and take prospect over Lost Canyon Park from the south side of the Santa Clara River, or branch off and take a short hike up to the pioneer cemetery on the north side of the river and un- derstand a bit of the local history in this ancestral burial place. t0 Four existing plant communities will be enhanced: Alluvial Scrub, Big Sagebrush Scrub, Oak Woodlands (found along the riverbed and upland areas), and the Coastal Sage/Chaparral vegetation, which is found on the foothill slopes. Site Design Elements The design for Lost Canyon Park in- cludes a number of key elements. (See the Design Guidelines section for detailed design.) • Trail Information Center: a one- story wood building, designed with porch -like main entry features and a partially open roof, provides day -use services and facilities. The community can buy supplies, use restrooms and water fountains, obtain maps of trails, gather for meetings in a small confer- ence room, picnic on the porch, and possibly sample local wares and foods. • Trails: the park serves as a trailhead and access point to the Santa Clara River Trail system. The trail design standard from the Recreation and Water Feature Study, 1991, is used as the reference for trail materials and dimen- sions, with the exception of the bicycle "flux" trail. The bicycle "flux" trail allows bicyclists and pedestrians to use the same trail because it includes an undefined flux area that facilitates passing. The benefit of this arrange- ment is that the overall pavement width can be reduced and native veg- etation can grow closer to the paved bicycle surface, capturing the water run-off along the edges. • Gravel Bars: the bar form is re- created within the park to introduce the vegetation types and patterns found in the river. High desert plants, as well as the sensitive Big Sagebrush Scrub plant community will be enhanced through design that is patterned off of the larger -to -smaller relationship of the rocks, gravel and sand of a gravel bar. • Oak Grove_Revegetation: this program outlines planting coast live oak, (Quercus agrifolia), to enhance and develop an oak grove. • "Universal Access Trail" and Park- ing Area: park users will find conve- nient parking adjacent to a loop trail designed to accommodate the needs of wheelchair users and others. The loop trail provides a passage through color- ful and scented native vegetation while the shade and sun exposure patterns create dramatic visual contrast. Park Use The appropriate activities for the natu- ral riverbed and adjacent native vegeta- tion zone should be limited to low - passive and moderate -passive recreation. Activities include: Hiking Kite flying Bird watching Pet exercising Interpretive trails More active recreation may take place on the open grassy play area and within the sand volleyball court vicinity. This designed space encourages: Family picnicking Horseback staging and riding Bicycling Closed loop jogging Sand volleyball Build -your -own -bridge Community special events Santa Clara River Park Project 63 m ii., Sa n t o Clara Rive r c LOST Cq C e�- N qpq A L, 0 k� .` L X neriMglKyRti •tMn+ac� w.e9+nwewHw•j°' � . LEGEND F- a. Coast Live Oak Grove i. Sand Volleyball Courts b. Valley Oak j. Picnic Grove (Fig. 4.17) c. Cottonwood k. Seat Wall d. Big Sagebrush Scrub I. High Desert Vegetation (Fig. 4.27) e. Horse Hitch & Water m. Equestrian Trail L Handicap Accessable Parking n. Flux Trail (Fig, 4.25) J g. Trail Information Center o. Hiking Trail x h. Park Entry Sign (Fig. 4.8) p. Cairn Trail Markers (Fig. 4.14) SAWA CIARA rLjt� RNER PARK Lost Canyon Park: Model Site Design - Figure 5.10 a 100 me 04A PROJECT 606 Studio • Department of Landscape Architecture • California State Polytechnic University, Pomona • June 1995 r r L J Design Summary Lost Canyon Park is at the eastern end of the river corridor. Following the A B C pattern concept, the planting scheme would be less dense (gradation pattern) and consist of transmontane plant communities (intergrade pattern).. --, Not only will sensitive native vegeta- tion communities be preserved and Li enhanced, but historic elements and topographic features will be explored and appreciated. Lost Canyon Park is J proposed to serve a large cross-section of the community. This park design n will give recognition to the first of I�f many public spaces for the enjoyment of future generations. ■1 J JFigure 5.11 1 Santa Clara River Park Project 65 66 Santa Clara River Park Project I C F C C C r ZK Ry S ZK I I J I r, J Looking into the Future The Santa Clara River Park Project aims to create a model park system that integrates ecology and design into a plan that protects the natural character of the river and provides recreational opportunities. This river park plan provides a framework for a park system that encompasses the whole river corridor within the City of Santa Clarita. The Santa Clara River Park Project is a planning effort that is being made at a critical time for the future of park planning in Santa Clarita. Other major studies develop- ing concurrently with this project include the City of Santa Clarita Parks Master Plan and the Santa Clara River Enhancement and Management Plan (SCREMP), see Figure 61. The Parks Master Plan focuses on city-wide park needs and opportunities including the Santa Clara River corridor. The scope of SCREMP is the whole river corridor from the headwaters to the Pacific Ocean. Its focus is on regional issues associated with CONCLUSION Sanaa Clara River V parte Enhancement and1//�\ Master Management Plan Plan Santa Clara River Park Project Figure 6.1 the river. An opportunity exists to expand the scope of the Santa Clara River Park Project. These designs are applicable to additional parkland acquisitions along the entire river corridor. Examples of possible sites include Towsley Canyon and Santa Clarita Canyon. (See Appendix Three, Alternative Expansion Areas, for more detail.) The concepts and designs put forward in this plan can permeate beyond Santa. Clara River Park Project 67 the river's boundary into the city's park guidelines, linking all city parks into one comprehensive system. The river park plan can also be applied at a regional level. The strength of the design concept, rooted in natural processes, provides a framework for open space design along the Santa Clara River within the whole watershed. Paul Sears wrote, 'Two kinds of landscape are worth looking at -those that man has never touched, and those in which man has gained harmony." The Santa Clara River Park Project is built on a vision of gaining harmony, where people are reconnected with the natural environment. People gain an appreciation and insight into the river environment and its function through these innovative park designs. This plan is a step towards developing an environmental ethic in the community, one in which people appreciate, understand and respect the importance of our natural environment. 68 Santa Clara River Park Project C E F C C �^. '6 -s , y�� +f.�. !Y '= II U`w::' .�. i. � y- ._.� �r �� + ; J[. � 'Y 1 �,Y 1 � �S � e a � �i 1 �r (�rrSl;.. !� �'aY' w;��1 J �J Ji I E C Site Selection Process Background The Santa Clara River Park Project goals and objectives are driven by the issues of valley development, the river's presence, and the need for recreational space. The combined objectives can be achieved by the integration of natural habitat and recreational space in and adjacent to the river. The riverbed and adjacent lands are mostly privately owned; therefore, the city must obtain rights to use and preserve desired parcels. An ideal goal is to gain public ownership of the complete river corri- dor. A practical approach is to estab- lish a land purchase program guided by a prioritized parcel list, established according to specific criteria. Land will be acquired incrementally, as funds are appropriated over a multi-year span. The land will become public recre- ational space according to the river APPENDIX ONE park plan whose concepts are pre- sented in the body of this document. The process for identifying and priori- tizing candidate sites is described in this section. The task was to identify and rank poten- tial park sites along the river corridor from Tick Canyon to Interstate -5 and up the South Fork to Lyons Avenue. The goals and objectives stress preserving the river in its natural state while seeking recreational space. This project area was evaluated for recreational intensity compatible with preservation goals. Overview Figure A1.1 illustrates the steps applied in the selection and prioritizing process. The Santa Clarita Community and City Staff identified locations that they preferred for various reasons. (The community and staff participation process is discussed in Appendix Two.) .Santa Clara River Park Project 69 -Recreational Inventory Ranking { Figure A1.1 Intensity Compatibility Initial Tentative Sites Sites Multiple Quantified Factors Recreational Intensity Zones 1 Ranking Criteri Community Public & 'Opinion and Staff Preferences -Recreational Inventory Ranking { Figure A1.1 Intensity Compatibility Initial Tentative Sites Sites Multiple Quantified Factors Recreational Intensity Zones 1 Ranking Criteri Raped Sites An inventory analysis was conducted independent of the community input data, based upon the compatibility of each site's physical characteristics with various recreational intensities. The results were then correlated with the community preference summary. The next step evaluated multiple factors including the physical resource inventory, community preferences, and team 70 Santa Clara River Park Project observations to develop a quantified rating for recreational sites or zones. Measures of potential recreational intensity were used to categorize the locations. Four intensity levels were considered based upon impact to sensi- tive habitat. These are described in Table A1.1, Recreational Intensity Defi- nitions. Both the inventory and mul- tiple factor analysis identified candi- LOW PASSIVE DESCRIPTION Habitat Preservation Viewing Areas Only Vehicle Restrictive Access Pedestrian Access Only No Grading or Construction of Facilities No Visibility from Roads Low Noise Levels Sense of Place Encourages Quiet Solitude date park locations. The process al- lowed the project team to develop a thorough understanding of the project corridor's natural and built environment. The final step applied the inventory data and other analysis data, including the community input, to prioritize the sites as park location candidates. This site prioritization is detailed in Park Site Selection, see page 21. LOW PASSIVE EXAMPLES Nature Viewing Photography Landscape Painting Learning about Natural Environment MODERATE PASSIVE DESCRIPTION MODERATE PASSIVE EXAMPLES Habitat Enhancement and Preservation Hiking Hiking Trails (unpaved) Nature Study Interpretive / Educational Signs Informal Picnicking Informal Parking (limited capacity) Dog / Pet Exercising Undesignated Picnic Areas Interpretive Trails Low Visibility from Roads Low Not" Levels a Site Site Identification Raped Sites An inventory analysis was conducted independent of the community input data, based upon the compatibility of each site's physical characteristics with various recreational intensities. The results were then correlated with the community preference summary. The next step evaluated multiple factors including the physical resource inventory, community preferences, and team 70 Santa Clara River Park Project observations to develop a quantified rating for recreational sites or zones. Measures of potential recreational intensity were used to categorize the locations. Four intensity levels were considered based upon impact to sensi- tive habitat. These are described in Table A1.1, Recreational Intensity Defi- nitions. Both the inventory and mul- tiple factor analysis identified candi- LOW PASSIVE DESCRIPTION Habitat Preservation Viewing Areas Only Vehicle Restrictive Access Pedestrian Access Only No Grading or Construction of Facilities No Visibility from Roads Low Noise Levels Sense of Place Encourages Quiet Solitude date park locations. The process al- lowed the project team to develop a thorough understanding of the project corridor's natural and built environment. The final step applied the inventory data and other analysis data, including the community input, to prioritize the sites as park location candidates. This site prioritization is detailed in Park Site Selection, see page 21. LOW PASSIVE EXAMPLES Nature Viewing Photography Landscape Painting Learning about Natural Environment MODERATE PASSIVE DESCRIPTION MODERATE PASSIVE EXAMPLES Habitat Enhancement and Preservation Hiking Hiking Trails (unpaved) Nature Study Interpretive / Educational Signs Informal Picnicking Informal Parking (limited capacity) Dog / Pet Exercising Undesignated Picnic Areas Interpretive Trails Low Visibility from Roads Low Not" Levels HIGH PASSIVE DESCRIPTION Built Trails (paved) Parking Areas (unpaved) Visible from Roads Vehicular Access Equestrian Staging Areas Designated Picnic Areas Outdoor Lighting Water Fountains ACTIVE DESCRIPTION Modest Facilities / Structures Festival. Activity Areas Childress Play Equipment Athletic Fields Easy Vehicular Access High Visibility from Roads Parking Areas (paved) Introduced Irrigation Outdoor Lighting Table A1.1 HIGH PASSIVE EXAMPLES Picnicking Horseback Riding Hiking Playing Horseshoes Enjoying Rest Areas, Water Replenishment Viewing Aesthetic Water Features ACTIVE EXAMPLES Picnicking Archery Volleyball Baseball and Soccer Frisbee Golf Model Plane Flying Ll L IrI,II L� L.. L C, 1 I— n J J I� Corridor Inventory The inventory data were developed from project corridor observation and inspection, previous river studies, aerial photographs, area maps, city and county office interviews, government publications, and numerous book and periodical references, see Figure A1.2. Step 1. Mapping Step 3. Overlay Mops Per Maft Plan Step 2. — DelermWo Most Imporlard InveMorlef Step 1: Develop Irnentdy Map 0 Each map describes one or more corri Eeed1sh ""' "r Levee dor attributes. All maps were drawn at the same scale on translucent vellum or FigureAl.2 tracing paper. Attributes mapped were: • Circulation • Flood plain, hazards • Prime recharge area, infiltration • Public access and barriers • Special habitats • Endangered species habitat • Existing land use • Existing park influence area • Fluvial effects • Historical sites • Slope • Soil • Vegetation • Visibility • Water inputs • Water table • Well location Community and City staff input was mapped as: Four Sepmale Site • Workshop site preferences • Parks and Recreation Commission suggestions • Parks and Recreation staff suggestions Step 2. Map Selection for Initial Site Identification Table A1.2 identifies the mapped fea- tures that were assessed, by the team to be the most influential in determin- ing appropriate recreational intensity. The map base was reduced to simplify this first analysis. Step 4. one Map IndIullMrp poordw Shea MAN Inlet Illea lbs r� step S. See F" A2.3 Filled circles indicate compatibility and open circles indicate incompatibility. Note that some mapped categories do not appear because the project team judged them to not be influential in this preliminary analysis. Step 3. Overlay Maps to Find Com- patible Areas at Each Intensity Level The selected inventory maps of the whole corridor were combined to find areas of common compatibility at each intensity level, thereby developing four separate potential site maps, one for each intensity level. Step 4. Create Composite Map of Potential Recreation Sites The elements of each map were indi- vidually assessed for compatibility The four maps were combined, produc- with recreation at each level, being ing a map of the areas deemed most either compatible or not compatible. compatible with recreational activities. Santa Clara River Park Project 71 Table A1.2 Certain factors contribute to question- able accuracy in the results, primarily the changing nature of the river and the vegetation patterns it engenders. Also, the imprecise boundaries of some mapped elements reduce the practical resolution of the composite map. A cross check with other data was per- formed to substantiate the findings. Step 5. Compare with Community and City Data The community preferences and City personnel suggestions were translated to a map format and compared to the composite map. The maps correlate well as shown on the combined Inven- tory/Community Map, see Figure A1.3. The correlation conferred confidence in the initial site selections. 72 Santa Gara River Park Project Multiple Factor Evaluation A comprehensive analysis was required for each site at a smaller scale. At the project corridor scale, small sites could be lost or incorrectly placed due to mapping inaccuracies. The many layers would require a series of transla- tions, each adding error. Finally, the finite boundaries that must be applied in this method are unrealistic for those factors which change gradually over an area, such as vegetation density. Mapping can infer a false precision.. A site by site evaluation was initiated using data collected and team mem- bers' personal experience. The evaluation was conducted by the project team in several sessions using the 500 scale (1 inch = 500 feet) colored aerial photo mosaic for spatial reference and nota- tion. The study progressed generally from west to east, considering the whole project corridor applying criteria from Step 2, see Figure AIA. Step 1. Assemble the Data Data came from four sources: Community Workshops Public input had already been documented. Additionally, each team member had notes and personal recollections of the work- shop experiences. • City Officials and Staff A project presentation and a special workshop was conducted with the Parks and Recreation Commission, eliciting comments and suggestions. The project was presented to the City Planning Commission and three of the five members were personally inter- viewed regarding their impres- sions. Many city and county staff personnel were contacted, such as City Public Works employees, and each provided data, advice and opinion. The team had one or more weekly discussion sessions with the City Parks and Recreation Department, where ideas were exchanged. Other reports, plans and maps were also gathered in the various interviews. F L C L L 11 L I v t c o W LL w W i a is Mapped Faaures �. u v. vRi i _ ?9 # c d Ai m R a q a JAmEe0 mrE - ;:]_ S N 6 2 S 6 - - HECHEATION INTENSITIES Low Paaslva Modwate P"Ove 11 loll 1 11 _ [High P"al" 11 1 11 1 11 Active Table A1.2 Certain factors contribute to question- able accuracy in the results, primarily the changing nature of the river and the vegetation patterns it engenders. Also, the imprecise boundaries of some mapped elements reduce the practical resolution of the composite map. A cross check with other data was per- formed to substantiate the findings. Step 5. Compare with Community and City Data The community preferences and City personnel suggestions were translated to a map format and compared to the composite map. The maps correlate well as shown on the combined Inven- tory/Community Map, see Figure A1.3. The correlation conferred confidence in the initial site selections. 72 Santa Gara River Park Project Multiple Factor Evaluation A comprehensive analysis was required for each site at a smaller scale. At the project corridor scale, small sites could be lost or incorrectly placed due to mapping inaccuracies. The many layers would require a series of transla- tions, each adding error. Finally, the finite boundaries that must be applied in this method are unrealistic for those factors which change gradually over an area, such as vegetation density. Mapping can infer a false precision.. A site by site evaluation was initiated using data collected and team mem- bers' personal experience. The evaluation was conducted by the project team in several sessions using the 500 scale (1 inch = 500 feet) colored aerial photo mosaic for spatial reference and nota- tion. The study progressed generally from west to east, considering the whole project corridor applying criteria from Step 2, see Figure AIA. Step 1. Assemble the Data Data came from four sources: Community Workshops Public input had already been documented. Additionally, each team member had notes and personal recollections of the work- shop experiences. • City Officials and Staff A project presentation and a special workshop was conducted with the Parks and Recreation Commission, eliciting comments and suggestions. The project was presented to the City Planning Commission and three of the five members were personally inter- viewed regarding their impres- sions. Many city and county staff personnel were contacted, such as City Public Works employees, and each provided data, advice and opinion. The team had one or more weekly discussion sessions with the City Parks and Recreation Department, where ideas were exchanged. Other reports, plans and maps were also gathered in the various interviews. F L C L L 11 L I v Legend Community Input Workshop 2 - City Stan 0 Park 8 flet Commission Q Inventory Analysis SAMA CLAM PNT RIVER PARK Inventory /Community Map - Figure A1.3 0 2000 4000 6000 12000 PROJECT 1606 Studio 0 Department of Landscape Architecture • California State Polytechnic University, Pomona • June .1995 Step L. Data Assembly Nnlic �' )c«nmuni Workshops Parks and Rac Camm'ssa'L) Cay InPIA send Planning nec Colon (I CityStafli Prblic Warks Parka end Rs Sla I Site Visas Observation Aerial Photon Slidos Figure A1.4 74 Maes Z Sae by Site Evaluation Expanded to Site Ceraered Zones Slap 3. Step 2. /v Establish \Vr1� Cderia W Me N.1019 M Observations Team members had spent many hours in and along the river, gaining impressions, both objec- tive and subjective. Soil, rocks, leaves and other plant parts were brought to the studio for identifi- cation and reference. The aerial photograph was more than a spatial reference tool, Many features were visible, particularly Santa Clara River Park Project Redefined Zonas Overlain on Large Aerial Photo / «Each ied for rtegory patterns that could be related to ground based observations. More than 500 photo slides were avail- able in the studio, cataloged to location. Key slides were repro- duced as 8x10 color Xerox prints for ready reference. • Inventory Maps The inventory maps provided a base reference, but more impor Step 2. Establish Criteria 7I assigning a one (1) if the criterion was J tantly, team members developed "expertise" on the various inven- tory subjects. These maps served 1 as the starting point for evalua- L tion. Localized site evaluation reduced the uncertainty and error L buildup inherent at the scales _ used during the layer comparison. Step 2. Establish Criteria assigning a one (1) if the criterion was t� The evaluation required a standard set of attributes and the criteria which were scored. Each intensity level was 1 assigned appropriate criteria for each L attribute as shown in Table A1.3. Criteria were borrowed from related L sources, such as from the City General Plan, but most were developed to support the definitions of the recreational inten- sity levels of the previous table. Step 3. Evaluation The evaluation sheet consisted of the attributes listed in the criteria table, at r each of the four recreational intensity levels, correlated to each site. Scoring, or site rating, was objective, assigning a one (1) if the criterion was true, minus one (-1) if false, and zero (0) if uncertain or neutral. The subjec- tive factor was in determining the locations to be rated. Nine site locations had been identified L through layer analysis, but these were generalized areas that could each J contain more than a single park site. The project team figuratively traveled through the corridor, using the photo mosaic. Moving through each site location, the data from step one was applied by the team to determine if the site should be divided, expanded, shrunk, moved or deleted. For ex- ample, if the adjacent existing land use at one end of a site was different from that at the other end, then a single rating regarding land use would not be valid. Site division was the solution. Stretches between sites were studied to determine if they exhibited features characterized by chosen sites. Sites were added if conditions merited. The nine sites grew to 14 and then to 19 through subdivision and addition. (Ultimately, the total number of sites expanded to 23 through similar reason - ing during the prioritization process.) The boundaries of the selected areas also changed and became zones. The final scores are shown in Table A1.4. The intensity levels acquired names of plant material appropriate to each. Step 4. Interpretation The intensity score indicates the most appropriate recreational intensity for a site. It does not preferentially rank sites or zones against one another. All the locations that survived step two are potential park sites, to be compara- tively ranked in a later exercise. Santa Clara River Park Project 75 CIRCULATION LEVEES Low Passive No adjacent road, No constructed trail thru site Low Passive. > 250 It from levee Mod. Passive Convenient road access (>250 k)), No paved trails Mod. Passive No restriction High Passive Direct road access, Constructed trails High Passive No restriction I� Active Direct road access Active No restriction EXISTING LAND USES FLUVIAL DISTURBANCE Low Passive > 500 k from developed areas Low Passive No restriction Mod. Passive > 250 It from developed areas Mod. Passive No restriction Higfi Passive > 100 k from residential areas High Passive Outside fluvial effects Active > 100 k from residential areas Active Outside fluvial effects J DIRECT RIVER ACCESS WATER TABLE Low Passive Dirert access to river Low Passive <20 R deep jy Mod. Passive No restriction Mod. Passive No restriction High Passive No restriction High Passive r Outsisideesurface now J Active No river access Active Outside surface now VISIBILITY OF SITE RECHARGE AREA Low Passive Majority of site not seen from main thoroughfare Low Passive No restriction �I Mod. Passive Majority of site seen by < 25,00 autos per day Mod. Passive No restriction J High Passive Majority of site seen by > 25,000 autos per day High Passive Outside recharge area Active Majority of site seen by > 25,00 autos per day Active Outside recharge area VEGETATION COMMUNITIES SLOPE Low Passive No restriction Low Passive No restriction Mod_ Passive Outside sensitive habitat areas Mod. Passive No restriction High Passive Outside sensitive habitat areas High Passive < 16 % `l Active >250 It from sensitive area Active < 16% SPECIAL HABITAT LANDMARKS Low Passive No restriction Low Passive > 250 k from landmark Mod. Passive Outside special habitats Mod.. Passive No restriction High Passive > 250 k from special habitat High Passive No restriction Active > 250 It from special habitat Active No restriction FLOODWAY Low Passive No restriction `j Mod. Passive No restriction High Passive Outside noodway Active Outside noodway 1 Table A1.3 ing during the prioritization process.) The boundaries of the selected areas also changed and became zones. The final scores are shown in Table A1.4. The intensity levels acquired names of plant material appropriate to each. Step 4. Interpretation The intensity score indicates the most appropriate recreational intensity for a site. It does not preferentially rank sites or zones against one another. All the locations that survived step two are potential park sites, to be compara- tively ranked in a later exercise. Santa Clara River Park Project 75 Intensity Name 1A 1B HIM 3 4 5 6A 7A 7B 6B 8 10 9 11A11B 12 13 14 Low Passive Bxkwheal 7 12 10 9 7 1 11 8 11 9 7 7 4 7 5 4 3 9 7 Moderale Passive CoBonwood 7 7 6 5 9 9 8 8 7 6 8 9 7 7 7 6 9 9 8 Nh Passive SageMM 2 0 7 5 7 9 5 4 1 6 5 1 9 4 5 5 9 7 8 Active Fesaie 3 -2 5 2 51 91 3 1 3 3 3. 1 8 2 3 5 8 5 7 Table AM Step 5. Presentation The figurative walk through the river corridor resulted in zone outlines, spaces that would become potential park sites. These were later drawn on the photo board for group presentation. Board updates were maintained through- out the subsequent prioritization process. The following river corridor map illustrates the zone locations and recreational intensity ratings, see Figure A1.5. 76 Santa Clara River Park Project Prioritization The foregoing analysis was used as input material for a site prioritization process detailed in the report body. The result is a site listing in order of suitability and need within the park system concept described in the Santa Clara River Park Project report. C L C ZONE EMMERT'A [ZONE AB ZONE ONE I1e:i IOI�,D0FD W1C OM00: COTI INCHU I M 1 COTTONWOOD (o- ; 11wow.9( AGIIUEBRUSH A EiSAGEBRUSHIE[SCI 7 , '} LS "11!_ L i 1Ij I L./II ,.S I, x.. i1 .'`-� ._n...J ! I f _ _ ["i. -'.S " Ir"� /iµL'S iL-/'V. ZONE 2B ZONE3 ZONE4 ZONE fSA ZONE 6B ZONE fO ZONE 1fA ZONE IIB ZONE 13 ZONE 14 IUCM HEAT. !ES[OEI'WUo- IS SEE w,* S ECf AW000. SAGEBRUSH:ONWOOD. I fES(UWOOD- ; [0 USOOD: 1 FEEUBUCKWHEAT onS !E{(�NW N06. S (ES(U�E' NDP.. S lESAGEBRUSH fOEp SU�O1 D SAMA CLAM RIVER PARK PROJECT Pw Zones and Ratings - Figure A1.5 0 2000 4000 6000 12000 606 Studio • Department of Landscape Architecture • California State Polytechnic University, Pomona • June 1995 .L I f i� r 78 Santa Clara River Park Project I L, Community Participation Community participation is an increasingly valuable component of design and planning processes. Planning activities can be fortified by a process of active input from the community. Incorporating into the process Flow, concerns or ideas expressed by the participants provides for a well- rounded project that the community can support. One means of gathering this information is through public workshops. Three public workshops were conducted for the Santa Clara River Park Project. Each of the workshops covered a specific topic that was pertinent to the stages of the project process. The goal of the first workshop was to introduce the 606 Studio Team to the community and gather their impressions and images of the Santa Clara River. The second workshop focused on site possibilities for locating parks along the river. The third workshop APPENDIX TWO concentrated on themes that could be incorporated into conceptual designs for the parks. The information gathered in each of these workshops became part of a larger component referred to as community input, see Figure A2.1. Information was also obtained from other sources and incorporated into the community input model. For example, staff from the Parks and Recreation Department gave recommendations for Workshop Workshop Workshop One Tvro Three i Community Input Figure A2.1 Santa Clara River Park Project 79 possible site locations. Individual Santa Clara River. In WorkshopTwo, iterviews were held with members of W or wT Wm« possible site locations for the river the Planning Commission to gather parks were discussed.. This coincided ideas and to introduce to each of them / with the Precision phase. The site the objective of this project. A specialI` selection process was conducted during study session was held with the Parks this phase. The project team generated and Recreation Commission to obtain information on suitable sites for park feedback from the members on possible Community locations and the possible levels of park site locations. This information Input activity that would be incorporated into was considered in the process. these parks. The focus of Workshop Three was on themes. In the The process or model used for the Generalization phase, synthesis of Santa Clara River Park Project is information gathered in the other two illustrated in Figure A2.2. Information phases is incorporated into the gathered from the three workshops, as conceptual design for the project. well as input from the Parks and pia piBBs carnia»ram0azstbn Themes for the conceptual designsn s are Recreation Commission and City Staff, also generated during this phase. is incorporated into a larger set of As Figure A2.2 illustrates, the three community input. The information I / components of the design process gathered was important to each phaseyl I`// feed into a larger segment known of the design process. As mentioned as Conceptual Design. earlier, impressions and images of the river were gleaned from the participants Community input and participation has in Workshop One. In the Romance phase, CODesignual been an integral component of the individual team members were also 9 Santa Clara River Park Project. The collecting their own images and Figure A2.2 participants of the workshop provided impressions of the environment of the valuable insight into the river environment.. 80 Santa Clara River Park Project Li I 11 ;ri Li I J J Workshop Information Three workshops were conducted by the 606 Studio to obtain information pertinent to the design process. Summaries for each of the workshops are listed below. Community Workshop One Summary The first community workshop was held January 25, 1995. Approximately 20 people attended. Representatives of the Sierra Club, Friends of the Santa Clara River, equestrian clubs and area businesses were present. Many concerns were expressed by those who participated. Three major issues surfaced: Accessibility, Habitat, and Recreation. Accessibility Participants expressed that they did not spend time at the river due to limited access. Those who did go to the river were concerned about tresspassing on private property. It should be noted that the river is primarily private property. Access to the river was a factor that the 606 Studio Team investigated in later workshops. �{ Habitat u r J Concern was expressed for the protection of the habitat in the river, especially west of Bouquet Canyon Road. Participants of the workshop expressed concern about development reducing the amount of vegetation in the corridor and encouraged preservation and enhancement of this habitat. Recreation A number of the participants that attended were members of equestrian clubs, joggers and bicyclists. Concerns associated with recreation dealt with the South Fork Trail, an existing multi- use trail. Access to the trail was of special concern to the equestrian groups. San Fernando Road was a barrier to the use of the trail. Trail surfaces was another topic discussed. Sand and compact dirt were the materials of choice preferred by the equestrian group. Concerns regarding hazards such as quicksand were expressed by this same group. Image of the River Images of the river were presented to the participants in a slide format. Participants were asked to write down their impressions of the slides. A total of 112 comments were gathered from approximately 40 slides. Slide images were of the Santa Clara River within the city boundaries. Out of these comments, an overall preference for keeping the river in a natural state was expressed by the participants. For example," wide open space" was a comment used. People also used the expression "clean up" or "trash clean up needed." Descriptions having to do with sand or rocks were mentioned several times. Participants also expressed a negative reaction to the concrete/cement channelization portions of the river. The goal of this meeting was to identify access points along the river, understand how residents use the river and their impressions of the Santa Clara River. Out of the small group discussions and slide presentation, the 606 Studio Team was able to take the information and divide it into three subject areas for the purpose of design. These three categories are Sites, Uses, and Facilities. The summarized information is listed as follows: Sites • Places to rest temporarily • Continuous movement along the corridor • Lost Canyon Road area provided access point to river • South Fork Trail - existing trail used • Access west of Bouquet Canyon Road JSanta Clara River Park Project 81 Uses • Equestrian trails • Habitat protection and enhancement • Rest areas • Sightseeing/nature viewing Facilities • Places to tie up horses/park trailers • Places to sit and rest/ sitting units • Shade/ trees, structures • Trails/ compact dirt or sand • Vegetation to attract wildlife The information gathered in this first community workshop was combined with later workshop impressions as Workshop • 2 River u a Resource Survey Results part of the design process for the Santa Clara River Park Project. Community Workshop Two Summary The second community workshop for the Santa Clara River Park Project was held on Wednesday, February 15, 1995. The objective of this workshop was to introduce possible locations for river parks to the community, receive their feedback on these possible sites, and include insights that the community may have into areas that had not been suggested before. Approximately 30 people attended this workshop; many of them were involved in the first public scoping meeting. The participants were asked to fill out a survey at The beginning of this workshop. The goal of the survey was to obtain the community's responses to the various objectives outlined by the 606 Figure A2.3 82 Santa Clara River Park Project O ror riauvn project team. The objectives were concerned with the restoration and preservation of the natural character of the river, water issues such as flood control, water quality, and groundwater recharge. Other objectives included habitat diversity, wildlife movement linkages and the type of resources the Santa Clara River provides for the community. The participants were also asked about recreational activities appropriate for the river corridor. The results of this survey are represented in Figure A2.3. The members of this workshop were then divided into 3 groups. Each of the groups was asked to comment on the possible sites selected by the project team. These sites were based upon observations of the river gathered by the project team members, city staff suggestions, and input from the first public scoping meeting. Each member of each group was asked to comment Workshop M 2 Recreation Survey Results Rwullan C.NRwIw L � +prnr.Hr O nm usonr�r,r �"' L 'I I f `j ;J ,-I U ILl n C I pro or con on the possible sites. Comments on each of these sites were discussed by the group as a whole. The participants were then asked about possible sites that had not been mentioned by the project team. Community participants felt that the sites selected had covered the possible areas they would had suggested for park locations. Discussion was focused on the 15 sites presented by the 606 Studio. Each of the small groups was asked to identify three to five most preferred sites along the Santa Clara River. One participant from each group then pre- sented the group's sites to the whole workshop and explained why each site was chosen. These sites were identified on the large aerial photo of the Santa Clara River. Areas that were men- tioned by each of the groups: • Site One River section from the 1-5 Freeway to McBean Parkway. • Site Two - Northern section of river bank from McBean Parkway to about Bouquet Canyon plus the recreational fields on the southern side of the river. • Site Four - Section of the South Fork of the Santa Clara River between Valencia and Newhall. • Site Six - South side of the river just East of the California Aqueduct. • Site Seven - North side of the river northeast of site six. • Site Nine - Eastern side of the river located just south of development. • Site Ten - Western section of the river adjacent to and North of Soledad Can- yon Road and west of Soledad Bridge. • Site Eleven - Penlon Road site, West- ern side of the river between Soledad Bridge and White Canyon Bridge. • Site Twelve, Thirteen and Fourteen Lost Canyon vicinity, South side of the river. • Site Fifteen - East of Sand Canyon Bridge on south side of the river where Oak Springs flows into the river. Sites mentioned by two groups or more were Site One and Site Four. Information from this workshop gave the project team a starting point in determining possible locations for park acquisition. Community Workshop Three Summary The third and final community work- shop for the Santa Clara River Park Project was held on Monday, March 6, 1995. This workshop concentrated on themes that provided a stimulus for river park design ideas. Information generated in this workshop served as a catalyst for developing concepts for the overall design plan of the Santa Clara River Park Project. Participants were asked questions to describe the river as it pertained to various metaphors. The questions presented to the community are listed below: If the Santa Clara River was a plant, what would it be and why? • If the Santa Clara River was a shape, what would it be and why? If the Santa Clara River was an animal, what would it be and why? The project team used this approach to help the participants in thinking about the Santa Clara River in abstract con- cepts. Discussion was done as one group in an attempt to generate inter- action between the participants. Ex- amples of the discussion are listed in the following summaries: Plants When asked if the Santa Clara River was a plant, here are some of the responses: It is like a Cottonwood, which are endemic to the region, the musky color reminds me of the river, the trees are monumental much like the river as it flows through the city. It is like Bermuda Grass, persists through all seasons, hard to kill and changes with the seasons. Santa Clara River Park Project 83 It is like Sage, wild and western, hardy and durable, and drought resistant. It is like an Oak, mighty and strong, the heavy trunk is like the river and the branches are the tributaries. Oaks go deep for water, are durable and long-lived. Shape When asked if the Santa Clara River was a shape, these are some responses: It is like a Star, the points of the star are the various tributaries. It is like a Triangle, which is the shape of the city, each of the points of the triangle related to water, biota and earth. The sides of the triangle are each of the main roads that run through the city, San Fernando Road, Soledad Canyon Road and Sierra Highway. It is like a Hand, the palm being the Santa Clara River and the fingers being the tributaries. As the hand is one unit made up of the palm and fingers, so the 84 Santa Clara River Park Project river is one unit made up of the main stem and the tributaries. Animal Responses to the question relating the Santa Clara River to an animal metaphor are described below: The river is like a bear, it hibernates during part of the year but when awake, it can be fierce. The river is similar to a Red -Tailed Hawk. The Santa Clarita Valley is the domain of the hawk. As the bird of prey travels, it mimics the river, meandering, rising and then sinking as it flies along.. The river can be compared to a horse, sinuous, strong and unpredictable. The next step of this workshop was to take the descriptions and images gathered in the metaphor exercise and collectively bring them together into a larger idea or theme. Many examples were discussed, including such ideas listed below: Western - Consider the history of the valley, the image of the cowboy and the settlement of the region. Railroad - Railroads had a major impact in the development of the valley and the communities that sprung up along them. The railroads still play a role today. The Metrolink takes commuters from the Santa Clarita Valley to Los Angeles. Motion Picture - This idea is rooted in the history of Western films that were shot on location in the Santa Clarita Valley_ Film production continues in this community. The final community workshop acted as a stimulus for design ideas. At this time, the project team was in the process of developing concepts for the river plan. I I J I J J J I Alternative Expansion Areas The Santa Clara River Park Plan focuses on the river corridor. The river corridor includes the riverbed, floodway, floodplain, and lands tangent to the floodplain. A logical extension of this study area could include lands along the many major and minor tributaries to the Santa Clara River. The South Fork of the Santa Clara River, up to the boundary of Lyons Avenue, was included in this study. At this point, the above -ground flow is interrupted by a box culvert, and the potential for recreational enjoyment along this part of the river system diminishes. The headwaters of the South Fork originate in Towsley Canyon, which is located on the west side of Interstate -5, with street frontage on The Old Road. This area could prove to be a valuable site for APPENDIX THREE city acquisition, if the city follows the effort undertaken by the Santa Monica Mountains Coastal Conservancy in the purchase and development of Ed Davis County Park, also located within Towsley Canyon. A state-wide park planning effort is currently underway to acquire land close to Towsley Canyon in the Santa Monica Mountains in order to increase the amount of state-owned parkland here, as well as to preserve important wildlife links from the ocean through the mountainous region and into the Santa Clarita Valley. Another potential area for further study is a small canyon within which an unidentified tributary to the Santa Clara River originates. This canyon, Site 7B in Figure 3.4, has been given the name, "Santa Clarita Canyon" and it is located on the north side of the river in the midsection of the city. Santa Clarity Santa Clara River Park Project 85 Canyon is currently overgrown, and recent observation also revealed evidence of previous dumping of "dry fill," or construction materials, such as concrete and asphalt. There could also be remnant material from mining operations which occurred near this area. No further investigation was made with regard to the nature of the debris; however, clean-up is needed before the canyon could be used as a recreational area. Vehicle access to the canyon is severely limited, due to the absence of a frontage road. With clean- up and regrading, hiking trails could be built through the canyon, to take advantage of the flat plateau at the ridgeline and the impressive view down the river to the west. The land directly across the river is used for light industry where truck trailers line the river's edge. Currently, some local schools' cross-country running teams use the canyon for rugged training exercises. An opportunity for youth employment for clean-up and regrading or trail building and maintenance could occur as a logical expansion of the canyon's ability to serve the community's more adventurous recreational needs. 86 Santa Clara River Park Project I r �1 r U 11 I I Regional History Human settlement in the Santa Clarita Valley can be traced to the year AD 500. The Tataviam invaded from the Great Plains, settling into the upper Santa Clarita Valley and displacing other tribes further west. Tataviam means "dwellers of sunny slopes." This tribe was known for its basketweaving skills, which they used to trade for other goods. The Tataviam "were at the hub of a trading network that extended from the Channel Islands to Arizona's desert and northward into the San Joaquin Valley." (Reynolds, 1992) Sev- eral generations later, they would be confronted with an invasion from another group looking to expand its territory. European settlement has its origin in the year 1769. The Spanish explorer, Gaspar de Portola, claimed the valley as a suitable place to establish a mis- APPENDIX FOUR sion outpost. Approximately 48,000 acres were provisioned as Rancho San Francisco mission lands, used to graze herds of cattle over 75 square miles. Seventy years later, in 1842, gold was discovered in Placerita Canyon, seven years before the famed first gold rush at Sutter's Fort in northern California. The quiet farming valley suddenly became the center of attention while several million dollars worth of gold was taken from the site. When the war with Mexico ended in 1848, the United States gained control over the area. Two years later, California was admit- ted to the Union. Economic growth in the Santa Clarita valley allowed for the expansion of agricultural uses, transportation corri- dors, and mineral extractions. Accord- ing to an historical account provided in the City's 1993 plan for a new civic center, most of the growth in the Santa Santa Clara River Park Project 87 Clarita Valley during the 100 years prior to 1950 had been fueled by the development of railroads and oil pro- duction. In 1875, Rancho San Francisco was sold to Henry Mayo Newhall from Saugus, Massachusetts. It was one of many ranches that H.M. Newhall acquired in the 1800s totaling over 150,000 acres. Newhall granted a railroad right-of- way through his ranch to connect Los Angeles and San Francisco. The South- ern Pacific Railroad Company estab- lished a town site which was named Saugus. A significant economic boom began in 1876, when California's first commercial oil well began operation in Pico Canyon. When H.M. Newhall died in 1882, his widow and sons formed the Newhall Land and Farming Company. The company remained family owned until the 1960s when the, business became public in response to development plans for the area. The Newhall family still owns a consider- able amount of stock in the company. 88 Santa Clara River Park Project Disaster struck in 1928, when the St. Francis dam, located nine miles from the junction of San Francisquito and Seco Canyons, collapsed, killing 450 people and causing 13 million dollars worth of property damage. Between 1900 and 1950, the area experienced little growth. Its rugged canyons have been used as a film location for many television shows and motion pictures. Ranching remained the prominent land use until the freeways were built in the 1960's. At this time, Los Angeles expe- rienced a burst in population growth which spread to the other "valley." The main north -south road connecting San Francisco and Los Angeles, which passed through the Santa Clarita Valley, was replaced by Interstate -5. Because of the rising cost of housing, lands which were formerly used for grazing cattle and growing onions, pumpkins and carrots were in demand for housing. The Newhall Land and Farming Company developed a master - planned community, Valencia. In the 1960s, housing development increased with the construction of Interstate -5. On December 14, 1987, the communi- ties of Valencia, Newhall, Saugus and Canyon Country were incorporated into the City of Santa Clarita. The General Plan, a blueprint for future development of this city, was adopted on June 26, 1991. Today, the Santa Clarita Valley is home to institutions of learning, commerce and industry. Six Flags Magic Mountain is perhaps the most noted commercial development in the area. According to the Chamber of Commerce, over 400 listings of businesses make their home in Santa Clarita, including the major industries of aero- space, electronics, cosmetic manufac- turers, and distribution companies. Located at the intersection of Interstate - 5 and 14 freeways, Santa Clarita is a major thoroughfare for the distribution of goods into southern California. J J `1 J River Parks Rivers are often the very reason cities are founded. Unfortunately, twentieth- century urban development often ignores the abundant resources rivers offer. Dredging, levee or dam construction and channelization tend to characterize responses to unruly rivers. However, significant efforts to arrest this trend are evident. Particularly interesting attempts to weave river corridors into the urban fabric involve management of rivers for multiple uses. The goal of such strategies is to "maximize public and private benefits with the least impacts on significant river resources." (National Park Service,1991) Such efforts are germane to the Santa Clara River Park Project, since these strategies address concerns related to the project's issues of recreation, park development, flood control, water APPENDIX FIVE quality and ecosystem function. The following is a synopsis of successful multiple objective plan developments discussed in the National Park Service publication, A Casebook in Managing Rivers for Multiple Uses, 1991. These plans address river corridor issues that parallel those of the Santa Clara River. South Platte River The South Platte River in Littleton, Colorado is a 625 -acre floodplain preserved as a park. The park serves as an alternative to channelization that allows flood waters to spread and slow down the rush of water downstream. The park also provides open space and wildlife habitat. Although initially intended to provide flood protection, the park also enhances fish and wildlife habitat and provides an arena for environmental projects for the local schools. Extant gravel extraction was later reclaimed as part of the park Santa Clara River Park Project 89 development for habitat enhancement. Also, like Santa Clarita's river corridor, the South Platte in Littleton is a transition zone between different ecosystems. The popular park attracts an average of ten to twenty people per hour during the week, and forty to fifty people per hour on weekends. This park connects to the South Platte Greenway. Chattahoochee River The Chattahoochee Corridor Plan in Atlanta, Georgia achieved a number of innovative goals. The design was intended to let nature determine what should take place in the river corridor. This was accomplished by analyzing the vulnerability of the landscape to impinging development. The foremost objective of the plan was the preservation of water quality. Other objectives focused on minimization of impacts to the river corridor from urban development, protection of property rights, erosion and sedimentation reduction, open space preservation and control of public access for recreational use. Development and implementation of the plan to regulate the Chattahoochee River and its tributaries helped foster partnerships and public participation in the planning process, invigorated local recreational opportunities, reduced the need for additional structural flood protection measures 90 Santa Clara River Park Project and became a model for regional resource use. This was accomplished by protecting river islands from development, maintaining water quality, allowing development that does not denigrate land and water resources along the river and identifying acreage for future parks. Mingo Creek Another example of multi -objective river corridor development is a network of greenways and linking trails along Mingo Creek in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The objectives for this plan called for designs that blended detention sites with adjacent neighborhoods, maintained or added to flood storage capacity, improved storm water quality and, where possible, did not interfere with wetlands. These objectives were intended to meet a wide array of concerns. The result was a cost-saving, multi-purpose flood control development that also provided recreational facilities, a system of linking trails plus the preservation and enhancement of riparian woodlands. Boulder Creek Boulder Creek in Boulder, Colorado is yet another example of a river successfully managed for multiple use. Community concerns for maintenance of the aesthetic and environmental qualities spawned development of a dynamic river corridor. Creation of the city's most heavily used recreational amenity was predicated on a series of the following objectives: development of an off-street, non -motorized transportation network; preservation and enhancement of fish and wildlife habitat and riparian wetlands; protection of ecologically sensitive areas; maintenance and improvement of flood carrying capacity; protection of water quality and the intention of bolstering recreational opportunities. The plan resulted in a number of remarkable resolutions. Channel improvements enhanced recreation by employing various construction alternatives to channelization. A number of wetlands were restored or created to cleanse storm runoff and enlarge water retention sites. Model development was also incorporated into the plan. The University of Colorado Research Park extended the recreation and transportation corridor. Runoff water quality entering the creek and wetland replacement were fortified by the creation of 14 acres of new wetlands along part of the project site. Clustering of development around courtyards, plazas and water features curbed unnecessary sprawl. This design strategy removed the developed land from the floodway and kept the floodplain storage capacity of the site. Another design component of the plan was the installation a of non -point source pollution demonstration area. Fencing was designed to exclude cattle but allow wildlife access; tree revetments stabilized eroding streambanks and reduced sediment input; steep bank terracing and removal of streambank berms provided for re -growth of riparian vegetation; excavation of a low flow channel concentrated and cooled flows; willow and cottonwood plantings removed pollutants before they entered the stream; boulder v -dams and aeration structures increased in -stream oxygen and carbon dioxide concentrations. Boulder'Creek passes through the city's most developed areas but maintains its natural qualities in addition to its provision of flood hazard mitigation. Wildcat and San Pablo Creek The plan for Wildcat and San Pablo Creeks in Contra Costa County, California, addressed issues similar to the Santa Clara River Park Project. The objectives of the plan focused on flood hazard reduction, restoration of natural stream channel and riparian trees, sediment reduction, wetland protection and enhancement, protection of endangered species, regional trail and recreation development, environmental education and minimization of maintenance needs, costs and impacts. A lengthy, convoluted planning process culminated in a multi -objective planning approach. Citizen rooted advocacy planning efforts led to the adoption of a plan that provided the same level of flood protection as traditional channelization proposals and comparatively lowered maintenance requirements, costs and environmental impacts. The multiple objectives of the plan broadened the project's eligibility for funding sources. Design mimicked the natural stream channel at equilibrium, thereby demonstrating that flood conveyance and stream channel vegetation and function are not mutually exclusive. Not only was the natural character of the creeks maintained, but a broad range of interests was successfully incorporated into what was developed. Recognition and incorporation of the many concerns into the plan fostered community self-determination and secured long-term community support for the project. Each of these plans accommodate multiple river uses. These plans offer alternatives to channelization, ways to enhance habitat and provide recreation without compromising the natural function of a river. Santa Clara River Park Project 91 92 Santa Clara River Park Project r �J L� C r r C APPENDIX SIX Park Site Descriptions Descriptions of the final 23 selected park sites are listed in this section. These site descriptions are based upon personal observations made by the project team and are organized according to the following eleven elements: Accessibility Hydrology Community Input Recreation Intensity Surroundings Topography Trail Connections Vegetation Visibility of Site Negative Attributes Positive Attributes Santa Clara River Park Project 93 SITE 1A-1 A moderate size piece of land located directly east of 1-5 freeway, along the north side of the river. One of few sites along river which is in a relatively natural state, with a large area of heavy riparian vegetation growth. An abandoned railroad bridge in the southeast comer serves as a pedestrian connection across the river, Accessibility: • Indirectly accessible from Magic Mountain Pkwy to the south via unpaved road which crosses railroad bridge. • Directly accessible only from unpaved, dirt roads to the north. Hydrology: • Water flows within a narrow river channel, which spreads out beyond a slight change in elevation. • Probably flowing year-round due to treated effluent from upstream outflow. • Natural groundwater table close to the surface. Community Input: • Community Workshop #2 • Parks and Recreation Commission Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Low -Moderate Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Located mid -way between residential communities and Magic Mountain Amusement Park. • Business Park beyond undeveloped hills to the north. • Mouth of San Francisquito Creek 1/2 mile to the east. • Adjacent to the I-5 freeway on the west. 94 Sarva Clara River Park Project Topography: • Narrow river channel is several feet below Floodplain. • Floodplain spreads out to form a riverside terrace, 10-15 feet below the surrounding landscape. Trail Connections: The proposed Santa Clara River Trail will cross the abandoned railroad bridge and continue through this site along the north side. Trail provides a connection to the regional post office complex, Magic Mountain Park and CHP office on the west side of the 1-5 freeway. Western extent of the trail system within the city. Vegetation: • Densely covered with riparian vegetation of mature trees forming a willow and cottonwood forest. • Thick undergrowth of mulefat and arundo along the riverbank. Visibility of Site: • Riverbed is not visible from nearby roads, but part of site is visible from the 1-5 freeway. Negative Attributes: • Located at the far western edge of the city boundary, away from general city -related activity. • Several rows of unattractive high power lines cross the river several hundred feet to the east. Positive Attributes: • Includes historical point of interest, i.e. the old abandoned railroad bridge. • Moderate size undeveloped area of dense natural vegetation. iLA J SITE IA -2 A moderate size piece of land located directly east of 1-5 freeway, along the south side of the river. One of few sites along river which is in a relatively natural state, with dense riparian vegetation growth. An abandoned railroad bridge in the northeast comer serves as a pedestrian connection across the river. Accessibility: • Accessible from Magic Mountain Pkwy. to the south. • North side indirectly accessible only from the unpaved roads to the north, across the railroad bridge. Hydrology: J • Water flows within a narrow river channel, which spreads out beyond a slight change in elevation. • Probably flowing year-round due to treated effluent from upstream outflow. • Natural groundwater table close to the surface. I J Community Input: • Community Workshop #2 • Parks and Recreation Commission Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Low -Moderate Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Located mid -way between residential communities and Magic Mountain Amusement Park. • Undeveloped hills to the north across the river. • Valencia Country Club to the south, across Magic. Mountain Pkwy. • Adjacent to the 1-5 freeway on the west. Topography: • Narrow river channel is several feet below floodplain. • Floodplain spreads out to form a riverside terrace, 10-15 feet below the surrounding landscape. • Partially disturbed and graded land south of the river, beyond the floodplain. Trail Connections: Proposed Santa Clara River Trail will cross the old railroad bridge and continue through this site, Trail provides a connection to the regional post office complex, Magic Mountain Park and CHP office on the west side of I-5 freeway. Vegetation: • Densely covered with riparian vegetation of mature cottonwood and willow trees. • Thick undergrowth of mulefat, arundo along riverbank and non-native grasses covering the disturbed area. Visibility of Site: • Riverbed is not visible from roads, but general area is highly visible from Magic Mountain Pkwy; Negative Attributes: • Located at far western edge of the city boundary, away from general city -related activity. • Several rows of unattractive high power lines cross the river several hundred feet to the east. Positive Attributes: • Includes historical point of interest, i.e., the old abandoned railroad bridge. • Easily accessible and highly visible area of dense natural vegetation. Santa Clara River Park Project 95 SITE 1B-1 Located west of McBean Pkwy. and south of the river. Long and narrow strip of land along the north side of the river, most of which has already been graded as part of a proposed Newhall Land and Farming Company's residential development. Adjacent to the mouth of San Francisquito Creek across the river. Accessibility: • Accessible from Magic Mountain Pkwy. to the south. • Not accessible from McBean Pkwy. to the east due to large drainage channel which separates them. Hydrology: • Natural groundwater table close to the surface. • Probably flowing year round due to treated effluent from upstream outflow. • Supports heavy riparian vegetation growth along riverbank. Community Input: • Community Workshop #2 • Parks and Recreation Commission Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Low Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Not near any residential communities. • Business Park to the northwest, across the river. • Undeveloped land which has been graded and leveled, directly adjacent to the south. • Tree farm directly adjacent to the west. • Valencia Country Club to the south across Magic Mountain Pkwy. 96 Santa Clara River Park Project r r Topography: L • Level land which is 5-10 feet above the riverbed. F Trail Connections: • The proposed Santa Clara River Trail will run through this site. F • The junction of three proposed trails will be located nearby, L across McBean Pkwy. to the northeast. Vegetation: L� • Part of site along riverbank is densely covered with riparian vegetation of mature cottonwood and willow trees and thick undergrowth of mulefat, arundo, etc. Visibility of Site: { • Good view of riverbed and eastern part of site from McBean Pkwy. to the east. • Majority of site is also visible at a distance from Magic Mountain Pkwy. to the south. L Negative Attributes: • Proposed levee channelization on both sides of the river and proposed residential development directly to the south. • High power lines and towers exist along the south side of this site and are visually unattractive and distracting. rl Positive Attributes: • Potential open space buffer between proposed residential development and the river. • Existing dense vegetation growth along the riverbank L r i v F r� LJ SITE 113'2 Located west of McBean Pkwy. and north of the river. • Adjacent to the confluence of the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek. • Riverbed around the confluence is in a relatively natural J state, with large areas of dense riparian vegetation growth on both the north and south sides of the river. JAccessibility: • Accessible directly from McBean Pkwy. to the east. Hydrology: • Natural groundwater table close to the surface. • Probably flowing year-round due to treated effluent from upstream outflow. • Supports heavy riparian vegetation growth. Community Input: 'J • Community Workshop #2 • Parks and Recreation Commission Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Low -Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Not near any existing residential communities, although developments are proposed directly to the north, east and across the river to the south • Business Park to the northwest on the other side of San Francisquito Creek • Undeveloped land directly adjacent along the north side and across McBean Pkwy to the east. i� Topography: • Majority of site forms a floodplain terrace about 5 feet above the riverbed and 5-10 feet below the level and graded piece J of land to the north. Trail Connections. • The proposed Santa Clara River Trail will be across the river on the south side. • However, the junction of three proposed trail alignments will be located nearby, across McBean Pkwy. to the east. Vegetation: • Dense riparian vegetation of mature trees forms a cottonwood and willow forest with a thick undergrowth of mulefat, sagebrush, etc. Visibility of Site: • Good view of riverbed and most of general site from the east, along McBean Pkwy. • Western part of the site is not visible from the roads. Negative Attributes: • Proposed levee channelization on both sides of the river and proposed residential development directly to the north. Positive Attributes: • Relatively undisturbed area with natural vegetation. • Direct and easy access and good visibility. Santa Clara River Park Project 97 SITE 2A Long and narrow strip of land along the north side of the river and east of McBean Pkwy. Most of the land to the north has already been graded and leveled as part of aproposed Newhall Land and Farming Company's residential development. Accessibility: • Accessible directly from McBean Pkwy. to the west, and from the future residential development to the north. Hydrology: • Natural groundwater table close to the surface. • immediately downstream from treated effluent outflow, the majority of which flows along the opposite side of river. • Probably flowing most of the year. • Supports heavy riparian vegetation growth. Community Input: • Community Workshop #2 • Parks and Recreation Commission Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Low -Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Proposed new residential development directly adjacent along the north side. • Baseball fields on the opposite side of the river to the south. • Confluence of Santa Clara River and Bouquet Creek to the east. • Confluence of Santa Clara River and South Fork to the south. Topography: • Most of this site is a few feet above the riverbed and a few feet below the graded land to the north. gg Santa Clara River Park Project L' F Trail Connections: 4-- • The proposed Santa Clara River Trail will extend across the entire site, along the north riverbank. r— • The junction of three proposed trail alignments will be L; located on the western end, next to McBean Pkwy. Vegetation: l _. • Site includes a dense stand of mature cottonwood and willow trees adjacent to a small, natural riparian area within 71 the riverbed. L • Part of a recent Newhall Land and Farming Company's mitigation / re -vegetation project. j Visibility of Site: • Western portion is highly visible from McBean Pkwy. • Entire site will be visible from proposed residential development to the north. Negative Attributes: L • Proposed levee channelization on both sides of the river. • Part of proposed residential development. • Lack of natural riparian vegetation outside of the riverbed. L Positive Attributes: • Potential open space buffer between proposed residential L development and the river. • Includes junction of three proposed trail alignments. r� i n U U 7 LI SITE 2B Located directly adjacent to Valencia Blvd, along the south side of the river across from the mouth of the Bouquet Creek concrete channel. Directly adjacent to several baseball fields in Hart Park, which are to the west. Most of site is part of city maintenance yard. Accessibility: • Accessible only from Valencia Blvd. to the south, via entrance to Hart Park ball fields. Hydrology: • Several hundred feet immediately downstream from the treated effluent outflow which flows year round. • Supports heavy riparian vegetation growth along the riverbank. Community Input: • Community Workshop #2 Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Moderate -High Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Several baseball fields to the west. • Commercial/retail area on the other side of Valencia Blvd. to the east. • Proposed residential development across the river to the north Topography: • Majority of site is level and highly disturbed and just a few feet above the riverbed. • Valencia Blvd. is elevated about 5 feet above the site. Trail Connections: • The proposed Commuter Rail Trail will run through part of the site. • Also, the proposed junction of the Commuter Rail Trail and the South Fork Trail will be located directly to the south, next to Valencia Blvd. Vegetation: • A part of the (Newhall Land and Farming Company's mitigation/ re -vegetation project has been planted in the riverbed along the north. • Majority of site is disturbed but supports growth of sagebrush and non-native shrubs. Visibility of Site: • Entire site is highly visible from Valencia Blvd.. Negative Attributes: • Proposed levee channelization along the riverbank. • immediately adjacent to very busy retail district and major traffic thoroughfare. Positive Attributes: • Very close proximity to proposed trail junction and existing baseball fields. Santa Clara River Park Project 99 SITE 3 • A curved piece of land located along the outside bank of a bend in the South Fork. • It is in the center of the triangular shape formed by Valencia Blvd., Bouquet Canyon Rd., and Magic Mountain Pkwy. Accessibility: • Directly accessible from Valencia Blvd. to the west and from Magic Mountain Pkwy. to the south. • Indirectly accessible from Bouquet Canyon Rd. and Cinema Dr. (to the east and north, respectively) via adjacent commercial properties. Hydrology. • Water Flow is affected by several drop -structures (check dams) located upstream within the South Fork channel. • Channel is approximately 200 feet wide at this bend. Community Input: • No community input for this site. Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Moderate -Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Located in-between Valencia Blvd. to the west and Bouquet Canyon Rd. to the east. • Adjacent to existing commercial development to the north and east. • Future commercial development to the south on the other side of the South Fork. • Apartment complex also adjacent on the east side. Topography: • Composed of two terraced areas which are several feet above the riverbed and about 5-10 feet below the surrounding upland. 100 Santa Clara River Park Project Trail Connections: • The proposed South Fork Trail will run along the riverbank, on the opposite side of the South Fork. Vegetation: • Adjacent riverbed is devoid of vegetation. • Terraces are moderately covered with buckwheat, sagebrush, mulefat, willows and several large cottonwood trees. Visibility of Site: • Most of the area is visible from either Valencia Blvd. or Magic Mountain Pkwy. • Highly visible from atop the riverbank on the other side of the South Fork. Negative Attributes: • High power lines and towers run through the western edge of this site and across to the other side of the South Fork. • Proposed levee channelization on both sides of the South Fork Positive Attributes: • Highly visible, several convenient access points ;existing multiple levels. • Potential open space buffer between commercial development and the river. 1 I SITE 4 Precisely defined size and shape which is confined by concrete levees around 8o% of its perimeter. Located adjacent to the South Fork confluence with Placerita Creek. Accessibility: • Directly accessible from Wiley Canyon Rd. and the adjacent residential communities along the northwest to southwest sides. • Also accessible from residential communities to the southeast via small pedestrian bridge which crosses the South Fork. • Proposed extension of Wiley Canyon Rd. across the river at the north end of this site. Hydrology: • Water flow in the South Fork is confined within a 200 -300 - foot wide channel. • Limited flow except during the winter rainy season. 1 Community Input: J Community Workshop #2 • Parks and Recreation Commission ,I I Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Moderate -Passive -Active Intensity. Surroundings: • Almost completely surrounded by the residential communities of Valencia. • Bordered by Wiley Canyon Rd. along one side and the South Fork channel along the other. Topography: • Entire site is graded relatively flat. • It is 5-15 feet above the South Fork channel, but at the same elevation as the surrounding residential communities. Trail Connections: • The existing South Fork Trail runs along the top of the levee from the north and currently ends at the pedestrian bridge. • This trail system will be continued southward along the South Fork levee. Vegetation: • Entire site is highly disturbed and covered with non-native grasses and shrubs. • The northern half of the adjacent riverbed is devoid of vegetation, but the southern half supports moderate riparian shrub vegetation. Visibility of Site: • Visible from Wiley Canyon Rd., neighboring residences and existing trail. Negative Attributes: • High power lines and towers pass directly through this site. • Existing levees encircle almost the entire area. • Lack of any native vegetation, save for a single oak tree. • Proposed levee channelization along the southeast comer. Positive Attributes: • Easily accessible from neighboring residential communities. Santa Clara River Park Project 101 SITE SA • Long, narrow strip located along the north side of the river and east of Bouquet Canyon Rd. • Site is sandwiched between the natural riverbed and the proposed Newhall Ranch Rd. extension. Accessibility: • Directly accessible from Bouquet Canyon Rd. to the west. • Possibly accessible from the proposed eastward extension of Newhall Ranch Rd. to the north. Hydrology: • Water flow in the adjacent riverbed varies from less than 400 feet wide to more than 1000 feet wide. Community Input: • Parks and Recreation Commission • Parks and Recreation Staff Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Low -Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Not adjacent to any residential communities, but a small retail complex is located to the northwest. • Land adjacent to the north is highly disturbed from extensive earth -moving for the Newhall Ranch Rd. extension. • Undeveloped hills lie to the north of this construction area, with a small residential community beyond. Topography: • just a few feet above the riverbed, this site is relatively level and undisturbed. • The proposed road to the north will be elevated approximately 2D-30 feet above. 102 Santa Clara River Park Project r Trail Connections: • The proposed Santa Clara River Trail will extend through this site, along the north side of the river. • The proposed junction of the Bouquet Trail and the Santa Clara River Trail will be located nearby to the west, next to r Bouquet Canyon Rd. L Vegetation: r • Entire site is covered with riparian vegetation of willows, sagebrush, mulefat and several stands of large, mature L cottonwoods along the north edge. • Several large heritage valley oaks grow just outside the L: floodplain at the eastern end of this site. • Parts of the river channel also support scattered riparian vegetation. L Visibility of Site: • Visible from Soledad Canyon Rd. across the river. . • Western portion of this site is visible from Bouquet Canyon Rd. • Entire area will be highly visible from proposed Newhall � Ranch Rd. extension. L Negative Attributes: r- • • Entire length of this site is directly adjacent to highly L; disturbed road construction area. • Proposed levee channelization on both sides of the river. Positive Attributes: `J • Relatively large undeveloped area of natural vegetation which includes a large stand of mature cottonwoods. • Located along a central portion of the river. L L rl LJ JSITE 5B J • A level area located along the north side of the river on a Trail Connections: • The proposed Santa Clara River Trail will extend through raised plateau overlook. • Excellent views up and down the river corridor from this this site, along the north side of the river. vantage point. Vegetation: .Accessibility: • Entire site is covered with wildflowers and non-native • No direct access to the site. • Indirectly accessible from unpaved roads which connect with grasses. • Vegetation in the riverbed is rather dense growth of willows, Newhall Ranch Rd. cottonwoods and other riparian vegetation. • Several large heritage Valley Oaks are growing on a lower Hydrology: level to the southwest. • Water flow in the adjacent riverbed is restricted to a channel J between 200-300 feet wide. • River course forms a bend in the channel just downstream Visibility of site: Plateau is barely visible from Soledad Canyon Rd. across the from this site. river. • Part of the site will be visible from the proposed Newhall !,7 Community Input: Ranch Rd. extension to the north. • Parks and Recreation Commission Negative Attributes: r] Recreation Intensity: • Proposed levee channelization on both sides of the river. —� Most suitable for Moderate -High Passive Intensity. • Very close to the distracting sounds of the Saugus Speedway. • No direct connection with the river. �} '`i Surroundings: • Undeveloped but flattened hills lie adjacent to the north. Positive Attributes: • land beyond these hills to the north is highly disturbed from Very good vantage point from which to safely view the j extensive earth -moving in preparation for the Newhall natural river processes and floodwater flows. J Ranch Rd. extension. Topography: • Site is a flattened hilltop, with steep cliffs along the east and south sides next to the river. • A gentler slope flows down to the river on the west. I ISanta Clara River Park Project 103 SITE 5C • A long, narrow strip of land along the south side of the river, and directly adjacent to an undeveloped level piece of land. • Located just north of Soledad Canyon Rd. across from the Metrolink Station Accessibility: • Accessible directly from Soledad Canyon Rd. and an undeveloped field to the southeast. Hydrology: • Water flow in the adjacent riverbed is restricted to a channel between 200-300 feet wide. • River course forms a bend in the channel directly adjacent to this site, and some severe erosion has occurred just downstream. Community Input: • No community input for this site. Recreation Intensity: Most suitable for Low -Moderate Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Undeveloped hills and plateaus across the river to the north. • Adjacent to a small residential community and commercial development to the east and southeast. • Undeveloped hills across road to the south. • Metrolink Station and Saugus Speedway across Soledad Canyon Rd. to the west. Topography: • just a few feet above the riverbed, this site is relatively level and undisturbed. • Surrounding land is just a few feet higher than this site. 104 Santa Clara River Park Project L Positive Attributes: • Easily accessible and visible. • Contains good stand of mature native trees. • Located along a central portion of the river. L C Trail Connections: • The proposed Commuter Rail Trail will run along the tracks on the other side of Soledad Canyon Rd. • The proposed Santa Clara River Trail will extend along the opposite side of the river. F Vegetation: • Most of site along the riverbank is covered with dense r growth of mature cottonwood and willow trees, in addition L to mulefat and other riparian vegetation. • Parts of the river channel also support scattered riparian vegetation. Visibility of Site: • Western part of site is highly visible from Soledad Canyon Rd. to the south. , • Remainder of site is also visible at a distance. F Negative Attributes: • Extremely close to Saugus Speedway and associated loud noises. LIr • Proposed levee channelizahon on adjacent riverbank. Positive Attributes: • Easily accessible and visible. • Contains good stand of mature native trees. • Located along a central portion of the river. L �1 ,i iJ I I I SITE 6A • Large, open and relatively undisturbed land along the north side of the river just west of the Los Angeles Aqueduct. • Not currently adjacent to any developed areas or paved roads, and therefore somewhat isolated. Accessibility: • No direct access currently exists. • Indirect access is available from unpaved roads to the north and from the unpaved service road alongside the Los Angeles Aqueduct, on the opposite side of the river. Hydrology: • Water flow in the riverbed is constricted to narrower than 500 feet as it passes under the aqueduct. • Riverbed quickly widens to about 1000 feet just south of this site. Community Input: • No community input for this site. Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Low -Moderate Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Los Angeles Aqueduct crosses the river along the east side. • Trailer park residential community located on the opposite side of the river to the south. • Castaic Lake Water Agency facilities are located on the hilltop to the north. • Undeveloped hills directly adjacent to the northwest and northeast. Topography: • Level area just a few feet above the riverbed. • Bordered on the north by relatively steep hillsides. Trail Connections: • The proposed Santa Clara River Trail will extend through this site, along the north side of the river. Vegetation: • Entire site is covered with native vegetation of sagebrush, buckwheat, mulefat and scattered cottonwood trees. • Adjacent riverbed includes some scattered vegetation. Visibility of Site: • Not visible from any existing major roads or developed areas. • Highly visible from undeveloped hills and unpaved roads to the north. Negative Attributes: • Currently very low visibility and lack of direct access. • Proposed levee channelization on both sides of the river. Positive Attributes: • Large open area in a relatively natural, undisturbed and highly vegetated state. Santa Clara River ParkPro*t 105 SITE 6B Relatively undisturbed land along the south side of the river just east of the Los Angeles Aqueduct. Directly adjacent to a small trailer park, but not directly accessible from major roads, and therefore somewhat isolated. Accessibility: • Accessible from the unpaved service road alongside the Los Angeles Aqueduct. Hydrology: • Water flow in the riverbed spreads out in a 1000 foot wide channel directly north of this site. • Riverbed is constricted to narrower than 500 feet as it passes under the aqueduct. Community Input: • Community Workshop #2 Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Low -Moderate Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Los Angeles Aqueduct crosses the river to the west. • A trailer park residential community is directly adjacent to the south. • Undeveloped hills located on the opposite side of the river to the north Topography: • Level area just a few feet above the riverbed. 106 Santa Clara River Park Project Trail Connections: • The proposed Santa Clara River Trail will be across the river on the north side. Vegetation: • Entire site is covered with native vegetation of sagebrush, buckwheat, mulefat, willow and scattered cottonwood trees. • Adjacent riverbed includes some scattered vegetation. Visibility of Site: • Not visible from any existing roads or developed areas. • Visible from undeveloped hills to the north. Negative Attributes: • Small piece of land which currently has very low visibility and lack of easy access. • Proposed levee channelization on both sides of the river. Positive Attributes: • Open area in a relatively natural and highly vegetated state. F1 L i F_ L L 7 L1 n L. L r I 7 Li I J it I .11 :I D I SITE 7A • Open and relatively undisturbed land along the north side of the river just east of the Los Angeles Aqueduct. • Not currently adjacent to any developed areas or paved roads, and therefore somewhat isolated. Accessibility: • No direct access currently exists. • Indirect access is available from unpaved roads to the north and from the unpaved service road alongside the Los Angeles Aqueduct, on the opposite side of the river. Hydrology: • Water flow in the riverbed spreads out in a 1000 -foot wide channel directly south of this site, but is constricted to narrower than 500 feet as it passes under the aqueduct. Community Input: • Community Workshop #2 Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Low -Passive Intensity.. Surroundings: • Los Angeles Aqueduct crosses the river along the west side. • Trailer park residential community located on the opposite side of the river to the north. • Castaic Lake Water Agency facilities are located on the hilltop to the northwest. • Undeveloped hills directly adjacent to the north and northwest. Topography: • Level area about 5 feet above the riverbed. • Bordered on the north by relatively steep hillsides. Trail Connections: • Proposed Santa Clara River Trail will extend through this site, along the north side of the river. Vegetation: • Entire site is covered with native vegetation of sagebrush, mulefat, a few coast live oaks, cottonwood trees along the river, and non-native grasses. • Adjacent riverbed includes some scattered vegetation. Visibility of Site: • Not visible from any existing major roads or developed areas. • Highly visible from undeveloped hills and unpaved roads to the north. Negative Attributes: • Currently very low visibility and lack of direct access. • Proposed levee channelization on both sides of the river. Positive Attributes: Large open area in a relatively natural and undisturbed state with good vegetation cover. Santa Clara lover Park Pmject 107 SITE 7B The mouth of a small canyon along the north side of the river, which is oriented in a northeast to southwest direction. Surrounded by undeveloped hills and therefore somewhat isolated. Located along a very narrow stretch of the river. Accessibility: • No direct access currently exists. • Indirectly accessible from unpaved roads to the north or from residential communities to the northeast via informal trail or unpaved canyon road. C� Trail Connections: E • Proposed Santa Clara River Trail will extend through this site, along the north side of the river. r Vegetation: • About half of this site is covered with dense riparian L vegetation of mulefat and mature willows and cottonwood trees. • The other half is barren or covered with non-native grasses r due to previous disturbances. L • Surrounding hills are covered with soft chaparral scrub. ^ Hydrology: Visibility of Site: • Small stream runs along bottom of this canyon. • Not visible from any existing major roads or developed • Water flow in the adjacent riverbed is constricted to a areas. channel approximately 200 feet wide by hills to the north and • Mouth of canyon is highly visible from light industrial area light industrial development protruding into the riverbed to across the river. the south. • Portions of the canyon are visible from the undeveloped hills to the north. Community Input: • Parks and Recreation Staff Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Low -Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Not adjacent to any residential communities. • Surrounded by undeveloped hills to the north, east and west. • High power line easement located directly to the west. • Light industrial development across the river to the south. Topography: • Relatively level area which is 5-10 feet above the riverbed. • Directly adjacent to steep hills on three sides. 108 Santa Clara River Park Project Negative Attributes: • Currently very low visibility and lack of direct access. • Entire canyon has been highly disturbed in the past and currently serves as illegal dumping grounds. • Unattractive views across the river toward light industrial area. Positive Attributes: • One of the few undeveloped canyons along the river. C L L r, J I I I I I SITE 8 Land area of limited size which is confined by a concrete levee to the south and the riverbed to the north. Located in the floodplain just downstream from an inside bend in the river. Accessibility: • Directly accessible from Honby Ave. to the south. Hydrology: • Water flow in the adjacent riverbed is constricted to a channel 200-400 feet wide by hills to the north. Community Input: • No community input for this site. Recreation Intensity, • Most suitable for Low -Moderate Passive Intensity Surroundings: • Directly adjacent to Rio Vista School on the other side of the levee to the south. • Residential development beyond the school to the south and southeast. • Light industrial development directly adjacent to the southwest. Undeveloped hills across the river to the north. Topography: • Level land which is just a few feet above the riverbed. Trail Connections: • The proposed Santa Clara River Trail will be across the river on the north side. Vegetation: • Entire site is covered with native vegetation of sagebrush, mulefat, willows and scattered cottonwood trees. • Adjacent riverbed also supports some vegetation growth. Visibility of Site: • Not visible from any major roads. • Visibility from adjacent school and residential development is blocked by concrete levee. • Highly visible from undeveloped hills to the north. Negative Attributes: • Limited size due to its location within the floodplain on the river side of the levee. • Very low visibility. Positive Attributes: • Adjacent to residential communities and school. • Good vegetation cover. Santa Clara River Park Project 109 SITE 9 • A triangular- shaped piece of land whose size and shape is dictated by adjacent roads and development. • The adjacent riverbank is still in a natural state, although concrete levees are in place immediately upstream and downstream from this site. • The riverbank on the opposite side of the river has also been stabilized with a levee. Accessibility. • Accessible directly from Canyon View Dr. to the east. Hydrology: • Very high seasonal groundwater table under this site and residential communities surrounding it. • Water flow in the adjacent riverbed moves within a channel which varies between 500-800 feet in width. Community Input: • Community Workshop #2 • Parks and Recreation Commission Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Low -Moderate Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Directly adjacent to residential communities to the north, east and south. • Additional residential communities located behind the levee on the opposite side of the river. Topography: • This site contains some slight topographic variation, and in general is a few feet above the riverbed. 110 Santa Clara River Park Project C Trail Connections: • Proposed Santa Clara River Trail will extend through this �- site, along the northeast side of the river. Vegetation: • The half of this area site closest to the river is densely (� vegetated with sagebrush, mulefat, buckwheat, willow and l� several mature cottonwood trees. • The other half has been graded and is covered with non- native grasses. L Visibility of Site:. • Highly visible from the surrounding residential L communities.. • Also visible at a distance from Soledad Canyon Rd. r Negative Attributes: • Limited size and shape due to adjacent development and r roads. Positive Attributes. • Directly adjacent to several residential communities. C • Good native vegetation cover on the west half of the site. • Currently being used by local residents for passive r— recreational activities such as hiking and cycling. • This site could potentially be linked with access traits across the river to Site 10. • A binary park would thus be created during the dry season when the river flow is insignificant. v C C �rJ I I SITE 10 Long, linear and very narrow strip of land sandwiched between a secondary highway and the river. The adjacent riverbank is still in a natural state, although concrete levees are in place immediately upstream and downstream from this site. The riverbank on the opposite side of the river has also been stabilized with a levee. Accessibility: • Accessible directly from Soledad Canyon Rd. to the southwest. Hydrology: • The adjacent river channel varies in width from 400 feet where it crosses under the Soledad Canyon Bridge, to more than 800 feet farther downstream. Community Input: • Community Workshop #2 • Parks and Recreation Commission Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for High -Passive - Active Intensity. Surroundings: • Directly adjacent to Soledad Canyon Rd. to the southwest along most of its length • Small commercial development is located adjacent to the northwest comer with residential development beyond. u• Residential and commercial developments are also located on the opposite side of the river. J Topography: • This site contains some slight topographic variation, and in general is a few feet above the riverbed. I Trail Connections: • The proposed Santa Clara River Trail will be across the river on the east side. • An additional section will extend through this site along the west side of the river and connect with a school one mile to the northwest. Vegetation: • This site supports moderate vegetation growth of mulefat, sagebrush, buckwheat and various other non-native grasses and shrubs. Visibility of Site: • Entire site is highly visible from Soledad Canyon Rd. • Also visible at a distance from the commercial development across the river. Negative Attributes: • Very narrow and long strip of land in close proximity to major highway traffic on Soledad Canyon Rd. • Limited size and shape due to adjacent road and development. Positive Attributes: • High visibility from Soledad Canyon Rd. • A potential open space buffer between the river and Soledad Canyon Rd. • This site could potentially be linked with access trails across the river to Site 9. • A binary park would thus be created during the dry season when the river flow is insignificant. Santa Clara River Park Project 111 SITE 11A • Long and linear piece of land along the southwest side of the river. • It is situated along the railroad tracks side of a triangle formed by Soleciad Canyon Rd., Whites Canyon Rd. and the Southern Pacific Railroad. • Only a northern portion of the riverbank has a concrete levee on it. • Entire bank on the opposite side of the river has been stabilized with a levee. Accessibility: • Accessible directly from Soledad Canyon Rd. to the north, via Penlon Rd. • Not accessible from Whites Canyon Rd., which is directly adjacent to the south Hydrology: • The adjacent riverbed spreads out to more than 800 feet wide, in-between its passage underneath the two adjacent highway bridges which narrow the channel width to 500 feet. Community Input: • Community Workshop H2 • Parks and Recreation Commission • Parks and Recreation Staff Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Moderate -Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • The Southern Pacific Railroad tracks he directly adjacent along the entire southwestern side, with a residential development beyond. • Commercial development is located across the river. • Soledad Canyon Bridge crosses the river to the north and Whites Canyon Bridge to the southeast. 112 Santa Clara River Park Project Topography: • Site contains 10-15 feet elevation changes. • This site ranges from 5-20 feet above the riverbed. Trail Connections: • An existing stretch of the Santa Clara River Trail runs along the top of the levee on the opposite side of the river to the northeast. • This site will serve as the proposed junction of the Santa Clara River Trail and the Commuter Rail Trail. Vegetation: • Very sparse vegetation of non-native shrubs and grasses covers just a portion of this site. • Majority of site is devoid of vegetation. Visibility of Site: • Majority of site is highly visible from both Soledad Canyon Bridge and Whites Canyon Bridge, as well as from the opposite riverbank. Negative Attributes: • Very close to major highway traffic on Soledad Canyon Rd. and Whites Canyon Rd. in addition to train traffic along the adjacent railroad. • Size is restricted by adjacent transportation structures. Positive Attributes: • Very high visibility and good access from nearby secondary highway. F1 L L L C C L C r i L� C J J I I SITE 11B • Relatively large and open piece of land which is located along the south side of the river. • The size and shape is restricted by development or structures on three sides. • The low riverbank has not yet been concreted with a levee, although there is a levee on the opposite riverbank. • This entire site has been graded and highly disturbed at one time or another. Accessibility: • Directly accessible from the trailer park residential community to the east. • Indirectly accessible from Via Princessa to the south, although the railroad tracks do serve as a barrier. Hydrology: • The river channel widens to approximately 700 feet I_ J following its passage through a 1.5- mile long concrete channel which varies in width from 400-500 feet. rl j Community Input: • No community input for this site. Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Moderate -Passive Intensity. JSurroundings: • The Southern Pacific Railroad tracks lie directly adjacent along the entire southern side. • A trailer park residential community is directly adjacent to the east. • Whites Canyon Bridge crosses the river on the west side. • Residential and commercial development line the levee on the opposite side of the river. 1 Topography: • This entire site is completely level and just a few feet above the riverbed. Trail Connections: • An existing stretch of the Santa Clara River Trail runs along the top of the levee on the opposite side of the river to the north. Vegetation: • Sparse vegetation of non-native shrubs and grasses covers most of this site. Visibility of Site: • Entire site is highly visible from Whites Canyon Bridge and from the opposite riverbank. Negative Attributes: • Railroad tracks form a physical barrier which prevents this site from being easily accessible. • Very close proximity to major highway traffic on Whites Canyon Rd. in addition to train traffic along the adjacent railroad. • Size is restricted by adjacent transportation structures and development. Positive Attributes: • Very high visibility. • Large open space. Santa Clara River Park Project 113 SITE 12 • A relatively small piece of land located to the north of the river in the midst of residential and commercial development. • The west half has been built-up and raised above the riverbed with fill material. • The east half has not been filled and is in a less disturbed state. Accessibility: • Easily accessible from Soledad Canyon Rd. to the north. Hydrology: • This site is in the middle of a 1.5 -mile long concrete channel section of the river which varies in width from 400-500 feet. • The Mint Canyon tributary empties from a very narrow concrete culvert into the main river channel just to the west. Community Input: • Parks and Recreation Staff Recreation Intensity: Most suitable for Moderate -High Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Residential and commercial development surrounds this site on three sides. • Additional residential development stretches along the opposite side of the river to the south Topography: • One half of this site is about 10 feet above the riverbed and is completely level and graded. • The other half is about 5 feet lower and has not been graded. 114 Santa Clara River Park Project i Trail Connections: G • An existing stretch of the Santa Clara River Trdil is in place to the west, and the proposed extension will continue along the r7 riverbank through this site. Vegetation: f • The ungraded half of this site supports modest non-native L grass and shrub cover. • The graded half is totally devoid of vegetation. Visibility of Site: • Not readily visible from Soledad Canyon Rd. but is visible Efrom adjacent development and residential community across the river. Negative Attributes: C • Limited size and shape due to close proximity of surrounding developments. n • Half of this site has been highly disturbed and graded and is devoid of vegetation. Positive Attributes: • Currently being used by community residents for recreation. rr I� L.' I SITE 13 A large, level open area on the south side of the river with an additional small area on the north side. The adjacent riverbed cuts a wide swath just downstream and neither riverbank is confined by a concrete levee. An unpaved road cuts across this site and links a few scattered residences on the west with Sand Canyon Rd. to the east. Accessibility: • Accessible from Sand Canyon Rd. to the east, via Lost Canyon Rd. • Also accessible across the river from Soledad Canyon Rd. to the north, via Lost Canyon Rd. where it passes under the Antelope Valley freeway. Hydrology: J • The unconcreted riverbanks widen to more than 1000 feet in J this area, thus allowing the river plenty of room to spread out. • The Sand Canyon tributary empties into the main river Lj channel just upstream to the east. I I J I J 1 Community Input: • Community Workshop #2 • Parks and Recreation Commission • Parks and Recreation Staff Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Low -Moderate Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Residential developments cover the hills on the far side of the Antelope Valley freeway to the north. • Less densely spaced rural equestrian communities are located to the east and southeast in Sand Canyon. • The elevated tracks of the Southern Pacific Railroad border this site to the south, with undeveloped hills beyond. Topography: • The majority of this site is level and just a few feet above the riverbed. • However, a few hills form a partial border to the southwest. Trail Connections. • The proposed Santa Clara River Trail will be across the river on the north side. Vegetation: • This entire site is covered with sagebrush, mulefat, buckwheat and non-native grasses. • Several remnant stands of mature native coast live oak dot the perimeter. Visibility of Site: • This entire site is highly visible from the Antelope Valley freeway to the north and the residential communities on the other side of the freeway. Negative Attributes: • Very minor elevation change from the adjacent riverbed. Positive Attributes: Large amount of open space containing native vegetation. Good visibility and easy access. Santa Qara River Park Project 115 SITE 14 • A moderate size piece of land located on the south side of the river at the junction of Lost Canyon Rd. and Oak Spring Canyon Rd. • The river banks on both sides are in a natural state without concrete levees. • In the midst of scattered remnants of native coast live oak and scrub oak trees. Accessibility: • Accessible from Sand Canyon Rd. to the west, via Lost Canyon Rd. or Oak Spring Canyon Rd. Hydrology: • Water flow in the riverbed has a 500 -foot width before being confined to about 200 feet as it passes under Sand Canyon Rd. to the west. • Heavy flood waters are slowly eroding the existing river banks. Community Input: • Community Workshop #2 Recreation Intensity: • Most suitable for Moderate -High Passive Intensity. Surroundings: • Rural equestrian communities are directly adjacent to the west and south. • Dense residential developments cover the hills on the far side of the Antelope Valley freeway to the north. • Sand and gravel mining companies operate in the riverbed a mile upstream. • Southern Pacific Railroad tracks form the southern edge of the site. 1 1 6 Sarva Clara River Park Project C� Topography: • The majority of the site is 5-10 feet above the adjacent r— riverbed, but slopes down to the riverbed along the western end where Oak Spring flows into the river. • A small hill forms most of the site on the eastern end. Trail Connections: • The proposed Santa Clara River Trail will be across the river on the north side. Vegetation: • The western part of the site is completely covered with non- native grasses, and an occasional cottonwood tree. • A large grove of coast live oaks and scrub oaks inhabits the riverbank on the eastern end. lJ Visibility of Site: • The entire area is visible from the Antelope Valley freeway to the north and from Lost Canyon Rd. to the south Negative Attributes: n • An area of limited size due to adjacent road and railroad Li tracks. • Located near the outer extent of the eastern city boundary. GI • Within the boundaries of a proposed residential development to the south Positive Attributes: • Easily accessible from Sand Canyon Road. • Good visibility from Antelope Valley freeway. • Mature stand of native coast Ive oak and scrub oak trees growing on the site. r L.J C I J 11 I 7 LJ I Individual Research Individual research topics are an integral part of the 606 Studio. Topics are chosen by individual team members based upon interest and relevance to the overall project focus, The five topics in Appendix Seven are as follows: Site History as a Guide to Sustainable Design by Peter F. Kasten APPENDIX SEVEN Design of Corridors for Human Activity and Wildlife Habitat by Michael A. Kirchmann, Jr. Southern California Riparian Management Reclaimed Wastewater as a Source by Don Colburn of Recreational Water in Arid Environments Recognizing the Subtle Differences in by Bartholomew D. Telep Defining the Term "Sustainable" in Economics and Landscape Ecology by Lisa Squiers Santa Clara River Park Project 117 C C C C C C C C C 0 C j 8 Santa Clara River Park Project C J IFIJ i J r, J I C SITE HISTORY AS A GUIDE TO SUSTAINABLE DESIGN By Peter E Kasten Introduction The modern landscape architect may look to the past for guidance toward sustainable design, but must under- stand not only the conditions of the past, but also the processes of change that have modified the local landscape. The vegetation patterns present on a site before human disturbance were part of a sustainable ecological system. This study presents a process and tools applicable to using site history a design guide. This investigation was stimulated by observations of the Santa Clara River in the Santa Clarita Valley of northern Los Angeles County, California. The Santa Clara River is an intermittent stream in a Mediterranean climate, dry much of the year, but known to flow more than 30,000 cubic feet per second, (25 Feb., 1969), during rain episodes, normally in the winter months. Large single and dispersed Populus fremontii, cotton- woods, in the stream bed appear to be remnants of some past pattern of cot- tonwood forest, but no small cotton- woods are found. Oaks are found scattered above the floodplain. This raised the question of what pattern existed and why has it changed. References will be made to the Santa Clarita Valley and to typical southwest- ern United States riparian conditions because this study uses the riverbed and floodplain in the Santa Clarita Valley to exercise the process being developed herein. The process is suffi- ciently generalized to be applicable to any location wherein significant human disturbance has occurred. Time Scales The context of this research considers three time scales. Prehistoric or the archeological past is defined herein as all that preceded significant human disturbance. Historic past begins with the first written accounts, which may vary widely from site to site, but is nominally 300 years ago or less in the western United States. The modern time is the recent decades of well re- corded landscape change. The most significant period for this study is the beginning of the historic past because it coincides with the start of human disturbance. The prehistoric past contains the variable of climatic change, which complicates interpreta- tion of contemporary sustainability based upon past conditions. Prehis- toric past should not be discounted, but it is not the focus of this study. Mod- ern time is usually well recorded and is, in part, directly observable. Objective The objective of this investigation is to develop a process that combines the knowledge of a location's past with an understanding of the processes that have altered the conditions in that Santa Clara River Park Project 119 location for the purpose of creating a sustainable landscape design. The Process The premise of this research is that a design process should apply site his- tory to help understand the elements necessary for a sustainable design. A process is presented to guide the search for relevant data and its interpretation. Figure 1 Research was initially focused on establishing methods to determine past vegetation on a site, typically, a site disturbed by human activity. The researched material referred regularly to disturbance factors and caused a change of focus from the vegetation patterns to the disturbances that form the vegetation patterns. The process that emerged from this research uses the disturbance history of a site as the hw" ee, sten lhEersUri7 Sea vegeta Mtticelor InUitaw, spew. s�ae FhODetemme Date l Muletlral Vele H prhwpee Dsw�iGencP(Me mwmgemem Assess site gwncreeWa UtAententl NYutY OiiN1DYlYAe l 'm w H. htwlatencee 120 Santa Clara River Park Project suab,pes key factor in assessing suitability of past vegetation to contemporary use. Figure 1 is a simple diagram illustrat- ing that investigative paths converge on disturbance interpretation. Each line of Figure 1 is expanded in the following text. Site Inventory Vegetation A site inventory of vegetation is com- mon to any design process. Existing vegetation is listed and mapped. Historical vegetation implies native species, however the non -natives cur- rently present may be significant to understanding disturbances. Regionally native, but not site native species may also be important, influ- encing the designer to adjust the meaning of "native" in view of human disturbances. The Santa Clarita riparian site features several Willow species, (Salix), consti- tuting the greatest vegetation density in limited locations, and Mule Fat, (Baccharis salicifolia), as the most wide- spread species. Desert cottonwood, (Populus fremontii), is the major large tree present, but in seemingly unnatu- ral distribution. Coast live oak, (Quercus agrifolia), and valley oak, (Quercus lobata), are found on the edge of the floodplain. Chaparral and Sage L r� LJ r L L r7 SLI J �l l� I communities dominate beyond the floodplain, outside the study area. Non native species abound. Indicator Species A few species on a site may be selected as disturbance indicators. The three riparian species listed above are _com- monly mentioned in the research refer- ences regarding disturbed riparian environments, e.g. Everitt. Even out- side the southwestern United States, cottonwood and willow species are used as indicators and test subjects in riparian environment research. The oaks are indicators of human distur- bances and became an important ele- ment in the Santa Clarita Valley site. The researcher must understand the life characteristics of the species and thereby be prepared to interpret the causes of change in that species distri- bution found through historical discov- ery. Some characteristics to understand are: propagation characteristics growth rate, age estimates expected life span water and nutrient needs soil preferences climatic needs resistance to mechanical forces (e.g. flood flow) drought and inundation tolerance disease and insect susceptibility natural range J typical growth pattern As an example, Populus fremonth is present on the Santa Clarita site, but in a distinct pattern. Individual, large trees are somewhat isolated in the river bed. No small cottonwoods are found. The valley oak is sparingly present near the river, in locations favorable to this species.. No young oaks are found. The reasons for the present patterns may be due to a determinable disturbance. Historical Component Data Sources Prehistoric data collection requires intensive effort, beyond the resources normally applied to landscape design. Existing data should be reviewed, but the most recent pre -human disturbance conditions should be sought, princi- pally from the historic past. Personal writings and records are the primary source of immediate pre -human distur- bance data used by most investigators. Dick -Peddie and Foster are examples of authors who rely upon early written accounts of their study areas in New Mexico and New England respectively. Preserved pollen, fire scars and middens (animal nest material), are also useful sources. Firsthand accounts require human presence, which alters the natural disturbance pattern, complicating interpretation. Only the earliest records can contain the descriptions of virgin conditions, but these may be the least reliable regarding location, identi- fication, and interpretation. As an example, the Juan Crespi diaries, circa 1770, are the first written accounts of the Santa Clarita location, but facts are generalized and require some guessing regarding site locations. Photographic records reach back to circa 1860. Hastings used then -and - now photographs from early and mid twentieth century, but he was not necessarily seeking undisturbed condi- tions, he was recording change. Systematic aerial photography goes back to the 1920s. The earliest aerial photographs of the Santa Clarita area are from 1928. Visible light aerial photography is excellent for determining patterns, but species identification is difficult. Remote sensing in ecology began seri- ously about 1969.. Modern satellite imaging, at many wavelengths, pro- vides much data for vegetation pattern, species and state of health, but is not directly applicable to historical condi- tions. Satellite images may be inter- preted for historical disturbance pat- terns by specially skilled persons. Old river beds, landslides and other geo- morphic influences may be identified. Local historical societies are a good source of data and for contacts with historians. A Santa Clarita Valley historian, Reynolds, has authored a book containing useful information and Santa Clara River Park Project 121 also holds the historic society's photo- graphic collection. Photographs must be accompanied by location and time information to construct the change sequence or the interpretation will lose value. Even the well documented photos from Reynolds are not always site specific. In summary, the oldest, most necessary data is mainly written records and is likely to be scarce and unreliable. Intermediate age data must be carefully sequenced and located to avoid misinterpretation. Site Characteristics The Santa Clarita site is a fortunate choice as an example because it empha- sizes natural change, which leads to understanding the causes of change, further directing attention to human induced change. The Santa Clara River is intermittent, the most disturbed of all natural systems. Fluvial geomor- phic processes create and destroy environments for riparian plant spe- cies. The riverbed consists of gravel bars and braid patterns. High stream side gradients restrict some meander- ing while flood control measures fur- ther suppress channel movement. The wide, flat riverbed allows ample area for water flow except during extreme flood conditions, such as in 1969 when a main bridge was destroyed in high water. The land in the upper flood- plain is disturbed far less often by 122 Santa Clara River Park Project natural causes, but is subject to more intense human disturbance. Other sites will have a wide range of characteristics which should be under- stood for both present conditions and for opportunities. Disturbance and Interference The classical view of succession empha- sizes climate as the main factor and the climax species as the best competitors. Compositional stability and self -repro- duction, a good definition of a regen- erative system, are central to the recog- nition of climax.. The concept of a monoclimax, succession converging on a stable state, is viewed by some ecolo- gists as a potential condition which is never reached due to disturbances. This climatic climax may be repre- sented in only a small part of the land- scape and definitely not on the Santa Clarita site. The polyclimax concept recognizes many climaxes, essentially disturbance climaxes, where the succession clock is reset so often that the disturbing envi- ronmental factors determine the condi- tions. The Santa Clarita site is well described by this concept. These views are pertinent to recognize that a landscape may not have a com- position or pattern that can be termed "normal" or "the ecologically correct one A stable pattern may not be i spatial, but may be recognized as an r irregular but repetitive sequence of L; events, a temporal pattern. Natural Disturbances The subject landscape must be under- stood beyond the vegetation constitu- ents to determine if it is in a state of dynamic succession or near a stable condition. Table 1 lists the primary natural disturbances that affect the Santa Clarita site. Other major natural disturbances, those that are not likely to affect the Santa Clarita site are: Windstorm Ice Storm Ice Push Cryogenic Soil Movement C r Temperature Fluctuations Coastal Erosion, Deposition, and Dune Movement Saltwater Inundation Lava flows Karst Processes L, Biotic Disturbance Disturbances that occur infrequently f may cause local eradication of species, but result in little evolutionary changes. High frequency disturbances L force adaptation, but again, little evolu- tion. Intermediate frequency distur- bances cause species mixtures with different strategies. The frequency of natural disturbance may then be in- ferred by the diversity of a landscape. j L I Human Disturbances Human disturbance may in fact be attempts at suppressing natural distur- bance. As an example, the concrete faced levees on the Santa Clara River suppress the river meander and flood plain inundation. Settlement, agricul- ture and industry change natural disturbances into disasters on the altered landscape. n The Santa Clarita site, one of frequent Historic Rote disturbance, is then one of adaptation Comment or frequent change, and also of low diversity. (The region is a convergence Fire of various plant communities, but the minor disturbed riverbed has low species Earth Movements diversity.) The researcher should not ' expect to find natural diversity here in watershed will cause soil erosion into the the past. Diversity may be a sign of Table 1 human interference. I Human Disturbances Human disturbance may in fact be attempts at suppressing natural distur- bance. As an example, the concrete faced levees on the Santa Clara River suppress the river meander and flood plain inundation. Settlement, agricul- ture and industry change natural disturbances into disasters on the altered landscape. n Disturbance Historic Rote Modem. Role Comment `j Fire moderate minor controlled on site but fire in the upper Earth Movements past earthquakes are a factor' watershed will cause soil erosion into the Table 1 j J riverbed Precipitation major major flood flow increases dramatically as Variability precipitation increases: water table variability is also a factor Interpretation The process diagram converges on interpretation. The data collected to this point will be mainly: 1. Past vegetation and its change over time. 2. Disturbance forces, natural and human induced. Interpretation requires reconciling these two fields of data. Change must be explained in terms of the causal disturbances. Interpretation may be best described by a brief example. Early accounts of the Santa Clarita Valley site describe forests of oak trees. The environmental conditions are appropriate for both coast live oak and valley oak. Large stands of coast live oak remain in the southern side of the valley and dot the surrounding hill- sides. Isolated valley oaks are found near the river. Valley history included extensive farming and wood collection, both of which would clear forests. Grazing followed, a practice that sup- presses young plant survival. Current' development is clearing more hillsides and threatens to appropriate the flood- plain, using levees to suppress river overflow. Figure is the data outline presented in the format of the process diagram, figure 1. Santa Clara River Park Project 123 Alluvial Erosion, major major Deposition, and stream migrates: colonizable sites are created and destroyed: plant species are drowned JFlooding i Landslides, moderate minor stream undercutting and steep slopes may be Avalanches, and significant: water soaked slopes are possible: Earth Movements past earthquakes are a factor' Table 1 j J Interpretation The process diagram converges on interpretation. The data collected to this point will be mainly: 1. Past vegetation and its change over time. 2. Disturbance forces, natural and human induced. Interpretation requires reconciling these two fields of data. Change must be explained in terms of the causal disturbances. Interpretation may be best described by a brief example. Early accounts of the Santa Clarita Valley site describe forests of oak trees. The environmental conditions are appropriate for both coast live oak and valley oak. Large stands of coast live oak remain in the southern side of the valley and dot the surrounding hill- sides. Isolated valley oaks are found near the river. Valley history included extensive farming and wood collection, both of which would clear forests. Grazing followed, a practice that sup- presses young plant survival. Current' development is clearing more hillsides and threatens to appropriate the flood- plain, using levees to suppress river overflow. Figure is the data outline presented in the format of the process diagram, figure 1. Santa Clara River Park Project 123 Find a sustainable design feature that has historic significance to the valley Generale public awareness of valley heritage by designing parks around the oaks and cottonwoods Collonwoods are the dominate Natural disturbance Reforest selected sites with large bees in the river promotes recovery, but it coast live oaks and valley Oaks appear regularly over the is elective against human oaks in city parks; nurture valley presssures only in the as necessary riverbed Oaks once covered the valley The valley is appropriate oak The riverbed is frequently disturbed by flood while the adjacent lard is and Forest clearing and grazing Intense development is further modifying the valley and threatens the riverbed. Figure 2 Conclusion General Human disturbance is accelerating and may overcome the rivers resilience Vegetation that existed on a site before human disturbance may or may not be appropriate as a contemporary design guide. The past vegetation may be determined, but with some uncertainty. The reasons for the changes in the vegetation are most important. Resto- Connect these sites to the river. allowing natural river processes to thrive; nurture cottonwoods as necessary ration may mean undoing change. Practical limitations may prove that past patterns are not now sustainable. The natural change forces must be understood to determine if any particu- lar design is appropriate. Relevance to the Santa Clarita Site Researching the vegetation patterns of the past led to understanding that the coast live oak and valley oak once populated this valley. The significance of the disturbance regime in the Santa Clara River became clear after this research. The river is naturally dis- turbed to such a degree that it is self healing as long as it is not significantly restrained. The flood fringe is not self healing because natural disturbance outside the riverbed is too infrequent and already too suppressed. The design proposals bring the oaks back to parts of the valley where they now grow sparingly, a symbolic resto- ration, but with the knowledge that agriculture and development have made actual restoration impractical. The examples in the designs may stimulate private oak plantings. The designs also let the river take care of itself by altering only the adjacent land, the flood fringe, using it for high capacity recreation. The river becomes more accessible, but need absorb only low impact recreational activities from which the river easily recovers. a I. L t- L 7` L i L C C 174 Santa Clara River Park Project I�I L I I� 14 J J References Dick -Peddie, William A. New Mexico Vegetation, Past, Present and Future. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press, 1993. Everitt, Ben L. "Use of the Cottonwood in an Investigation of the Recent His- tory of a Flood Plain." American Journal of Science, 266 (June 1968): 417-439. Foster, David R. "Land -use History (1730-1990) and Vegetation Dynamics in Central New England, USA" Journal of Ecology, 80 (1992): 753-772. Gecy,•J. Leslie and Mark V. Wilson. "Initial Establishment of Riparian Vegetation after Disturbance by Debris Flows in Oregon." The American Mid- land Naturalist, 123:282-291. Hastings, James R., and Raymond M. Turner. The Changing Mile. Tucson AZ: The University of Arizona Press, 1965. n Johnson, Philip L. Remote Sensing in J Ecology. Athens GA: University of Georgia Press, 1969. :J McBride, Joe R., and Jan Strahan. "Es- tablishment and Survival of Woody Riparian Species on Gravel Bars of an Intermittent Stream." The American Midland Naturalist, 112 (1984): 235-245. -I :J Reynolds, Jerry. Santa Clarita Valley of the Golden Dream. Granada Hills, CA: World Of Communications, Inc., 1992. Sedgwick, James A., and Fritz L. Knopf. "Prescribed Grazing As a Secondary Impact in a Western Riparian Flood- plain." Journal of Range Management, 44(4) (July 1991): 369-373. Szaro, R. C. "Southwestern Riparian Plant Communities: Site Characteris- tics, Tree Species Distributions, and Size -Class Structures." Forest Ecology and Management, 33/34 (June 1,1990): 315-334. White, P. S. "Pattern, Process and Natural Disturbance in Vegetation." Botanical Review, 45 (1979): 229-299. JSanta Clara River Park Project 125 F L r L 126 Santa Clara River Park Project F L 1 r - :J I n k� Southern California Riparian Management By Don Colburn This paper outlines extant southern California riparian management techniques, presents a skeletal frameworkfor a comprehensive, integrated, biologically based management strategy, and illustrates some parallel strategies in other western states. Riparian is defined as the area of association between plant and animal species normally found near bodies of perennial or intermittent fresh water. Riparian systems constitute areas that have a "presence of fresh water in excess of water locally available, the moist soils derived from that transported water and the environment associated with them." (Meyer, 1984) In southern California, human interaction with riparian systems is a key component of riparian dynamics. Since it is highly unlikely that human activities can or will be eliminated from riparian functions, management of these areas is paramount. Consequently, southern California riparian systems are defined further as the area of activity between plants, animals and human activity within the range of moist soils associated with riverine meanderings. Roughly five percent of riparian zones remain intact in the southwestern United States. Extant riparian systems represent areas of biotic and cultural concentration. In other words, these areas are corridors of biodiversity, and often are, the only habitat for wildlife and plants in urban places. (Dawson, 1984) Riparian systems maintain denser levels of natural resources relative to their drier surroundings. Concentration is manifest by higher amounts of energy, nutrients, plants and animals, particularly in California. Riparian systems are also a critical component of stream function. Riparian vegetation provides terrestrial habitat, supplies detritus, i.e., energy, to the stream and augments water quality and quantity. Vegetation shade controls primary production in the stream and water temperature. Interaction of riparian vegetation with the stream is key to a stable, healthy aquatic environment. In dry southern California, riparian systems act as focal points for agriculture, urban development and recreation. For these reasons, riparian systems are a prime component of land management. Current Management Strategies Current management strategies for riparian systems revolve around government jurisdictions and relationships. Typically, jurisdictions impinge upon one another yet they fail to identify baseline standards.. Laws and regulations are subject to budget constraints that often debilitate official capacity to monitor and enforce. Laws, programs and ordinances illustrate the techniques used by agencies to manage riparian areas. Santa Clara River Park Project 127 Essentially, there are agencies that have regulatory management authority, those that act in an advisory capacity and those that have or exhibit policies that are neglectful or detrimental to riparian systems. By far the most effective riparian management policies to date are embodied in the Coastal Act of 1976. The Coastal Commission's permit authority establishes an arena in which maintenance or enhancement of biological productivity and quality is assured. Provisions are made for protection of ground water supply and maintenance of vegetation buffers that protect riparian habitats. The major shortcoming of this policy is that it applies only to coastal zone jurisdiction. Apart from the obvious exclusion of inland areas, many coastal fresh water streams are part of watersheds that extend beyond the coastal zone. Downstream vitality is inextricably dependent on what happens upstream. Additional, though less comprehensive state and local regulatory policies include the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act. This act requires buffers and protection for riparian vegetation in and near mined lands. In Ventura County, for example, sand and gravel operations are required to have minimum 60 -foot buffer zones to protect riparian vegetation. The Davis- Dolaig Act requires projects to avoid or 128 Santa Clara River Park Project minimize impacts on waterways. The Proter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act gives the State water Resources Control Board the ability to determine standards for retention of instream waters. The Department of Parks and Recreation has authority to prohibit facility development and intensive use in riparian areas; however, they have not opted to do so when opportunities have presented themselves. California has a riparian forest acquisition program administered by the Wildlife Conservation Board. This program can establish restoration projects. The Hidden Valley Wildlife Area on the Santa Ana River is a product of the program. At the county or city level, Significant Resource Area inventories allow for designation of protection policies to be incorporated into the conservation/ open space elements of General Plans. Los Angeles County has drafted 65 Significant Ecological Areas into its conservation/open space element. Such listings provide protection when they are connected with regulatory processes. Local enforcement of land use regulations can be implemented through zoning ordinances. Used in conjunction with an explicit ordinance, use permits allow localities to impose protective conditions or regulate uses in sensitive environmental areas. Open space, conservation and resource management districts can encourage installation of protective designs for streams' courses. A highly regarded approach to riparian protection, at the disposal of local governments, is the Waterways Conservation Ordinance. Zones varying in width from 25 to 150 feet are established in which a permit is needed for any predetermined alterations to a riparian area. Flood plain ordinances are also effective local protection measures. Ordinances at the local level offer a way to manage development along the State's floodways. Several agencies have polices that function in an advisory capacity. At the federal level, the US. Fish and Wildlife Service has produced a prolific amount of information concerning riparian system protection. The service has devised "channel modification guidelines" which promote efforts to restore and maintain riparian vegetation as a functioning part of ecosystems. The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act allows the Fish and Wildlife Service to function as a forum for interagency consultation concerning resource conservation. The Endangered Species Act lets the Fish and Wildlife Service define critical habitat areas for endangered species. Both legislative acts bolster the agency's ability to integrate riparian issues into its affairs. The US. Forest Service has produced publications with objectives that recognize the values of riparian areas and call for their protection and 1 u' 11 enhancement through management activities. One management prescription for southern California revolves around the determination of buffer strips to ensure minimum disturbance for streams from nearby development. This is based on the notion that riparian systems are usually the most productive areas of flora and fauna. This is certainly true in southern California. The Federal Flood Disaster Prevention Act provides incentives for construction outside flood prone riparian areas and promotes the restoration and preservation of flood plains. The Clean Water Act encourages management strategies that promote retention and enhancement of vegetation along streams to diminish bank erosion. Regulatory standards have not emerged from plans enacted under this act. The National Environmental Policy Act addresses flood plain management. However, its application is often perfunctory. The State of. California has legislation that encompasses riparian management. The doctrine of the Public Trust does not specifically address riparian systems, but it has been used to justify preservation of stream flows requisite for habitat protection. The Department of Fish and Game is prevented from effectively implementing preservation and sound management techniques due to scant personnel and a dearth of public awareness of riparian issues. The Santa Barbara County Coastal Plan requires that development in specified areas within 50 feet of any stream abide by policies that protect the floodway. The conservation element of this plan is advisory, not mandatory. The County relies on the California Environmental Quality Act environmental review process to establish additional habitat protection guidelines. Orange County has recommendations for riparian protection in several elements of its General Plan; however, there are no implementing ordinances. Unfortunately there are a number of agency policies that are detrimental or neglectful to riparian systems. The Small Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act allows the Soil Conservation Service to establish soil conservation and flood control projects of specified sizes. This act has wound up funding a number of stream channelization projects. Projects conducted under the auspices of the Soil Conservation Act often involve stream channelization, The Flood Control Act of 1936 bestowed the Army Corps of Engineers with responsibility for flood projects. Corps efforts usually entail riparian degradation. The Farmers Home Administration provides credit for farmland improvements. No requirements for loans ensure riparian protection.. A number of state acts and regulations allow for the establishment of policies and practices that compromise riparian systems. Section 8125-8127 of the California Water Code allows counties to alter riparian systems for flood control purposes without assurances of preservation. State flood plain management strategies fall short of establishing non-structural regulations that control development in floodways and flood -risk areas. Like the National Environmental Policy Act, the California Environmental Quality Act addresses protection of environmental systems, including riparian areas. Like its Federal counterpart, CEQA contains guidelines that are often construed to the detriment of riparian systems. Riparian protection policies promulgated by the Department of Water Resources are subject to prioritization and reorganization by political figures. The Coastal Conservancy has adopted restoration of riparian zones as part of its coastal protection program. The agency's protocol, however, does not include requisite erosion control to prevent detrimental amounts of sedimentation by strong storms to newly established preservation and restoration project areas. The Division of Mines and Geology of the Department of Conservation cannot satisfactorily Santa Clara River Park Project 129. address mining impacts along riparian areas because riparian vegetation is not considered for streambed erosion control measures. San Diego's General Plan conservation element states that flood control measures are not to compromise riparian habitat. Prohibition of riparian vegetation removal is not specified nor regulated. There is conflict, overlap, ineffective communication and poor cooperation amidst the plethora of laws, agencies, local ordinances and districts that concern riparian areas. In essence, contemporary management strategies supply guidance. They generally do not specify implementation nor regulation measures. Elements of a Comprehensive Management Strategy Effort to improve the efficacy of riparian management strategies is predicated on a paradigm shift based more on natural system function and less on engineering. This trend in management theory relies on biological assessment, integration of inter -agency management strategies and the incorporation of the public into the riparian management process. Fundamental to a natural system approach to management is an assessment of riparian biological components. Assessments must be 130 Santa Clara River Park Project made for each riparian system because no two are alike. Cohesive management strategies require that crucial riparian characteristics be catalogued and the consequences of proposed activities be anticipated. Baseline studies need to evaluate riparian systems in terms of health and water quality requirements, hydraulics, fluvial conditions, nutrient cycling,. plant succession, bank stability, existing wildlife populations, the relationships between riparian vegetation and stream flow, groundwater, fish habitat and channel size, shape, and stability. (La Rosa, 1984) Biologic inventories are to account for off-site influences such as fire, urbanization, off-roading and cultivation. (Barry, 1984) The same holds true for on-siteinfluences that include livestock grazing, cultivation, exotic species invasion, off-roading and equestrian and human trampling. (ibid., 1984) Such baseline data will establish a foundation for planning decisions that can mitigate detrimental effects of development. A thorough understanding of natural systems will help anticipate the effects of waste water discharge, entrainment, groundwater' depletion, interference with water flow, and determination of vegetation buffer zones. (Capelli,1984) Buffer zones protect and enhance riparian habitat. A defensible way to initiate such studies is to devise standards that examine the historic context that established a natural system. Study of relic or comparable areas will help decipher the historic undisturbed character of a riparian area. (Dawson, 1984) Part of this effort includes obtaining knowledge of the frequency, magnitude and duration of water flows that have led to the shape of the channel in question. (Kelley, 1984) Devising comprehensive survey methods will help shore up efforts to maintain the ecological integrity of riparian systems. Developers or agencies proposing projects that could affect riparian systems should be required to conduct biological studies and submit the results to public agency critique. Implementation of requisite controls needs to take place early in the development process. Biological integrity is not compromised by educational and research activities, nor by development of trails and scenic overlooks. Any channeling and dams should be limited to necessary water supply projects, flood control (when no other method is feasible) or as an attempt to improve fish and wildlife habitat. (Bentner, 1984) Where no other alternatives exist, bridge supports, pipelines, maintenance roads, road crossings and agriculture that does not J J J '.f t� J J n J' J ,I call for riparian vegetation removal are permissible. (ibid.,1984) Coordination of research with implementation strategies is fundamental to sound riparian management. Inter -disciplinary approval of planning and management decisions among agencies having land management responsibilities is key to this process. (Martin, 1984) A multi agency approach involves federal, state, county, municipal and stewardship organizations. (La Rosa, 1984) Management considerations these groups should address include biological assessments, the consumptive public use of riparian areas, surrounding land uses, restoration and long term preservation goals. (Hesseldenz, 1984) Once agreement upon protection methods is reached among pertinent agencies, program options need to be unified into one overall strategy. (ibid., 1984) Management should be based on a long-term and, ideally, drainage -wide, planning description of critical elements and their respective sensitivities. (ibid., 1984) Over 80 percent of riparian systems in the United States are privately owned. (Morris, 1984) Private land acquisition is prudent when "long term regulation is not feasible or inadequate." (Ray, 1984) Designation of conservation easements, management agreements, land exchanges, and inclusion within protective government systems are all ways to infuse protection and management on private lands. Ultimately, activity in riparian areas must comply with national, state and local "conservation practice standards and specifications." (Patterson, 1984) Pertinent agencies should have permit approval capabilities. As part of the permit process, alternative plans should be submitted for consideration. (Cappelli, 1984) In effect, multiple agency involvement and coordination of riparian management will sidestep dominance of particular agendas in favor of well balanced management strategies. Urbanization, recreation and agriculture play preponderant roles in determining how riparian systems function in southern California. Given the large extent of human interaction with riparian systems, public involvement should also play a role in management strategies. In other words, public participation is requisite to make management strategies compatible with riparian system function. Public support helps to define goals and policies and encourages a more thorough review of project plans. (Kelley, 1984) "Securing public involvement and feedback throughout the planning process" is more likely to be accomplished when an array of planning and management alternatives in developed, "from the environmental ideal to the limits of compromise." Doing so will unveil the most "widely acceptable protection program" and foment implementation because the program has the "support of agencies, owners, organizations and involved individuals." (Hesseldenz, 1984) Related Approaches Senate Bill 397 in Oregon provides a good example of a duplicable framework for California riparian system management. The bill embodies a policy of biological assessment, interagency cooperation and public involvement. The bill is predicated on an evaluation procedure for assessing the condition of riparian areas. The process involves a sequence of inventory, evaluation and recommendation of objectives. Development of management prescriptions to meet established objectives is then addressed. This step encompasses "an analysis of trade-offs involved, cost-effectiveness of each management prescription, and a time frame for implementation and monitoring procedures." (Duhnkrach, 1984) The intent is to encourage maintenance or rehabilitation of riparian systems. The Bureau of Land Management Pineville, Oregon offers an interesting sequential method for "selling" Santa Clara River Park Project 131 riparian management programs. This process is predicated on identification of the benefits to land users if a riparian system has a high degree of biological integrity. To do so it is essential to have access to an improved riparian area that demonstrates the value of a healthy system. The next step is to bring the "affected landowners, grazing permittees, interest group members, other agency personnel, and public land managers together, 'on the ground' to observe what can happen and to agree on goals, alternatives, and a plan of action for riparian area management on other areas." (Hancock, 1989) Such gatherings foster an environment in which goals, alternatives and implementation are discussed and agreed upon. The crux of this approach is based on the belief that when all concerned parties are involved, there is apt to be a much greater understanding between varying perspectives and philosophies. A series of meetings at'a model riparian area should be conducted over a period of time so that all involved parties have time to comprehend issues and establish goals.. Exploration of alternatives to resolve management problems will bolster the chances of reaching an acceptable solution (ibid., 1989). Progress toward goals must be monitored. Monitoring will identify changes in predetermined baseline conditions over time. Such measures should include vegetation, 132 Santa Clara River Park Project soil, wildlife and fish populations, water quality and quantity and other environmental constituents. Long-term involvement of all parties in conjunction with documentation and evaluation of changes is critical to the long-term success of a management plan. The key to managing the dynamism of riparian systems requires that plans be adaptable to change. Change should receive the consent of all parties involved. The Oregon Watershed Improvement Coalition, formed in 1986, is a good example of an organization that creates a forum for diverse riparian groups to establish common goals. The collective goal of OWIC is "to insure the long- term benefits of riparian: systems by providing information that will help with the improvement of riparian systems and their associated uplands compatible with the varied land use objectives of land owners and managers." (ibid., 1989) To reach this goal, OWIC has established a demonstration area in the central Oregon Bride Creek watershed. Dissemination of information papers, a library of case histories of riparian restoration projects, a riparian bibliography, presentation of slides and videos and distribution of the organization's meeting minutes are adjunct services of the educational component of the organization:: Essentially, OWIC sees its function "as that of catalyst and facilitator in bringing together people, resources and technical knowledge. The concept that is fostered is that of a healthy watershed, with the result that everyone benefits." (ibid., 1989) Washington state has a similar arrangement, albeit on a larger, state wide scale. Dissatisfied with existing regulations, several parties involved with riparian areas approached the Northwest Renewable Resources Center for assistance. NRRC. is a nonprofit corporation composed of corporate, environmental and tribal leaders. The organization facilitates conflict resolutions involving the use, management, and conservation of natural resources..NRRC conducted negotiations between varying riparian interests with consensus being the fundamental guideline for resolution. The process of reaching consensus entailed the development of an array of options and selection of a preferred plan alternative. After agreement was reached, an Environmental Impact Statement was written, public hearings were held and implementation was subsequently funded by the Washington State Legislature. The final plan, known as the Timber, Fish and Wildlife Agreement, "describes an innovative multi -resource management approach that provides the framework and procedures for ... effective natural resource management." (Phinney, 1989) c r^ i L L.: r L r, f� L j 7, J C� V "I J 1i J �I J ,I r� U I u r� The Agreement framework is similar to the BLM strategy in Pineville, Oregon. In Washington, resource use and protection are balanced by administrative rules that address the needs of all interests. Regulatory prescriptions are predicated on the physical qualities of "transitional terrestrial environments bordering streams ... flood plains and areas of high water table." (ibid., 1989) In Washington's plan there is a site- specific method that accommodates unusual circumstances.. Under such conditions, landowners and developers can deviate from specified regulations, provided their proposals provide the same level of resource protection afforded by standard regulations. The Resource Management Planning component of the Agreement entails creation of long-term management plans that meet the needs of all local interests. The final component of the Agreement is an adaptive management planning approach. This part of the Agreement accommodates the inevitable uncertainties in managing natural resources. The process relies on "monitoring, research and evaluation to determine the results of regulatory actions." (ibid., 1989) Annual reviews, special three- and eight -year reviews are the basis of this component. Assessment and in-depth evaluation of the regulatory impacts will help decipher if changes to the plan are requisite. The eight-year review allows participants to decide if the Agreement is to "remain, be renegotiated or abandoned." (ibid., 1989) The Arizona Riparian Council provides another example of a worthwhile approach to riparian management for southern California. The Council is the result of a perceived necessity for a continual interaction among people concerned with riparian areas. The goals of the Council are "the continual interaction of those interested in riparian resources as well as integration of ideas, concerns, activities, research, outreach and education programs." (Patten, 1989) The Council addresses "water resources and instream flow, inventory and classification, protection and enhancement, land use, education and institutional arrangements and policy." (ibid., 1989) The objectives of the Council coincide with the essence of a California riparian management paradigm shift to biological assessment, functional inter -agency interaction and public participation. The objectives of the Council are worth quoting at length since they apply to the need to fortify southern California riparian management strategies. The objectives are: 1. To stimulate and support studies in all phases of ecology, management and protection, and related intrinsic values of riparian systems; 2. To provide a clearinghouse of information among all agencies, organizations and individuals engaged in work on riparian systems through appointment of work committees, preparation of bibliographies and abstracts, and related methods; 3. To function in an advisory capacity on questions involving management, conservation and protection of riparian systems, and to adopt such measures as shall tend to ensure the continued survival and maintenance of riparian systems; 4. To establish programs whereby the public is made aware of the importance or proper management and protection of riparian systems; and 5. To publish symposium proceedings and transactions of meetings in order to present current information on problems relating to the preservation of riparian systems and to commend outstanding action by the public and professionally engaged individuals supporting the purposes of the Council. Division of the Council into committees allows the Council to focus on pertinent riparian issues. The Classification and Inventory Committee facilitates aggregation of riparian information for assimilation into a common database. The Water Resources Committee is concerned with development of methods for evaluating "instream flow rights by land management agencies and private landowners." (ibid., 1989) The Education Committee cosponsors riparian workshops for people such as Santa Clara River Park Project 133 teachers, with the intent of communicating riparian concerns to the public. The Land Use Committee solicits information concerning grazing. The Policy and Issues Committee serves as an advocacy component of the Council Membership of groups that represent the general public fortifies the Council with interest other than "those who either study, manage or wish to preserve riparian habitat." (ibid., 1989) The estimable overall goal of the Council is to "work with riparian management agencies, legislators and user groups to develop policies and activities that will offer long-term appreciation for healthy and vigorous riparian habitats in Arizona." (ibid., 1989) Such broad, integrated goals are applicable in southern California. Conclusion Urban development pressures have displaceed most southern California riparian areas and are the salient threat to extant riparian lands. Aspects of procedures developed in Oregon, Washington and Arizona have applications in southern California. Appropriate applications adapted from theses states used in conjunction with development of regulatory systems for management that address multiple considerations, a process of biological assessment, a high degree of inter- agency interaction and thorough public 134 Santa Clara River Park Project integration will fortify current southern California riparian management strategies. (Jones, 1984) References Anderson, David B. "The Public Trust and Riparian Systems: A Case for Preservation." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 265-268. Barry, W. James.. "Management and Protection of Riparian Ecosystems in the State Park System," In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 758-766. Bollman, Frank H. "Economic Analysis and the Management of Riparian Resources." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M, Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 221-225. Burns, James W. "Public Values and Riparian Systems." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 226-227. Capelli, Mark H. and Stephen J. Stanley. "Preserving Riparian Vegetation along California's South Central Coast." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed, Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 673-687.. Duhnkrack, Nancy E. "Senate Bill 397: A New Approach to Riparian Area Protection in Oregon." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 430-437. Erwin, Myra. "Protecting Urban Streams: A Case Study." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 833-837. Faber, M. Phyllis, The Ecology of Riparian Habitats of the Southern California Coastvl Region: A Community Profile. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlfe Service, 1989. I J J C1 J f� J J Fitshugh, Lee. "Developing Management Strategies for Privately Owned Riparian Land." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 958-961. Flournoy, Bill, Don Lancaster, and Paul Roush. "Integrated Riparian Area Management on the Tule Lake Allotment, Lassen County." In Proceedings of the California Riparian Systems Conference, September 22-24, 1988 by the Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. Berkeley, CA.: 1989, 530-532. Hancock, James L. "Selling a Successful Riparian Management Program: A Public Land Manager's Viewpoint." In Riparian Resource Management: An Educational Workshop, May 8-11, 1989. Gresswell, Robert E., Bruce A. Barton, and Jeffery L. Kershner, ed. Billings, Montana: US Bureau of Land Management, 1989, 5-6. Hanson, Mary L. "The Oregon Watershed Improvment Coalition's Approach to Riparian Management." In Riparian Resource Management: An Educational Workshop, May 8-11, 1989. Gresswell, Robert E., Bruce A. Barton, and Jeffery L. Kershner, ed. Billings, Montana: US Bureau of Land Management, 1989, 5-6. Hesseldenz, Thomas F. "Developing a Long-term Protection Plan for the Mcloud River, California." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 784-794, Hewett, Richard P. "A Management Strategy for the Kern River Preserve, California." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 962-964. Hill, Elgar and Peter Straub. "Management Options for Dry Creek Riparian Corridor Including Formation of a Local Land Trust." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 861-866. Holstein, Glen. "California Riparian Forests: Deciduous Islands in an Evergreen Sea." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 2-22. Horak, Gerald C. "Integrated Riparian Planning in the Urban Setting." In Riparian Resource Management: An Educational Workshop, May 8-11, 1989. Gresswell, Robert E., Bruce A. Barton, and Jeffery L. Kershner, ed. Billings, Montana: US Bureau of Land Management, 1989, 41-44. Huffman, Robert Terry. "Technical Delineation of Wetland Boundaries within California Riparian Systems." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: 'University of California Press, 1984, 889-894. Ice, George G., Robert L. Beschta, Raymond S. Craig, and James R. Sedell. "Riparian Protection Rules for Oregon Forests." In Proceedings of the California Riparian Systems Conference, September 22-24, 1988, by the Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. Berkeley, CA.: 1989, 533-536. Johnson, Huey D. "California Riparian Systems: A Renewable Resource Awaiting Renewal." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 384-385. Santa Clara River Park Project 135 Johnson, R. Roy and Lois T. Haight. Riparian Problems and Initiatives in the American Southwest: A Regional Perspective." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 390-403. Johnson, R. Roy, Steven W. Carothers, and James M. Simpson. "A Riparian Classification System." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 375-382. Jones, Bruce E. "A State Mandate for Riparian Wetland System Preservation." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 826-832. Kier, William M. "Diverse Interests in Riparian Systems." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 230-232. Kindel, Fred. "Riparian Protection from Corps of Engineers Projects." In 136 Santa Clara River Park Project California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 895-898. Knight, Allen W., and Richard L. Bottorff. "The Importance of Riparian Vegetation to Stream Ecosystems." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 160-167. Kraemer, Thomas J. "Sacramento River Environment: A Management Pian." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 795-799; LaRosa, Ronald. "Environmental Resource Conservation: Riparian System Enhancement Through Water Reclamation." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 459-464. Lever, Andrew A, "Riparian Area Management in the Pacific Southwest Region of the Forest Service." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 800-807, Lockard, William M. and Richard A. Burgess. "The Preservation and Restoration of Riparian Resources in Conducting Flood Control Activities." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 844-860. Martin, Kenneth E. "Recreation Planning as a Tool to Restore and Protect Riparian Systems." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA. University of California Press, 1984, 748-757. Meyer, Philip A. "Economic and Social Values in Riparian Systems." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 216-220. f L; is L r - L L+ L f7 l r, { r I I J IJ Mikkelsen, Patricia and Greg White. "Management of Cultural Resources in Riparian Systems." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 773-797. Morris, Robert H. "Planning Recreation Development and Wildlife Enhancement in a Riparian System at Orestimba Creek." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 767-772. Nedeff, Nicole. "Cooperative Resource Management on the Muleshoe Ranch Preserve." In Riparian Resource Management: An Educational Workshop, May 8-11, 1989. Gresswell, Robert E., Bruce A. Barton, and Jeffery L. Kershner, ed. Billings, Montana: US Bureau of Land Management, 1989, 7-10. Ottenfeld, Bruce. "A Manager's Perspective of Riparian Areas in the California Desert." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 720-721. Patten, Duncan T., and William C. Hunter. "Formation of the Arizona Riparian Council: An Example of Lasting Public Interest in Riparian Resources." In Proceedings of the California Riparian Systems Conference, September 22-24, 1988, by the Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. Berkeley, CA.: 1989, 537-540. Pesonen, David E. "Riparian Woodland Regulation: Pros and Cons." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 728-730, Phinney, Duane 'E.,.Millard S. Deusen, Steven M. Keller, and Pamela A. Knudsen. "A New Approach to Riparian Management in Washington State." In Riparian Resource Management: An Educational Workshop, May 8-11, 1989. Gresswell, Robert E., Bruce A. Barton, and Jeffery L. Kershner, ed. Billings, Montana: US Bureau of Land Management, 1989, 11-16. Plantico, Reuben C: "The Value of. Riparian Ecosystems: Institutional and Methodological Considerations." In California Riparian Systems Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 233-239. Ray, Dan, Wayne Woodroof, and R. Chad Roberts. "Management of Riparian Vegetation in the Northcoast Region of California's Coastal Zone." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 660-672. Ross, John W. and Sheila L. Massey. "Riparian Area Management: Principles, Politics, and Practices" Ir Proceedings of the California Riparian Systems Conference, September 22-24, 1988, by the Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. Berkeley, CA.: 1989, 526-529. Schultze, Ronald F. "Riparian System Restoration by Private Landowners: An Example of Coordinated Interagency Assistance." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 965-967. Shanfield, Allan N. "Alder, Cottonwood, and Sycamore.Distibution and Regeneration Along the Nacimiento River, California." In Santa Clara River Park Project 137 California Riparian Systems:. Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 196-202. Spotts, Richard. "Conflicts in River Management: A Conservationist's Perspective on Sacramento River Riparian Habitats—Impacts, Threats, Remedies, Opportunities, and Consensus." In Proceedings of the California Riparian Systems Conference, September 22-24, 1988, by the Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. Berkeley, CA.: 1989, 521-525. Thomas, Frank H. and Gerald D. Seinwill. "Overview:. National Trends in Floodplain Management." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 386-389. Weatherford, Gary, Barbara Andrews, and Kim Malcolm. "Protection of Riparian Systems in an Anti -Regulatory Era." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 281-287. 138 `eta Clara River Park Project Zentner, John. "Protection of Riparian Systems in the California Coastal Zone." In California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management. Warner, Richard E., and Kathleen M. Hendrix, ed. Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1984, 634-649, I I J J n J J Recognizing the Subtle Differences in Defining the Term, "Sustainable" in Econom- ics and Landscape Ecology By Lisa Ann Squiers "The concept that use of natural resources, environmental services, and ecological systems somehow should be 'sustainable' has become one of the most widely invoked and debated ideas in the area of resource and environmental management." Michael Toman, November 1994 The concept of sustainability is used ambiguously in ecological and economic critical thought. Herman E. Daly, in his book, For the Common Good, states that, "the very first step toward redirection must be a widespread recognition that something is wrong." Human beings still have the possibility of choosing a liveable future for themselves and their descendants, in a healthy, sustainable economy and a revived, sustainable ecosystem. Daly states that "humanity is not simply trapped in a dark state." Couldn't a sustainable economic goal for a community be as much to provide meaningful and personally satisfying work as to provide adequate goods and services? However, how does one avoid the tension that surfaces when the structure and functions of nature are given an equally high priority in order to meet sustainable ecologic goals? The term, "sustainable," suggest a continuation of a similar or more advanced state of physical existence within a complex system. One aspect of this complexity is the fact that we now have to understand the world's economy as a single system, consisting of literally billions of subsystems, as described by James Robertson in his book, Future Wealth. He says that today's ecomonic system operates as if it were a machine designed to take resources out of the earth, convert them into wastes, and returm them to the earth as wastes. The 21st century economic order, by contrast, must see the whole economic activity as a single continuing cyclical process, consisting of inter -related cyclical sub-precesses, with the wastes from each providing resources for others. It must design the ecomonic system as an ecologically soundd, organic part of the natural world, not a machine external to it. Michael Toman, an economist whom much of this research is credited to, examined in greater detail various usages of the term, "sustainable," and not surprisingly found that economic and ecological writers had very different meanings in mind. His discoveries of the unequal definitions for the word, 'sustainability,' and conclusions drawn by studying published scholarly and public policy usage, can help us to forge a common definition of the term when looking to satisfy political or economic needs and environmental imperatives with regard to sustainability. Santa Clara River Park Project 139 For example, the 1992 World Development Report, published after the Earth Summit, uses the term in a way that "seems to refer primarily to the application of existing neoclassical principles of efficient resource and environmental management in developing countries." This is very different than the ideas expressed by Herman Daly, "Toward Some Operational Principles of Sustainable Development," who argues that " use of energy and materials must be sharply curtailed to avoid ecological catastrophe," In addition, very general use of the word, 'sustainability,' by ecologists and ethicists differs from use by economists: ecologists "express greater concern for both ecological integrity and the interests of future generations," whereas economists see "the natural environment as one of many fungible assets that can be deployed in satisfying human demands." There seems to be two central themes in the conception of sustainability: our present feeling of responsibility for the qualtiy of life for future generations and the degree of substitutability between natural resources and investment in human capital, such as education and advances in technologies. In order to positively use and employ sustainable goals and objectives in the 140 Santa Clara River Park Project profession of landscape architecture beyond the academic realm, promoting ecological considerations before economic desires, focusing in on the philosophies of intergenerational fairness, and resource substitutability.. This review of an important part of the inter-disciplenary language of economics and landscape ecology will provide a valuable refocusing on how discrepencies in the use of the word, "sustainability, can effect the way that it is applied. Intergenerational Fairness Many theories exist regarding the concept of distributive justice, including fairness across generations. These theories can be grouped into two catagories: maximizing a defined good and innate rights and obligations. A further distinction can be made from those theories that emphasize the curent generation and its immediate descendents, and those that put greater emphasis on the "further future," And one final distinction concerns justice of individuals versus community interests. It is implied in all of these theories that intergenerational fairness is necessary because sustainable measures may be difficult if not impossible for one generation to carry. The notion of "no waste" seems desireable in any intergenerational scheme. Itis understandable that there has been controversy over intergenerational rights, because it is difficult to assign rights and "standing to potential future persons whose circumstances are largely unknown to the present generation." Herman Daly offers the thought that, "to the extent that you are concerned about the welfare of your descendant, you should also be concerned about the welfare of all those in the present generation from whom, for good or ill, your descendent will inherit." Thus a concern for future generations should reinforce rather than weaken the concern for present justice, contrary to what is often supposed. This has lead to the development of arguments in favor on an entire community.that "invoke an obligation to the entire context of future human life -the species as a whole, and the ecological systems that surround it - rather than just to potential future individuals." This stewardship perspective emphasizes the safeguarding of the large-scale ecological processes that support of all facets of human life, from biological survival to cultural existence. Resource Substitutability Assuming that the world population continues to grow at some rate, and that one accepts some obligation to I 11 -1 v I' 1J i� consider the . Al :., acre generations, nanamount of capital should we make available to the next generation. In order to answer this question, one must decide what degree of substitutability are allowable between what Toman refers to as "natural capital, (material resources, waste absorption, cultural values), and other forms of capital, (institutions, knowledge, plants, skills, etc.)." Threat to the term, 'sustainability,' as it applies to public policy, presents little challenge if natural resources are capable of being renewed or of having damages offset by compensatory investments. "Even with exhaustible resources or some other irreversible degradation of the services provided by the natural environment (such as accumulated pollution), it is possible for consumption and welfare to grow if there is sufficient substitutability between natural resources and technical progress sufficient to offset the depletion/degradation of natural resource services." From this point of view, large-scale damages to ecosystems such as degradation of environmental quality, loss of species diversity, or destabilization from global warming are not unacceptable, according to Toman's look another economist's views. He also points out that, "investments in human knowledge, techniques of production and social organization are pertinent to outrace any increases in the scarcity of services provided by the natural environment." An alternate view, he continues, is endeared by many ecologists. Such compensatory investments often are infeasible as well as ethically indefensible. "Physical laws are seen as limiting the extent to which other resources can be substituted for scarce natural resources or ecological degradation. In addition, because matter is conserved, waste is an inherent part of any economic activity; and natural limits may constrain the capacity of the environment to process these wastes. (Ayres and Miller, 1980) Healthy ecosystems offer resilience against unexpected changes that preserve options for future generations. Toman, Daly and Robertson all emphasize that the issue of physical scale is central to this debate. "Local and global impacts must be considered when looking at substitution possibilities. Local resource depletion and ecological degradation may be more easily compensated for by trade, economic diversification, and migration than regional or global adversities.... individual countries may appear to develop sustainability by 'exporting' unsustainable resource use to other nations that supply materials." Safe Minimum Standard To provide some common ground for consideration of differences in conceptions of sustainability among economists and ecologists mainly, Toman supposes the following: all potential human impacts on the natural environment can be characterized by their prospective "cost" and "irreversibility." He defines cost as an expected opportunity cost or threat to a social value, such as political freedom. Irreversibility is seen in terms of an ecological assessment of system function (nonsubstitutability). Research by Norton and Ulanowicz, 1992, suggests that damages to ecological systems that are larger in spatial scale or higher up in the hierarchy of natural processes - more complex, consisting of more component subsystems -is both more harmful and harder to reverse because of the complexity and slower time of adaption in these systems. According to Toman, the safe minimum standard was orginally developed in the context of individual species preservation. The following chart was developed by Toman to help in guiding decisions with regard to balacing natural resource trade-offs and imperatives for preservation. It can be a useful tool for measuring the goals and objectives of the 606 projects against the landscape architect's view of 'sustainability.' It can also be customized to include Santa Clara River Park Project 141 events or tasks that may conflict with each other with regard to cost and irreversibility. Toman discusses the usefulness of this chart in that "as one moves closer to the northwest corner of the box, the more entirely individualistic criteria are supplemented by other expressions of community interest in the form of social rules for preserving natural capital. The zig-zag line can be moved based upon primary concern. For example, Toman suggests that "ecologists, with a primary concern for natural function and resilience might be more inclined than economists to emphasize the irreversibility dimension and draw the zig-zag line vertically, limiting even lower-cost irreversible effects; economists with greater concern for cost and more confidence in sustitutability might be more inclined toward a horizontal line." However, for impacts on the natural environment that are uncertain but may be large and irreversible, Toman concludes that the safe minimum standard pushes for an alternative to relying on comparisions of expected economic benefits and costs for developing resource -protection criteria. In conclusion, sustainability is strongly related to human values and institutions and not just ecological functions. Guidance for social decision is also required, with a common definition for terms such as sustainability. Stress between 142 Santa Clara River Park Project ecological and economical persepectives on sustainability suggests "several ways in which both could adapt to make the best use of interdisciplinary contributions. For ecologists, the challenge includes providing information on ecological conditions in a form that could be used in economic assessment. Economists must consider how both physical limits and ethical constraints on resource use may affect sustainable outcomes. References Barbier, Edward B. "Valuing Environmental Functions," Land Economics. Madison, WI: Univ. of Wisconsin Press. Vol. 70. No. 2, pgs. 155-173. May, 1994. Bruton, Michael J. (Ed.). The Spirit and Purpose of Planning. London, England: Hutchinson and Co., Ltd. pgs. 124-148. 1974. Daly, H. "Toward Some Operational Principles of Sustainable Development." Ecological Economics, 2 (Apr.):1-6. 1990. Daly, Herman E. For the Common Good. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Pgs. 1-190.1994. Robertson, James. Future Wealth. New York, NY. The Bootstrap Press. Pgs.20-33,137-149. 1990. Toman, Michael A. "Economics of Sustainablility", Land Economics. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Vol. 70, N. 4, pp. 319-413. November 1194. F L i.: r. r r L r� r: i_ r r—. L I I :I "-1 J I J Design of Corridors for Human Activity and Wildlife Habitat By Michael Kirchmann, Jr. Introduction Corridor design has become increasing important with the fragmentation and development of natural open spaces. Corridors or greenways have been designed along streams and rivers in urban areas for recreational purposes as well as designed for movement of wildlife from one large natural area to another. Due to the increasing devel- opment in some suburban areas, corri- dors are having to provide two func- tions; recreation and wildlife habitat. This research attempts to examine the dynamics of designing for human activity and wildlife habitat and the combination of the two into one design. Designing for Human Activity In examining the design of space for human activity, Patrick Condon defines space into two categories; Cubist space and Volumetric space. Cubist space is space that surrounds and is subordi- nate to solids. Volumetric space can be defined as space that is made an ex- plicit form by solids with solids subor- dinate to intended space. Cubist space is space made by placing solids in it while volumetric space is made by enclosing space with solids. Condon argues that volumetric space is more logical for human activity design. He also states that volumetric space is suitable for designs based upon the environmental holism movement. Environmental holism looks as humans as part of the ecosystem "nature in not 'other' in the sense of something to be revered or despoiled. Rather, nature is as 'one' with us." (Condon, 1988) Patrick Condon, in his article, cites Christopher Alexander's, A Pattern Language, as an example of an applica- tion of environmental holism in design. In his book, patterns in a city define various space relationships. Open space within the urban regime is seen as "outdoor rooms bounded by solids." (Condon, 1988) Jay Appleton, in his prospect -refuge theory also argues for volumetric space. His theory states that human behavior responses to the idea of pros- pect and refuge in the landscape. In other words, humans want to be up higher to see around them (prospect) or seek to be sheltered in order to feel secure (refuge). Condon states, " In Appleton's view, space that was charac- terized by a dynamic relationship between objects.... would be seen as satisfying neither the need for prospect nor the imperative for refuge. A design field filled with objects.... provides no place which one can escape, but offers numerous hiding places for threats." (Condon, 1988) In designing spaces for human activity, arguments can be voiced for rooms that need to be cre- ated by solid objects that warrant a Santa Clara River Park Project 143 need for comfortable space and to solicit the notion of a 'sense of place.' Open space design in cities and sub- urbs addresses the important topic of spaces for human activity. Werner Nohl, in his article, "Open Space in Cities; Inventing a New Esthetic," discusses design of open space. He writes that open space "represents the counterworld of the almost completely man-made urban environment and as such is a symbol of nature." (Nohl, 1985) He goes on to say that "people associate a multitude of qualities with nature including health, peace, loneli- ness, freedom and originality." (Nohl, 1985) Nohl also states that "city dwell- ers find green spaces beautiful when they represent a reconciliation between culture and nature. In these green spaces, the aggressive dominance of people over nature, which is apparent every where else in the city, is relin- quished or reduced to a level that ensures nature a life of its own."(Nohl, 1985) Nohl then suggests the realm of activi- ties in open spaces. He defines the type of activity as appropriation. "Ap- propriation does not lead to the de- struction of nature because it is ori- ented to the functional value of space and because it depends on agreement with other users." (Nohl, 1985) In order to enjoy these activities, the space requires an "incomplete land- 144 Santa Clara River Park Project scape, an open space that has not been designed in every detail and that is not perfectly maintained." (Nohl, 1985) He goes on to state that "to cultivate the right landscape for appropriation, allow nature to develop unhindered whereever possible."(Nohl, 1985) Less design is encouraged to accommodate these activities. Facilities can dictate activities. "Designs become high main- tenance and expensive - constraints are setup and prevent the public from determining how they will use open spaces..." (Nohl, 1985) Open spaces can provide for environmental learning and an understanding of how natural pro- cesses work. Nohl states that "it is the interplay between users and natural processes that gives a place its special character." (Nohl, 1985) Several approaches to human space design has been examined in the previ- ous section. The underlying theme is the interconnection of humans with the environment. The next section will examine wildlife corridor design. Corridors as Habitat Natural areas are becoming increasing fragmented by development. Corridors have the potential to improve the connectivity between larger habitats and to improve the biological diversity of a region. Two major benefits of wildlife corridors are: 1) providing dwelling habitat for plants and animals; and 2) serve as a conduit for movement. Two important objectives for designing wildlife corridors are " to provide a high quality for native species present, especially the most sensitive and to maintain enough functional connectiv- ity along the entire length of corridor for safe passage." (Noss, 1993) Width is the most important aspect of corridor design. The corridor width issue is perplexing. Extensive research has yet to be done to evaluate the effectiveness of current designs. This type of re- search is essential in documenting design dimensions for wildlife corri- dors. In dealing with the notion of width, the "penetration of edge effects is an overriding factor in the consider- ation of corridor quality and width..." (Noss,1993) How wide a corridor should be depends on several items. These items include habitat structure, human use patterns, length of corridor and the particular species expected to use the corridor. (Noss, 1993) In examining how to design for wildlife habitat within a corridor, individual species are usually targeted for habitat development. Careful analysis of the region is required in order to establish the guidelines necessary for the design. There is no magic number for corridor width that can be applied to all sites. For example, "if trails or other recre- I U i� u ational facilities occur within the corri- dor, the corridors should be wide enough so that most sensitive species using the corridor are not disturbed by human activity." (Noss, 1993) Noss also states that it is important to "set boundaries so that greenways are wide enough to provide both high impact corridors of concentrated recreational use and zones that are virtually undis- turbed."'(Noss, 1993) In dealing with riparian corridors, edges should be "extended into the floodplain, both banks and an area of upland at least on one side, which is wider than the edge effect."(Noss, 1993) These are a few guidelines that are suggested in design- ing corridors. What is important is the analysis of the context in which the corridor exists. Corridors are linear landscape ele- ments. Corridors have six functions: habitat, conduit, barrier to movement, filter of water, source of population and seeds, and as a sink, retaining excessive nutrients. The three most important variables dealing with corri- dors are width, connectivity and qual- ity. Width is how much corridor will be exposed to physical, human and biological intrusions or edge effects from, the outside." (Thorne, 1993) Connectivity is determined by number and severity of breaks along a given stretch of corridor. The degree of connectivity determines the suitability for different uses. Quality depends on width and connectivity but also in- cludes consideration of structure of vegetation. The linkage of patches and corridors within the landscape matrix is crucial to ecological design. They provide for human and wildlife habitat needs at once. Corridors allow for the movement of people as well as plants and animals. The issue is "linking of landscape elements to form a continuous corridor is paramount." (Thorne, 1993) The method for corridor design can be expained in four stages, 1) under- standing the regional context, 2) select- ing project goals and a study swath, 3) defining greenway`(corridor) bound- aries and 4) creating and implementing site designs and management schemes. Each one of these stages will be briefly discussed below. In stage one, understanding the re- gional context is "determining the overall importance of the region's features and the potential means for the protection of them." (Hellmund, 1993) During this stage, a designer is obtain- ing an overall impression of the area as well as becoming familiar with the ecology of the landscape. In stage two, the direction of the project is defined. The purpose of this stage is to "select goals to guide devel- opment of the project and to identify a preliminary geographic area of study." (Hellmund, 1993) Goals also influence the entire design and management process. The public plays an important role in this stage. The input gathered from the community is key in identify- ing goals and concerns. Involving the community in the process allows for support down the road in the approval of the design. During this stage key uses are also indentified for the corri- dor such as the movement of particular species or types of recreation. Stage three can be divided into two categories: '1) finding greenwayalign- ments that will serve the needs of the key uses and 2) setting widths along the alignments. (Hellmund, 1993) In this stage disturbance patches are identified in the matrix to calculate their affect on corridor alignment. Alignments are then associated with key uses. Stage four is creating site designs and formulating plans to specify how a greenway is to be man- aged. (Hellmund, 1993) Designs will be specific to each site and conform to the goals of the project. The overall direction of this design method is dependent on the importance of scale. From stage one to stage four, scale has been decreasing at each level from the region down to site location. The scale also ranges from general to specific. This design method is made to be flexible and encompasses the elements of understanding the Santa Clara River Park Project 14$ 'J ecological integrity of an area and the possible human interactions. Summary Human activity spaces and wildlife habitat can be combined within the corridor design. First, the general outline for each will be examined to develop guidelines for designing spaces that incorporate the two. Human activity space, according to Condon, should be designed with volumetric space, that is, a space formed by solids. The Piazza San Marco was used as an example of volumetric space. The components included the "floor,", (ground plane), "walls," (sides of buildings), and "ceil- ing." (the sky). Condon states " when arriving in this volumetric space from the many narrow access ways, there is an unmistakable sense that one has 'arrived' ..." (Condon, 1988) Also, when designing open space areas, we must also keep in mind what Nohl had argued. He stated that open spaces should not be designed in every detail, but retain a large amount of the natural character. The public can determine how they will use the open space. Corridor design includes several objec- tives, many that require specifics that will not be addressed in this article.. These objectives are 1) provide a high quality for native species present, 2) 146 Santa Clara River Park Project maintain a functional connectivity, and 3) width dimensions. These objectives are outlined in more detail in Reed Moss's article in Ecology of Greenways. Width dimensions, for example, are dependent on specific information that includes habitat structure, human use patterns and the particular species that will use the corridor. Once this infor- mation has been assessed for a specific area, width dimensions can be devel- oped for the corridor design. The combination of human activity spaces with corridor design can be realized along river corridors within urban/suburban settings. These spaces are ideal for the development of linear forms of recreation such as bicycling and jogging. Cities have been re- examining their river corridors due to the increase in the need for recreational space. Trail system development has provided access to these corridors. Trail nodes or resting areas can be designed as "rooms" within the corri- dor. Larger areas within the corridor can incorporate the specifics necessary for wildlife movement, especially edge considerations and species that will be moving through the corridor. Corridors, such as rivers and streams were vital to the early development of cities. Redesigning these spaces to encompass both humans and wildlife can serve a dual role: providing recre- ation as well as an educational experi- ence. The incorporation of human activity spaces and wildlife habitats along river corridors in urban settings, can allow cities to rediscover their waterways. References Condon, Patrick. Cubist Space, Volu- metric Space and Landscape Architec- ture, Landscape Journal, Vol. 7, n. 1, Spring 1988, pp. 1-14. Forman, R.T.T., and Godron, M., Land- scape Ecology. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons. 1986. Greenbie, Barrie B. Design for Diversity, New York, NY: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company. 1976. Greenbie, Barrie B. Spaces:. Dimensions of the Human Landscape, New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press. 1981. Hirschman, J. Bird Habitat Design for People: A Landscape Ecological Ap- proach, Master's Thesis, University of Colorado at Denver, Department of Landscape Architecture. Ingliss, G., and A. J. Underwood. Com- ments on Some Designs Proposed for Experiments on the Biological Impor- tance of Corridors, Conservation Biology, Vol., 6, n. 4, December, 1992, pp. 581-86. Nohl, Werner. Open Spaces in Cities: Inventing a New Esthetic, Landscape, 1985, v.28. no. 2, pp.35-40. Smith, Daniel S., and Paul C. Hellmund. Ecology of Greenways. Minne- apolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. 1993. Santa Clara River Park Project 147 48 Santa Clara River Park Project C r U r: L r L L +1 u L, I rl iJ i ,I I r, J I Li Reclaimed Wastewater as a Source of Recreational Water in Arid Environments By Bartholomew D. Telep Introduction Traditionally, treated wastewater effluent has been discharged into streams and rivers ordirectly into the ocean. This one-time use represents a potential loss of valuable reusable water. There is a growing acceptance of the need for water reclamation projects, which involve the reuse of municipally treated wastewater. This water has undergone extensive purification and disinfection to make it safe for beneficial use in certain applications. Various categories of direct reclaimed wastewater reuse include the following: • Irrigation: (golf courses, landscaping, agricultural, horticultural) this category accounts for the largest use for reclaimed water in this country • Industrial Process Applications: (cooling, washing) • Groundwater Recharge: (surface spreading or well. injection) • Environmental Enhancement: (wetlands restoration, river flow supplementation, wildlife habitats) • Recreational Waterbodies: (currently rather uncommon) • Aquaculture: (currently very limited applications) • Livestock Watering: (currently very limited applications) Of these, agricultural irrigation, landscape irrigation, industrial applications and groundwater recharge account for the majority of the total amount of reclaimed water used in this country. Local environmental conditions, community needs, availability and quality of reclaimed water will determine the specific kind of reuse. The following focuses on the possibility of combining water -related recreational activities within the context of groundwater recharge basins and wetland ecosystems which use reclaimed municipal wastewater. Groundwater Recharge Artificial recharge of groundwater aquifers may be defined as "augmenting the natural movement of surface water into underground formations by some method of construction, by spreading of water, or by artificially changing natural conditions." (Todd, 1980). One of the main purposes of recharging groundwater is to provide underground storage and additional treatment of surface water, including stormwater runoff, imported water and reclaimed wastewater for subsequent reuse. There are several advantages to underground storage versus above- ground reservoirs such as: low cost, simplicity of construction and operation, high storage capacity, and no loss from evaporation. Santa Clara River Park Project 149 A variety of groundwater recharge methods have been developed, including water spreading over shallow surface areas, recharging through deep pits, and pumping directly into aquifers using injection wells. In places where aquifers are unconfined, surface soils are permeable, there are no impermeable clay lenses to restrict downward flow, and sufficient land is available, then surface recharge is the most cost-effective approach. Water spreading methods are the most widely practiced and are accomplished by "releasing water over the ground surface in order to increase the quantity of water infiltrating into the ground and then percolating to the water table." (Todd, 1980). Two basic types of systems may be employed. In channel systems (stream channel, ditch, furrow and flooding) are built within a stream or river channel and consist of dams, levees or weirs which spread the water out over the floodplain. These are usually less than permanent and are designed to be repaired or replaced following major flooding episodes. Off -channel systems (recharge basins) are more permanent basins or shallow pits which are formed by the construction of small dikes or berms located away from the water flow. The most favored method of recharge is the use of basins, because of their relative permanence, general feasibility, ease of maintenance and efficient use of space. 150 Santa Clara River Park Project There are several factors to consider in the design and construction of recharge basins, which should be tailored to the local topographic, geologic, and soil conditions, water quantity and quality and climate. The groundwater table must be deep enough below the basin (at least 3 to 6 meters) so that the infiltration process is not hampered. The depth of the basin itself should be carefully considered. The hydraulic head pressure of deep bodies of water tend to compress clogging layers, thus raising the hydraulic resistance of the bottom layers and restricting infiltration, Therefore, deep basins can produce lower infiltration rates than shallow basins. The maximum ideal depth is approximately two feet (Bouwer, 1990). Clogging of soil pores in the bottom of the basin (due to microbial growths) can greatly reduce the rate of water infiltration and therefore periodic drying and cleaning of the basin may be necessary. Depending upon the climate, soils, suspended -solids content and nutrient levels of the water, the flooding and drying cycles may vary from four days flooding and ten days drying to 11 months flooding and one month drying. Other wet -dry cycles include 2-14 days wet alternating with 5-20 days dry, or a 21 -day cycle of 7 days filling, 7 days infiltrating and 7 days drying. In order to lessen the possibility of silt, clay and other particles from clogging the bottom, inlet structures should be designed to prevent eroded materialsfrom entering the basin. Clogging also tends to be more severe with stagnant water, which might necessitate the use of flowing recharge channels. According to Todd (1980), recharging of treated effluent (usually following secondary treatment) onto bare ground or native vegetation for infiltration and percolation through the soil and plant root systems, functions as a tertiary treatment process by removing bacteria, viruses, almost all biochemical oxygen demand, suspended solids, up to 50% of nitrogen and 60-95% of phosphorus. Conventional Wastewater Treatment Processes The Wastewater Reclamation Criteria, commonly referred to as Title 22 Regulations, were established by California's Department of Health Services (DHS) in order to protect public health and ensure safety in wastewater reclamation and reuse practices. The most recent revision of these criteria was in 1978. This revision contain wastewater reuse applications for groundwater recharge and recreational impoundments, among others. When raw sewage or untreated wastewater reaches a water reclamation plant, it can go through as many as four levels of purification, depending on the type of plant, degree of purity desired and the ultimate destination of the treated effluent. Following is an outline of current wastewater treatment processes. Primary Treatment: A mechanical process which involves the initial screening of large solids and settling out of heavy grit, in addition to the physical clarification of the wastewater in a tank. A primary clarifier allows suspended solids to slowly settle to the bottom and be removed as sludge. Primary treated effluent is often discharged to surface waters, although this practice is illegal. Secondary Treatment:. A biological process in which aerobic bacteria and the primary effluent are mixed together in trickling filters as part of the activated sludge process. This results in the breakdown and removal of up to 90% of degradable, oxygen -demanding organic wastes. Many plants throughout the U.S. discharge secondary effluent directly to surface waters. This level of effluent is commonly used for wetlands enhancement. Tertiary Treatment: A series of specialized chemical and physical processes consisting of coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation and filtration that lower the quantity of specific pollutants, such as pesticides, which remain following primary and secondary treatment. This process effectively removes wastewater particles and helps increase the effectiveness of the disinfection stage. This level of treatment produces reclaimed water most often used for irrigation and groundwater recharge.. Advanced Treatment: Additional nutrients are removed through advanced treatment methods. Due to the potential for eutrophication and increased algal growth in effluent with high nutrient content, advanced treatment is often employed when discharging into sensitive receiving waters. Disinfection: Before treated effluent is discharged following one or more of the above treatment processes, the water is disinfected to kill pathogenic microorganisms including bacteria and viruses. This is most often accomplished using chlorine, but ozone or ultraviolet light maybe used as well. The chlorine is subsequently removed from the water through a dechlorination process to prevent damage to nonpathogenic organisms upon release. Treated effluent discharged to surface waters is quite often disinfected in this manner. Pathogenic organisms can be reduced by a factor of "1,000,000 or more through conventional wastewater treatment processes including disinfection (McHaney, 1992). In southern California, several of the water reclamation plants operated by the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County produce tertiary treated effluent which meets the state's criteria for "unrestricted recreational use" and exceeds California's drinking water standards. Health Concerns Regarding Recreation Around Waterbodies People generally enjoy being around rivers, lakes, wetlands and other waterbodies to enjoy the beauty, serenity and cooling effect of the water, especially in dry, hot climates.. Recreational activities in and around waterbodies can be described as having varying levels of exposure to water. • No Direct Exposure to Water: (hiking, jogging, walking, horseback riding, nature viewing, photography, picnicking, and outdoor education) • Minimal Exposure to Water: (boating, fishing, hunting, aquatic. plant and animal collecting) • Direct Exposure to Water: (swimming, drinking water, consumption of aquatic, plants and animals) The degree of treatment of the reclaimed wastewater entering the waterbody must be considered in determining the level of human Santa Clara River Park Project 151 exposure to water and the appropriate recreational activity. If the source of the water is tertiary or advanced treated effluent, then there is little concern of potential risks to public health. However, if an artificial wetland system is being employed to treat and purify effluent which has not gone through tertiary or advanced treatment and disinfection, then potential health risks can be mitigated through proper wetland design and functioning; appropriate mosquito control methods; and recreation management through control of public access. (McHaney, 1992). Examples of Existing Projects Yellowhouse Canyon Lakes: Lubbock, Texas Lubbock became a pioneer in the reuse of treated effluent for recreational purposes with the construction of the Canyon Lakes recreation area in the early 1970s. Lubbock does not reuse the reclaimed water directly in the lakes, but rather allows the water to percolate into the ground (recharging the groundwater table) and then pumps it up and into the canyon lakes. Santee Lakes Project: Santee, California A pioneer in recreational water reuse, this project dates back to 1961. Five lakes were created with the high quality wastewater from the Padre 152 Santa Clara River Park Project Dam Municipal Water District. The county health department has approved the water for unrestricted recreational use. The effluent water from the final sedimentation tanks flows by gravity to the oxidation ponds where the water is retained. By the natural process of aeration and photosynthesis, the effluent quality is further improved by reduction in biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and by settling out of most of the remaining solids left in the plant effluent. From the oxidation ponds, the effluent is diverted to the percolation basins and then to the recreational lakes where full body contact is allowed safely. Apollo Lakes County Park: Lancaster, California Treated wastewater from the Lancaster Water Reclamation Plant is further treated by removal of phosphorus (to diminish algal growth) at the Antelope Valley Tertiary Treatment Plant. Nine months out of the year, this reclaimed water is supplied to two man-made lakes which are the main feature of the county park. Swimming is not allowed in these clay -lined lakes, although they are stocked with fish for recreational fishing. San Jacinto Wildlife Area: San Jacinto, California The dry San Jacinto River flows through the Wildlife Area, which is an ideal habitat for the threatened Stephens kangaroo rat: In 1987, the 606 Studio proposed a pond and wetland system to further treat the secondary effluent from the nearby Hemet -San Jacinto Wastewater Reclamation Facility. This currently unused treated effluent would flow through a series of ponds and narrow channels which would also serve as wildlife habitat. Once through this wetland treatment system, the high quality water would be used to supplement the flow of The San Jacinto River and tributaries, in recreational ponds, and to recharge the groundwater aquifer. Conclusion The term wastewater is perhaps no longer valid, since water is not wasted as long as appropriate and safe water reuse becomes a common occurrence. Water is a very precious commodity and natural resource:. therefore, reuse of treated effluent for beneficial purposes should be considered appropriate and a necessary way of life, especially in and environments. In all of our environmental concerns, we must not forget the important social and cultural concerns. But these do not have to be isolated from our efforts to make the most efficient use of our available natural resources. Quite the contrary, social and environmental solutions can be incorporated to their mutual advantage. One simple example can be demonstrated by the marriage of groundwater recharge Bouwer, Herman, et al.. "Recharging Lyle, John Tillman. Regenerative Design basins with recreational water features. Ground Water." Civil Engineering., Vol. for Sustainable Development. New York: 60, No. 6. June 1990. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1994. The Los Angeles County Sanitation District operates a wastewater treatment facility within the city of Santa Clarita. More than six million gallons of tertiary treated effluent are currently discharged into the Santa Clara River everyday. Here exists an opportunity to create groundwater recharge basins, either in or alongside the riverbed, which could provide the additional benefit of a passive recreational water feature. An educational element could also be incorporated which would demonstrate the various aspects of wastewater reuse, groundwater recharge, wetlands ecology and river processes. References 606 Studio. "San Jacinto Wildlife Area." Pomona. Department of Landscape Architecure. California State Polytechnic University. 1987. Asano, Takashi, et al. "Evolution of Tertiary Treatment Requirements in California." Water Environment & Technology. Vol. 4, No. 2. February 1992. Asano, Takashi. "Artificial Recharge of Groundwater with Reclaimed Municipal Wastewater: Current Status & Proposed Criteria." Water Science and Technology. Vol. 25, No. 12. December 1992. Bryan, Dot. Water Reuse. National League of Cities. March 1981. Cook, Edward A. "Ecosystem Modeling as a Method for Designing Synthetic Fluvial Landscapes: A Case Study of the Salt River in Arizona. Landscape and Urban Planning. Vol. 20, No. 2, February 1991. Cook, Edward A. "Rivers in the City: Rio Salado." Landscape Architecture. Vol 81, No. 2, February 1991, Day, Henry P. 'Beneficial Reuse on the Texas South Plains." 1994 Water Reuse Symposium. Dallas, Texas. American Water Works Association, Water Environment Federation. February March 1994. Hamann, Carl, Brock McEwen. "Potable Water Reuse." Water Environment & Technology. Vol. 3, No. 1. January 199E Lee, G. Fred, et al. "Indirect Reuse of Domestic Wastewater for Recreational Lakes: Evaluation of the. Sanitary., Quality of the Yellowhouse Canyon Lakes, Lubbock, Texas." Symposium on Water Supply and Water Reuse: 1991 and Beyond. San Diego, California. American Water Resources Association. June 1991. McHaney, Steven X. "Health Considerations Regarding Public Recreation Around Wetlands Using Recycled Wastewater." Urban and Agricultural Water Reuse Conference. Orlando, Florida. Environment Federation. June -July 1992. Taylor, John D. "Take Back the Water." Landscape Architecture. Vol. 82, No. 5. May 1992. Todd, David Keith. Groundwater Hydrology. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1980. Santa Clara River Park Project 153 154 Santa Clara River Park Project I i1I J 11 J I Baldwin, A. Dwight Jr., Judith De Luce and Carl Pletsch. eds, Beyond Preservation: Restoring and Inventing Landscapes. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1994. Bowen, Robert. Groundwater. London, England: Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, 1986. BSI Consultants, Inc. Santa Clara River Recreation and Water Feature Study. March, 1991. Cairns, John Jr., ed. Rehabilitating Damaged Ecosystems Volume 1. Boca Raton, FL: Crc Press Inc., 1988. Department of Water Resources. Investigation of Water Quality and Beneficial Uses, Upper Santa Clara River Hydrologic Area. Glendale, CA: Department of Water Resources, Southern District, 1993. REFERENCES Everitt, Ben L. "Use of the Cottonwood in an Investigation of the Recent History of a Floodplain." American Journal of Science. Vol. 266, 417-439, June, 1968. Forman, Richard T.T., and Michel Godron. Landscape Ecology. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, 1986. Fritts, Harold C. and Geoffrey A. Gordon. Annual Precipitation for California Since 1600 Reconstructed from Western North American Tree Rings. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona, July, 1980. Fugro-McClel land (West), Inc. Final Environmental Impact Report for the Santa Clara River Trail Project. Ventura, CA: Fugro-McClelland (West), Inc. January, 1994. Santa Clara River Park Pnz ject 155 Gecy, J. Leslie and Mark V. Wilson. "Initial Establishment of Riparian Vegetation after Disturbance by Debris Flows in Oregon." The American Midland Naturalist. Vol. 123: 282-291. Hanes, Ted L., Richard D. Friesen and Kathy Kiane. "Alluvial Scrub Vegetation in Coastal Southern California." Proceedings of the California Riparian Systems Conference, September 22-24, 1988, by the Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. Berkeley, CA: 187-193, 1989. Hastings, James R., and Raymond M. Turner. The Changing Mile. Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona Press, 1965. Hey, R. D., J. C. Bathhurst and C. R. Thorne. Gravel -Bed Rivers. New York, NY: John Wiley k Sons, 1982. Holland, Margoriem., Raul G. Risser and Robert J. Naiman. ed. Ecotones: The Role of Landscape Boundaries in the Management and Restoration of Changing Environments. New York, NY: Routledge, Chapman and Hall, 1991. Holland, V. L.and David J. Keil. California Vegetation. San Luis Obispo, CA: El Corral Publications, 1990. Johnson, Philip L. Remote Sensing in Ecology. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1969. 156 Santa Clara Rivet Park Project Jordan, William R. III, Michael E. Gilpin and John D. Aber. Restoration Ecology: A Synthetic Approach to Ecological Research. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1987. Landphair, Harlow C., and John L Motloch. Site Reconnaissance and Engineering. New York, NY: Elsevier, 1985. Leliaysky, Serge. An Introduction to Fluvial Hydraulics. New York, NY: Dover Publications, 1966. Lucas, P.H.C. Protected Landscapes: A Guide for Policy -Makers and Planners. London, England: Chapman and Hall, 1992. Lyle, John Tillman. Design for Human Ecosystems. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1985. Malanson, George P. Riparian Landscapes. Cambridge, England University Press, 1993. McBride, Joe R., and Jan Strahan. "Establishment and Survival of Woody Riparian Species on Gravel Bars of an Intermittent Stream." The American Midland Naturalist. Vol.112, 235-245, 1984. Miller, G. Tyler Jr. Environmental Science. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1991. Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center. Floodplain Management in the United States: An Assessment Report. Boulder, CO: University of Colorado at Boulder,1992. Naveh, Zev, and Arthur S. Lieberman. Landscape Ecology: Theory and Application.. New York, NY: Springer Verlag, 1984. Newhall, Ruth Waldo. The Story of The Newhall Land and Farming Company. San Marino, CA: The Huntington Library, 1958 Outland, Charles F. Man -Made Disaster the Story of St. Francis Dam. Glendale, CA: The Arthur Clark Company, 1977. Owen, James H. and Glenn R. Wall.. Floodplain Management Handbook. U.S. Water Resources Council, September 1981. Palmer, Tim. Lifelines: The Case for River Conservation. Washington, D. C.: Island Press, 1994. Reynolds, Jerry. Santa Clarita Valley of the Golden Dream. Granada Hills, CA: World Of Communications, Inc., 1992. Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assisstance National Park Service. Economic Impacts of Protecting Rivers, Trails and Greenway Corridors. National Park Service, 1991. Di LJ I Santa Clarita, City of. City of Santa Clarita General Plan. Santa Clarita, CA: City of Santa Clarita, June, 1991. Sedgwick, James A., and Fritz L. Knopf. "Prescribed Grazing As a Secondary Impact in a Western Riparian Floodplain." Journal of Range Management. Vol.44, 369-373, July, 1991. Slade, Richard C. Volume I - Report Text, Hydrogeologic Assessment of the Saugus Formation in the Santa Clara Valley of Los Angeles County, California. North Hollywood, CA: Richard C. Slade, February, 1988. Smith, Daniel S., and Paul Cawood Hellmund. eds. Ecology of Greenways, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1993. Szaro, R. C. "Southwestern Riparian Plant Communities: SiteCharacteristics, Tree Species Distributions, and Size - Class Structures." Forest Ecology and Management. Vol. 33/34, June 1, 1990: 315-334. Tettemer, John M., Harold A. Vance and Julie Vantermost. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers General Section 404 Permit Santa Clara River From Castaic, Creek to One -Half Mile Above the Los Angeles Aqueduct and Portions of San Francisquito Creek and the Santa Clara River, South Fork Los Angeles County, California. Los Angeles, CA: John M.Tettemer & Associates, Ltd., July, 1993. Todd, David Keith. Groundwater Hydrology. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1980. U.S. Department of Agriculture -Soil Conservation Service. Soils and Rural Fringe Interpretations, Saugus -Newhall Area, Interim Report of a Portion of Northern Los Angeles County Soil Survey Area. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles County, February, 1966. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. A Casebook in Managing Rivers For Multiple Uses. Washington D.C., 1991. White, P. S. "Pattern, Process and Natural Disturbance in Vegetation." Botanical Review. Vol. 45, 229-299, 1979. Zeveloff, Samuel I., L. Mikel Vause'and Wiliam H. Mcvaugh. eds. Wilderness Tapestry: An Eclectic Approach to Preservation. Reno, NV: University of Nevada Press, 1992. Santa Clara River Park Project 157 158 Santa Clara River Park Project F i' L.. C C G r r L C Personal Communications Community Workshop Participants: John Bache Mary Ann Berrington Roger Campbell Jean Cloyd Jim Dolan Ed and Joan Dunn David L. Ely Donna Farber John Frye Russell Garland Shari Gibbs Stan Gibbs Tony Haile Dick Hargetty Harris Hartsfield Dick Hazlett L. J. Hesseltine Chris Kudija Ray Lorme Tom Matteucci George Meeker Dennis Ostrum Michael and Vera Peterson Lynne Plambeck Lee Pulsipher Ken Pusl Darrell Readmond Tom Reilly Lynn Reyes Sharon Richardson Christine Roberts Sharon Rose Henry Schultz A. Sherin Murray Siegel Steve Spalding Laura Stotler Mark Subbotin Steven Svete Pam Szucs Steve Tannehill Diana Thom Alex Vasquez Barbara Wampole Kathee Wiley Leon Worden Santa Clara River Park Project 159 Santa Clarita City Council: Jo Arne Darcy Carl Boyer Janice Heidt George Pederson H. Clyde Smyth Santa Clarita Planning Commission: Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Council Member Council Member Council Member Pat Modugno Chairperson Louis Brathwaite Commissioner Jerry Cherrington Commissioner David Doughman Commissioner Linda Townsley Commissioner Santa Clarita Parks and Recreation Commission: Laurene Weste Chairperson Jeff Wheeler Vice Chairperson Maria Aguilar Commissioner Todd Longshore Commissioner George Stigile Commissioner 160 Santa Clara River Park Project I 11 II I I J Santa Clarita Administrators: George Caravalho Ken Pulskamp Lynn Harris Jeff Kolin Rick Putnam Steve Stark City Manager Assistant City Manager Deputy City Manager; Director of Community Development Deputy City Manager; Director of Public Works Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services Director of Finance Santa Clarita Administrative Services: Elizabeth Ackerman Gail Foy Donna Grindey Geri Miller -Davis Carolynn Deller Gordan Kister Santa Clarita Parks, Recreation and Community Services: John Danielson Joseph M.Inch Jodi Jones Ellie Kane Johnathan O. Skinner J Wayne J. Weber V Santa Clarita Public Works: I] Hazel Joanes Santa Clarita Community Development: Glenn Adan -ick Reuben Barrera Jan Bear Jeff Chaffin Nancy Delange Fred Follstad Rich Henderson Amelia Hutchinson Bahman Janka Chris Kudija Kevin Michelle Robert G. Newman Tony Nisich Lori Powell Christopher Price Rabie Rahmani Jennifer D. Reid Steven C. Stiles Laura Stotler Alex Vasquez Sandy Walrath Bill Whitlatch Don Williams Santa Clara River Park Project 161 9 Santa Clarita Community Development: Glenn Adan -ick Reuben Barrera Jan Bear Jeff Chaffin Nancy Delange Fred Follstad Rich Henderson Amelia Hutchinson Bahman Janka Chris Kudija Kevin Michelle Robert G. Newman Tony Nisich Lori Powell Christopher Price Rabie Rahmani Jennifer D. Reid Steven C. Stiles Laura Stotler Alex Vasquez Sandy Walrath Bill Whitlatch Don Williams Santa Clara River Park Project 161 Additional Agencies and Organizations: Erin Allen Jonathan Baskin, Ph.D. Jack L. Bath, Ph.D. Shawna Bautista Carl Blum Dan Bohning Ron Bottorff Cathy R. Brown Tony Castignolia Jerry Cherrington Andy Christensen Jean A. Di Angelous Robert J. DiPrimio Ed Dunn Paul M. Edelman Terry Green Dick Hackney Paul L. Haden Jim Harter Earle Hartung 162 Santa Clara River Park Project U.S. Army Corps of Engineers California State Polytechnic University, Pomona California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Angeles National Forest Los Angeles County Department of Public Works; S.C.R.E.M.P. Newhall County Water Company Friends of the Santa Clara River U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service VELO Bicycle Club Santa Clarita Runners Association Los Angeles County Sanitation District Newhall County Water Company Valencia Water Company Newhall County Water District Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Valencia Water Company The Collaborative West, Inc. Newhall Land and Farming Company Los Angeles County Sanitation District C I C II Additional Agencies and Organizations (continued): 1 Bill Horn California Department of Water Resources J Vivian Howell Department of Water and Power Ron Kettle Valencia Water Reclamation Plant Paul Lemay Saugus -Newhall Water Reclamation Plant Ed Low California Department of Water Resources William J. Manetta Santa Clarita Water Company Tom Mateucci RINCON Consultants Joe Ochab National Park Service Ed Pederson Metropolitan Transit Authority Chuck Peters Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Lynn Plambeck Santa Clarita Organization for Planning the Environment (S.C.O.P.E.) Jerry Reynolds Author, Historian . I Phillip Robeniol Los Angeles County Sanitation District Lj Sharon Rose Newhall Trail Riders Robert Sagehom Babs Schwartzberg Castaic Lake Water Agency University of California, Santa Barbara, Grad Student Alex Sheydayi Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, S.C.R.E.M.P. John Skelley Santa Clarita Valley Sierra Club JSharon Stine, Ph.D. California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Mark Subbotin Newhall Land and Farming Company Steve Svete RINCON Consultants J Leticia Villaverde Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Michelle Weber Los Angeles County Sanitation District 1 F- r-� J 11 Santa Clara River Park Project 163 C� F L E C I 164 Santa Clara River Park Project G