Download - FINAL CONSTRUCTION REPORT
FINAL AGREEMENT REPORT
Bicknell Avenue Green Street
Urban Runoff BMP Treatment Demonstration Project
for the State Water Resources Control Board
Agreement #04-414-554-2
March 30, 2010
Another project to improve California‟s watersheds funded in full or in part through agreements with the State
Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) pursuant to Proposition 50, Coastal Non-Point Source Pollution, Santa
Monica Bay Restoration funding, any amendment thereto for the implementation of California‟s Nonpoint Source
Pollution Control Program, all which have been administrated through the SWRCB. The information herein does
not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the SWRCB, nor does mention of trade names or commercial
products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
GRANT SUMMARY
2
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Completed Grant Summaries are made available to the public on the State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB) website at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/funding/grantinfo.html
Use the tab and arrow keys to move through the form. If field is not applicable, please put N/A in field.
Date filled out: 3/10/10
Grant Information: Please use complete phrases/sentences. Fields will expand as you type.
1. Grant Agreement Number: 04-414-554-0
2. Project Title: Bicknell Green Street Urban Runoff Treatment BMP Demonstration Project
3. Project Purpose – Problem Being Addressed: Reducing urban runoff pollution from highly urbanized
streets through the modification of an existing street into a “green” street containing various BMPs to harvest
and reduce runoff and pollution.
4. Project Goals
a. Short-term Goals: Install a number of BMPs, such as biofilters, infiltration zones, and permeable
paving, to collect and treat urban runoff.
b. Long-term Goals: By removing urban runoff pollution from the street and keeping it out of the storm
drain system and out of the Santa Monica Bay, water quality and beneficial uses of the Bay will be
improved, protected and preserved.
5. Project Location: (lat/longs, watershed, etc.) Santa Monica Bay Watershed, 118o 29” 20‟ W 34
o 02”
10‟ N
a. Physical Size of Project: (miles, acres, sq. ft., etc.) 1 residential block, about 1.5 acres
b. Counties Included in the Project: Los Angeles
c. Legislative Districts: (Assembly and Senate) 41 Assembly; 23 Senate
6. Which SWRCB program is funding this grant? Please “X” box that applies.
Prop 13 Prop 40 Prop 50 EPA 319(h) Other
Grant Contact: Refers to Grant Project Director.
Name: Rod Gould Job Title: City Manager
Organization: City of Santa Monica Webpage Address: www.santa-monica.org
Address: 1685 Main Street, Room 209
Phone: 310.458.8301 Fax: 310.917.6640
E-mail: [email protected]
Grant Time Frame: Refers to the implementation period of the grant.
From: 4/14/05 To: 3/31/10
3
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Project Partner Information: Name all agencies/groups involved with project. City of Santa
Monica
Nutrient and Sediment Load Reduction Projection: (If applicable) N/A
4
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Table of Contents
I. Grant Summary Form 2
II. Table of Contents 4
III. Executive Summary 6
IV. Introduction 6
A. Statement of Project Purpose 6
B. Scope of the Project 7
C. Project Area 8
D. History of Project 8
E. Description of Approach & Techniques During Project 9
V. List of Submittals 10
VI. Additional Information 11
A. Project Personnel and Partners 11
B. System Approach & Techniques 12
C. Summary of Project Budget 13
D. Contact Information 14
VII. CEQA Documentation 14
VIII. Quality Assurance Project Plan 14
IX. Project Assessment & Evaluation Plan 14
A. Load Reduction Analysis 14
B. Non-bacterial Indicators Analysis 16
C. Bacterial Indicators Analysis 19
D. Gross Solids 19
X. Public Education & Outreach 19
A. Reaching Out to the Public 19
B. Website Accessibility 20
C. Tours 20
D. Signage & Outreach Materials 20
E. Conferences 20
XI. Conclusions, Challenges & Lessons Learned 21
A. Conclusions 21
B. Challenges 21
C. Lessons Learned 22
XII. Photo Diary 22
XIII. Appendices 23
A. Appendix A: Project Overview 23
i. Watershed 24
ii. Project Site Location 25
iii. Cross Section of Project-Plantings 26
B. Appendix B: Project Budget Summary 28
C. Appendix C: Water Quality Results 30
i. Water Sampling Summary Table 31
ii. Water Quality Reports (not included)
iii. Summary of Parameter Concentrations 32
5
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
D. Appendix D: Educational Materials 38
i. Construction Sign 39
ii. Final Sign and Mounted in Place 41
iii. Website Printout 43
iv. Outreach Material 44
E. Appendix E: Sampling Locations 46
F. Appendix F: Photo Diary (separate file) 51
6
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
III. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Santa Monica installed a “green” street as a demonstration of how
comprehensive structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) can harvest urban runoff, both dry
and wet weather, for infiltration, keeping this single largest source of water pollution out of the
Santa Monica Bay. The green street demonstration project was a retrofit of a highly urbanized
residential-commercial city block. Four different types of BMPs were installed: sub-surface
plastic concave infiltration chambers under the parking lane; wider, depressed parkways with
climate-appropriate flora and low-volume solar-powered irrigation; gutter oriented catch basin
filters; and pervious concrete parking lanes. The project harvests any dry weather runoff and up
to 80% of wet weather runoff. By removing runoff for infiltration and bio-filtration, all
pollutants found in this harvested runoff is kept out of the Santa Monica Bay, improving water
quality and protecting beneficial uses of the Bay.
Water quality analyses showed significant removal of heavy metals as the runoff passes
through the soil column. Little if any chlorinated organic chemicals were found in the influent
so there was really nothing to treat. Nutrients had mixed results, discussed below. Bacteria were
reduced in most cases. Total dissolved solids and suspended solids increase because the influent
is relatively clean, little if any suspended materials; however, as the runoff filters through the soil
it picks up fine materials to increase TDS and TSS. The key point is that the project eliminated
most runoff from the MS4 system, eliminating all pollutants to the Bay.
The cost of the project was at the high end of normal street project, which in this case
was only one block. The City implemented four BMPs to show how they work rather than
selecting one to do all the runoff mitigation. By adding pervious concrete and resurface the
entire the street, additional costs were encumbered. For such runoff projects to become more
common, the use of depressed and widened parkways with sub-surface infiltration under the
parkways will be a more cost-effective solution.
IV. INTRODUCTORY SECTION
Statement of Project Purpose & Objectives
The Project goal is to reduce pollutants found in urban runoff carried to the Santa Monica
Bay through a small portion of the Ashland Street Watershed through a green street retrofitted
urbanized residential block demonstration project. The purpose of this project is to install a
number of best management practices (BMPs), e.g. treatment devices or structures, “green
street,” replacing impermeable asphalt surfaces with pervious concrete, sub-surface infiltration
chambers, depressed parkways and catch basin filters, to remove pollutants commonly found in
urban runoff, and demonstrate how this BMP project when expanded to other streets can remove
significant amounts of runoff and its pollutants, lead to a reduction in the number of pathogen
exceedances and corresponding beach postings at storm drain outlet locations, and restore and
protect the water quality and environment of local coastal waters, estuaries and near shore waters
of the Santa Monica Bay. Through these objectives, beneficial uses of the Bay will be protected
and preserved; water quality objectives will be achieved by reducing the pollutants of concern
most common in urban runoff: trash, debris, sediments, oil and grease, nutrients, heavy metals
and organics. In addition, this project will help the City comply with various NPDES, TMDL,
7
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
NPS and watershed restoration programs and to better safeguard aquatic habitats and beaches for
wildlife and people. Moreover, this project will help meet the goal of protecting and restoring
beneficial uses of these waters as outlined in the Los Angeles Regional Board‟s Basin Plan for
the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties.
The project purpose and goals were defined through the following processes:
Identification of factors that affect the concentrations and loads of problem
constituents in urban runoff; and
Review of existing data on costs, effectiveness, and benefits of stormwater BMPs.
The project is designed to improve urban runoff quality by converting a typical urbanized
street, e.g. impermeable, unsightly, into a more sustainable street with low-impact development
strategies to promote runoff capture and infiltration. The overall treatment system, which
involves four structural BMPs, will improve water quality by removing most trash, debris and
sediments, and up to 100% of other soluble TMDL pollutants of concern, such as heavy metals,
nutrients, pathogens and synthetic organics found in dry and wet weather runoff (up to 0.75 inch
storm event or about 80% of total annual runoff). By removing pollutants of concern, the Santa
Monica Bay will be enhanced for the many beneficial uses of these waters, used by both aquatic
species and people.
To assess if the overall objectives of the project are met, a set of numeric water quality
objectives or criteria goals are established to determine whether successful treatment has been
achieved, within this small section of the Ashland Avenue Basin:
Removal of 100% of floatables and solids through the entrapment in the catch
basin filters and depressed parkways (for all dry weather and up to 80% of annual
wet weather flows);
Removal of 70% of Total Suspended Solids (TSS), oil and grease, and other
soluble pollutants attached to solids through the catch basin filters and depressed
parkways (removal efficiency will vary based upon influent concentrations); and
Treatment through pervious concrete and sub-surface infiltration chambers
instead of out to the Bay; all dry weather flows and initial wet weather flows (first
flush) from up to a ¾” storm event, which is approximately 80% of wet weather
events.
Scope of the Project
This project removed the existing impermeable asphalt in the parking lanes on both sides
of the street and installed pervious concrete along one block of a City street to receive and
infiltration road runoff. The existing 4‟ parkways were doubled in width and depressed to receive
gutter runoff. Sub-surface infiltration chambers were placed under the parking lanes to receive
gutter runoff after passing through catch basin filters, or from overflow pipes in the depressed
parkways. This project treats all dry weather flowing from a highly urbanized area in the south-
western part of the City. The project also treats up to 80% of wet weather flows from the same
area.
Project Area
8
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
The green street is located along the 100 block of Bicknell Avenue, one block from the
beach between Ocean Avenue and Neilson Way.
Runoff from the project location, which is within the Ashland Avenue Watershed, flows
into the Santa Monica Bay via the Ashland Avenue storm drain, a marine coastal habitat, sand
beach bottom with a gradual slope along the Bay floor.
Beneficial uses include bathing and swimming. Surfing and fishing occur north and
south of this area. Other beneficial uses include breeding and feeding by aquatic and terrestrial
animals.
The sub-watershed that drains to the project area is 1.5 acres and is 100% built-out. Land
uses include multi-family residential, commercial and transportation.
Appendix A contains a map of the watershed and project location area.
History of Project
The planning for the project began in 2004 when staff of the City‟s Office of
Sustainability and the Environment Watershed Section expressed interest in the developing the
City‟s first green street, using state funding that was coming available in 2005. The concept of a
demonstration green street moved forward.
The City applied for a Proposition 50 grant beginning in 2005 through the Santa Monica
Bay Restoration Commission, which administers the Santa Monica-related portion of the
Proposition 50 process for the State Water Resources Control Board. The City applied for and
received the grant from the Commission the end of 2005. City Council approved a staff report in
January 2006 to proceed with a Proposition grant. The grant agreement was executed in June
2006 for $450,000, whereupon the City worked with the Commission to implement the project.
In September 2005, the CEQA process was completed with the project obtaining a
Categorical Exemption.
A wide city street with a narrow parkway was selected because a wide existing street
provided space to convert to the parkway and install a permeable surface. A street with multi-
families and near a commercial area was also selected since these characteristics present some of
the most difficult scenarios where such a demonstration can prove workable. If such a project
works in this type of environment, it should work in most typical urbanized streets. A
community design process led by City staff began in November 2007 and continued into 2008.
Construction commenced in March 2009.
9
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Project Construction Schedule
The project schedule was delayed due to the extended period of time required to meet
with the public for a discussion on the design. In addition, initial turnout for a community
workshop was inadequate to get an objective feel for what the residents of the project area
wanted. A second community workshop resulted in a better representation of the neighborhood.
In addition, numerous residents who could not attend submitted their thoughts via written or
verbal. The delays required the City to seek agreement extensions, which in themselves resulted
in further delays. As a result the project completion was about two years delayed. However,
once the project was awarded to the contractor, it moved ahead rapidly and was completed in
three months.
Description of Approach & Techniques During Project
In FY04-05, the Santa Monica City Office of Sustainability & the Environment explored
the feasibility of retrofitting an existing urbanized road in a built-out area into a „green street‟ by
removing impermeable asphalt and replacing with a pervious concrete, and by collecting and
directing runoff into sub-surface infiltration and surface depressed parkways to comply with
urban runoff mitigation regulations. During the next three years, sites were evaluated and
community input gathered. That effort culminated in the award of a grant from the State Water
Resources Control Board which made the project possible. In March 2009, construction began.
An opening celebration event has held on July 8, 2009.
The Objective: The Bicknell Avenue Green Street Project demonstrates the feasibility of
reducing dry weather and stormwater runoff and pollution by converting one block of highly
urbanized road, paved with little vegetated, into a more aesthetically pleasing, less paved and
more dynamic smart road. This green street collects, filters, infiltrates, and cleanses all dry
weather runoff and most storm water from 1.5 acres (about 30,000 gallons per storm event over
0.10”) in an average rainfall year. The system consists of widened, depressed parkways to
10
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
collect runoff for infiltration and plant uptake; sub-surface infiltration chambers; and pervious
concrete in replacement of impermeable asphalt. The low-volume irrigation system for the
parkway is regulated by an advanced controller using climate data and is powered by a solar
panel.
An Important Demonstration Project: The Bicknell Avenue Green Street Project can
demonstrate to other municipalities that the transportation grid can play a role in abating runoff
and pollution while adding to sorely needed green space. “Greening” areas of asphalt also
reduces surface temperatures and heat gain, which is especially critical in urban communities.
Appendix A contains graphics of the project site and a schematic diagram of the design.
II. LIST OF SUBMITTALS
Item DESCRIPTION GRANT FUNDING
DUE DATE
EXHIBIT A – SCOPE OF WORK
1.0 PROJECT ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION PLAN, MONITORING PLANS, QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN
$ 0 - -
1.1 GPS Coordinates - - 8/06
1.2 PAEP - - 6/07
1.3 Monitoring Plan (MP) - - 6/07
1.4 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) 6/07
2.0 WORK TO BE PERFORMED BY GRANTEE $ 0 - -
2.1 Pre-Construction Monitoring & Notification - -
2.1.1 Property Owner Notification - - 9/07
2.2 Design Plans & Specifications
2.2.1 Pre- and During-Construction Photo Documentation 3/09
2.2.2 Design Plans & Specifications - - 10/07
2.2.4 Final Design Plans & Specifications -- 11/08
2.3 Bicknell Avenue Construction $450,000
2.3.1 Notice to Proceed 2/15/09
2.3.3 Post-Construction Photo Documentation - - 6/09
2.3.4 As-built Drawings 6/09
2.4 Project Effectiveness Monitoring - -
2.4.1 Operations & Maintenance Plan 2/09
2.4.3 Cleanouts Photo Documentation - - 2/10
2.4.4 Summary of Analytical Results 3/10
2.5 Water Quality Monitoring - -
2.5.2 List of Selected Monitoring Sites 9/07
2.5.6 Water Quality Monitoring Report - - 3/10
11
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Item DESCRIPTION GRANT FUNDING
DUE DATE
2.6 Educational Outreach & Technology Transfer - -
2.6.1 Outreach Material - - 6/09
2.6.2 Signage Installation Photo Documentation $ 0 6/09
2.6.3 List of Tours - - 2/10
2.6.4 Printout of Updated Website $ 0 2/10
2.7 Draft and Final Project Reports - -
2.7.1 Draft Project Report 2/15/10
2.7.2 Final Report 3/1/10
EXHIBIT B – BUDGET AND REPORTING PROVISIONS
1.1 Invoicing Quarterly
7.0 REPORTS
7.1 Progress Reports by the twentieth (20th) of the month following the
end of the calendar quarter (March, June, September, and December)
- - Quarterly
7.2 Expenditure/Invoice Projections Quarterly
7.3 Grant Summary Form Day 90
7.4 Natural Resource Projects Inventory (NRPI) project survey form - - Before final invoice
EXHIBIT C – SWRCB GENERAL CONDITIONS
7 Copy of final EQA/NEPA documentation
Work cannot begin prior to receipt of environmental clearance from the SWRCB
- - 5/15/07
30 Signed cover sheets for all permits - - As needed
Total Grant Funds: $ 450,000 - -
III. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Project Personnel and Partners
City of Santa Monica Neal Shapiro, Project Coordinator, Office of Sustainability & the
Environment
Mark Cuneo, Jessica Arden, Project Managers/Design &
Construction, Civil Engineering & Architecture
Rick Valte, Water Quality Monitoring, Engineering Division
Gary Welling, Danny Gomez, Operation & Maintenance: Water
Resources Division
Randy Little, Community Maintenance
Kim Braun, Solid Waste Management Division
12
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Grant Funding Agencies State Water Resources Control Board
Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board
Proposition 50, Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Control, Santa
Monica Bay Restoration Commission Grant Program
Construction Manager City of Santa Monica
Contractor Scully-Miller
Design Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. – Overall Design
Geosyntec – Engineering
American Environmental Testing Lab – Water Quality
Product Vendor Sub-surface Chambers, Contech ChamberMaxx
Catch Basin Filters, Contech Triton
System Approach & Techniques (Operation)
The following discussion is intended to provide a general overview of BMP components
for the green street runoff reduction and treatment project.
ChamberMaxx™ Sub-surface-Depressed Parkway Surface Runoff Storage System
Contech‟s ChamberMaxx™ (http://www.contech-
cpi.com/stormwater/products/plastic_detention/chambermaxx/817) plastic storage chambers
were placed under the parking lanes on both sides of the street along the length of the block.
These chambers receive filtered runoff from the gutters, where the runoff infiltrates into the
substrate. When the chambers reach capacity, runoff continues to flow along the gutter as in any
traditional gutter to the closest storm drain. However, in this Project, runoff is also diverted into
depressed parkways adjacent to the gutter. Additional runoff is stored here for infiltration. Each
segregated parkway has a standing overflow pipe. When the parkways reach capacity, excess
runoff overflows into the vertical pipe, which diverts runoff to the chambers. If both are full,
runoff continues along the gutter in a traditional manner.
See Appendix A for design and project layout.
Landscape Design
The plant palette was based on climate-appropriate species for a semi-arid,
Mediterranean climate. See Appendix A for a listing of plant species and location of parkways.
A high efficiency, low-volume (drip) irrigation system was installed to maximize
water efficiency and eliminate overspray and runoff. The irrigation system is regulated by a
controller powered by the sun.
Monitoring Ports & AB411 Location (see Appendix E)
13
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Influent samples are taken from the first catch basin on the north side of Bicknell
Avenue just east of Neilson Way. The City sampling consultant sets sample bottles in the catch
basin to capture runoff before it gets into the outlet pipe, which drains into the sub-surface
chambers.
Effluent samples are taken from two monitoring wells at two different depths, 8”
(root zone) and 26” (18” below root zone). The two wells are located in the second parkway east
from Neilson Way on the north side of the street.
The purpose of two sampling depths is to obtain samples that have undergone
different times of treatment. Effluent taken from the deeper well will have had more time for
treatment through a taller column of soil, and presumably have a higher quality, e.g. lower
concentrations of pollutants.
The ocean beach monitoring location is at Ashland, 3-5 (Bacterial TMDL names)
or S7 (old name).
Summary of Project Budget
See below and Appendix B (enlarged).
In terms of meeting a set budget, the project was in line with the estimate from the
contractor that was awarded the construction project. The design phase of the budget was over
budget due to the much iteration for the design, as a result of numerous public input and
reporting to the City Council. However, no set budget was set for the design. In addition, these
were matching costs encumbered by the City through its Stormwater and Clean Beaches funds
and had no negative impact on the grant nor installation of the project.
In terms of cost-effectiveness, the project cost is most likely higher than for a normal
retrofit road project. This project installed four structural BMPs; it was overbuilt, has more
redundancy, in terms of BMPs. However these BMPs were used to demonstrate how they can be
integrated into a green street and which BMPs will work best. This strategy will help the City
and other agencies decide which BMPs they will want to pursue in future green street projects.
Contact Information
14
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
For readers with questions about the project or the report:
Neal Shapiro
200 Santa Monica Pier
Suite E
Santa Monica, CA 90401
310.458.8223
IV. CEQA DOCUMENTATION
Documentation was submitted as per the Table of Submittals. See above.
V. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN
Documentation was submitted. See Table of Submittals.
VI. PAEP: WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS & EFFECTIVENESS
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Load Reduction Analysis
No pre-construction pollutant load data exists. Before the project, no system existed to
capture and record the amounts of trash, debris, sediments and other gross pollutants leaving this
storm drain outlet. When data becomes available, it will be posted on the City‟s website,
http://www.smgov.net/epd/residents/Urban_Runoff/urban. All water quality analysis, including
raw data and chain of custody are available from the city upon request in hard or electronic
format.
Because runoff is going to infiltration zones under the parking lanes and parkways, it is
kept out of the Bay, and water quality benefits still accrue. All the pollutants contained in the
harvested runoff for infiltration is kept out of the bay.
For purposes of analysis, pre-construction water quality data is considered to be the same
as influent water quality data. Samples were not obtained before construction due to minimal
flows and the difficulty of obtaining grab samples. Moreover, as there is no change in any flows
entering the treatment system before and after the project installation, the data can be considered
the same. No changes occurred upstream to neither alter dry and wet weather runoff flows nor
water quality before and after the project installation.
Three sampling events occurred, and they were for wet weather. Because there is
generally no runoff during dry weather, no samples exist for dry weather. Three wet weather
events were sampled because by the time the sampling wells were installed and the consultant
hired, it was mid-January 2010. Samples were obtained in February.
Below is the table of PAEP effectiveness objectives:
Project Goal Desired Output Outcome Measurement Target
15
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Outcome Indicator Indicator Tool &
Method Educate the public
about urban runoff
pollution
Increase the number
of the public who
know about this problem and
solutions
ACHIEVED
No. of the public
contacted:
Through two community planning
workshops, two
council meetings and an opening event, the
public learned about
the project and its goals.
% increase in urban
runoff knowledge Questionnaire –
Did not perform
the questionnaire
but sent out dozens
of notices to
residents and
businesses in the
project area for
their input and to
attend planning
meetings to learn
about the project
goals.
100% increase of
those who have no
knowledge of subject:
As a result of
community workshops with the
design team,
attended by about 20 residents; in addition
dozens more learned
about the project via mailings, online
postings, council
meetings and the opening ceremony.
Comply with
TMDLs for the Santa Monica Bay
Reduce amounts and
types of runoff pollutants reaching
the Bay
ACHIEVED
No. of BMPs
installed at the project site: 4
Percent reduction of
runoff to the Bay.
Percent reduction in
pollutants.
Estimate of runoff
volume entering BMPs.
Up to 29,000 gallons
per ¾” storm event.
Water quality
analyses of pollutants:
Results discussed in
section and tables in appendix, showing
mixed results.
Up to 80% reduction
in runoff volume to the Bay from the
project site.
Based on sizing of the storage reservoirs
for the depressed
parkways, sub-surface retention
chambers, and sub-
grade for pervious concrete,
ACHIEVED.
100% reduction of
pollutants found in
runoff within the project treatment
zone, such as trash,
bacterial indicators, heavy metals,
organic chemicals,
and oil and grease. ACHIEVED based
on removal of runoff
volume.
In addition to quantitative results below, they are also found in Appendix C in a larger,
easier-to-read format. These seven tables contain water quality results from the February 2010
water samples. The table below is a summary of all sampling dates. No issues in sampling and
monitoring protocol occurred.
16
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Result of Non-bacterial Data
General Minerals
Though all runoff was captured for infiltration, the water sampling results show
that infiltration through the turf and top soil does not improve water quality for Conductivity,
Hardness, TDS and TSS. (TSS did show improvement for the deep well in one sample.) The
reason may be that as the rain water passes through the soil, it picks up soluble components to
make the initial water quality higher in minerals. As we know, rain water is pure and neutral.
And while it picks up solubles as it flows across roofs and roads, it picks up more traveling
through the soil column. The influent sample of rain water was cleaner. The only source of
these minerals is from the soil in terms of the difference between influent and effluent. pH was
reduced (made more acidic). (NOTE: % Change in red is a reduction of concentration,
decrease in pollution; in black is an increase or worsening of concentration, pollution.)
Metals
Samples contained few of the metals. Cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury and
nickel were all non-detects for influent samples. Copper and zinc were both present. Generally,
mercury and lead are not normally found. One would expect nickel from vehicles. In all
samples, concentration reductions were achieved. In 3 of 4 cases, the reductions were the same
indicating that the difference in depth did not impact the performance, and the best removal
occurs in the top inches of soil. One sample for zinc showed higher removal for the deep well
sample.
17
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Nitrogen & Phosphorus
Results are mixed for these components. Nitrate showed improvement for the
first sample, both depths; however, the second sample showed the opposite. Nitrite has no
improvements. Ammonia showed improvement from 63-100% for all samples. And, no
improvements were achieved for ortho-phosphate. This failure to achieve improvements for
nutrients may be because plants do take up both elements but also release compounds of these
elements.
Organic Chemicals
All but one constituent was non-detect for influent and effluent, indicating fairly
clean water for this group of compounds. Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate did show up in one
influent but was non-detect in the effluent. (See results in Appendix C due to large size of the
table to fit in this space and lack of meaningful results.)
Miscellaneous Constituents
18
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
This group of measurements includes turbidity, chemical oxygen demand,
biological oxygen demand, and oil and grease. The latter was non-detect for influent and
effluent samples, despite runoff from the adjacent roadways. Turbidity showed increases for all
samples, while one might expect turbidity to decrease as the water is filtered for fine particles
through the soil. However, it may be that very fine materials are entering the water as it
percolates through the soil, increasing turbidity in the effluent samples. The increases were 200-
300 times. COD and BOD both showed significant improvements, 60-100%.
Result of Bacterial Data
Mixed results were observed. All three indicators showed both improvements and
increases in concentration. No pattern is indicated by the results. The influent concentrations,
though, are not high. One expects improvements as the runoff passes through the soil, but the
soil can and does contain its own bacteria that could be showing up in the effluent samples.
Bacteria can grow in moist, dark environments such as soil.
19
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Gross Solids Removal
No data was collected on trash and debris washed into the catch basins and depressed
parkways. Trash was observed by City staff during initial rain event observations in the
locations mentioned. However, maintenance has not visited the area to collect and measure the
materials. But any such solids on the surface are captured and removed from the MS4 system.
VII. EDUCATION & OUTREACH
Reaching out to the Public
Refer to the timetable under the Project Construction Timetable sub-section above to read
when the City involved the community in the planning of the project. The City made two
opportunities available for public input in the design phase.
Website Accessibility
The City website to access information about this project is
http://www.smgov.net/epd/residents/Urban_Runoff/urban. The link to the project includes
valuable project information:
Project Signage, pre and post-construction
Draft Final Report
Water Quality Reports
Educational Materials
Project Budget
20
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Tours
No tours have been requested by the public. Only had initial tour for opening event in
July 2009.
Signage and Outreach Materials
See Appendix D for samples and descriptions, which include project signs posted during
construction, post-construction signage, a printout of the website for project, and an educational
brochure/hand-out for events.
Conferences
The City will make oral presentations on this project at the international Low Impact
Development Conference in San Francisco, CA, April 2010 and at the national Watershed
Conference in Madison, WI, August 2010.
VIII. CONCLUSIONS, CHALLENGES & LESSONS LEARNED
Conclusions
The green street treatment system is effective in eliminating gross pollutants and soluble
pollutants as all runoff is captured in the various storage-infiltration BMPs. Water quality results
are mixed. The most dramatic improvements are for the metals category and COD-BOD.
Organic chemicals are not showing up. For nutrients, one expects mixed results when using
biofilters for treatment. Failure to achieve improvements for TSS and TDS is unexpected. All
soluble pollutants captured by the treatment system are removed from the MS4 system and kept
out of receiving waters – a 100% efficiency standard.
Meeting the Project Objectives
1. Removal of 100% of floatables and solids (for all dry weather and up to 80% of
wet weather flows).
Objective 1 has been met.
2. Removal of 70% of TSS, oil and grease, and other soluble pollutants attached to
solids through the primary stage vortex unit (efficiency removal will vary based
upon influent concentrations).
Objective 2 has been achieved because the removal efficiency is 100% for
pollutants through infiltration, though best upon the water quality results, for a
treat and release system, this objective would not be met using living floral
systems for treatment.
3. Treatment through the primary BMP device (instead of out to the Bay) of all dry
weather flows and initial wet weather flows (first flush) up to a designed one
21
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
cubic foot per second (cfs) flow rate, and treatment of approximately 80% of wet
weather events through the primary treatment BMP.
Objective 3 has been met.
Challenges
Right BMP Mix: When designing a green street, one needs to decide early on which
pollutants are to be addressed and select the BMPs that will best address those
pollutants. Landscaped BMPs may not be the best solution if nutrients are your issue,
but may be ideal for heavy metals.
Economics: Multiple BMPs may not be necessary to achieve one‟s objectives. Too
many BMPs can be overkill in meeting goals, yet significantly add to the budget.
One properly-sized BMP can accomplish what three or four BMPs do. While
demonstrating the use of multiple BMPs is a good demonstration for the public and
data collection, for a long-term green street program, each street may only need one
BMP.
Public Acceptance: For projects in residential areas, pleasing 100% is nearly
impossible. Keeping that in mind, opening up the design process for public input is
critical to get its overall support.
Lessons Learned
o For future projects, incorporate rainwater harvesting, e.g. cisterns, under the parkways or
parking lanes for an onsite supply of irrigation water and reduction of the use of potable
water.
o Lower the in-line catch basins in the gutter so water falls easily into them. The present
project sloped the gutter in a way that the water flow hugs the curb and can by-pass
falling into the catch basins.
o The curb cuts to direct gutter runoff into the parkways need to be lower to capture
flowing water.
o Curb cut pads leading from the gutter into the depressed parkway need to be lower and
angled downward, and the depressed parkways lowered, so that the water enters more
easily from the gutter and flows unobstructed into the entire depressed parkways. The
present project did not depress the parkways enough and the entry pads are not sloped
downward, resulting in ponding at the front end of the parkway and no flow to the back
end to take full advantage of the entire storage volume.
IX. PHOTO DIARY
See PowerPoint Attachment, Appendix F
Pre-Construction
Construction
Post-Construction
22
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
APPENDIX A
Project Overview
1. PROJECT WATERSHED (ASHLAND)
2. PROJECT LOCATION (AERIAL)
3. CROSS SECTION OF PROJECT
29
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
APPENDIX C
1. Water Sampling Summary, Table 1
2. Water Quality Reports
February 2010 (Hard copies excluded from Final Report due to length; available upon request. Data
summarized in tables below)
3. Summary of Parameter Concentrations
Influent v. Effluent
Tables 2-7
37
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
APPENDIX D
Educational Materials:
1. Construction Sign
2. Final Sign and Mounted at Site
3. Website Printout
4. Outreach Brochure
39
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Construction Sign: Construction sign posted during construction, top;
close-up of sign, above, informing the public what project is being
installed and the purpose of the project to improve water quality
reaching the Santa Monica Bay. Located at the west and east ends of the
construction site.
41
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Final Post-Construction Sign: informing the public the purpose of the project to
improve water quality reaching the Santa Monica Bay. Located at the west and east ends of
project site in a location that maximizes public viewing.
42
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Printout of Updated Contractor‟s Website
44
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Educational Brochure (pages 1/2): Project information brochure disseminated to the
public when asked, at City public events and at conferences related to runoff themes.
45
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
APPENDIX E
SAMPLING LOCATIONS (PHOTOS)
Influent Monitoring Port (Catch Basin)
Effluent Monitoring Ports (in Parkway)
46
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Effluent Sampling Wells for 8” and 26” depths.
47
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
8” french drain to receive shallow water percolation to shallow monitoring well (left).
48
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
26” french drain to receive shallow water percolation to shallow monitoring well.
49
City of Santa Monica Final Report 02-225-550-1
March 31, 2010
Checking monitoring wells during rain event. Uncapping well (top) and looking at water at
well bottom (bottom).