report prepared report prepared creek wqip state designation...of its water resources. there is also...

REPORT PREPARED BY:

LEONARD RICE ENGINEERS, INC.

EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL

ALPINE ENGINEERING, INC.

TIMBERLINE AQUATICS, INC.

REPORT PREPARED FOR: EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED URBAN RUNOFF GROUP

The Town of Vail was incorporated in 1966 just four years after the Vail ski area opened in December, 1962 for its first season. The early 60’s marked the beginning of rapid urbanization within the Gore Creek valley, and today ‐ 50 years later ‐ a thriving year‐round resort community exists where sparsely populated rural ranch lands previously dominated the valley floor.

Photograph: History of Vail Video Series (1962‐1973) http://www.vail.com/lodging‐and‐dining/explore‐town/history.aspx?page=viewall

VAIL CIRCA 1959

CHAPTER1: BackgroundtotheGoreCreekWaterQualityImprovementPlan

VAIL CIRCA 1998

Photograph courtesy of Ken Neubecker

Gore Creek Water Quality Improvement Plan

1.1 INTRODUCTION Over the last two decades, Eagle River Watershed Stakeholders and other interested parties have been conducting water chemistry and biological studies in the Gore Creek and Eagle River watersheds to assess water quality and aquatic ecosystem health. In recent years, studies have found that the aquatic health of Gore Creek – measured using biological (macroinvertebrate) metrics – is degraded. In fact, most sites sampled along the main stem of Gore Creek are substantially stressed with areas through East Vail and Vail Village being the most degraded of all sites. Conditions found at reference sites show healthy biological conditions indicating that urban runoff and land use activities are adversely impacting stream health. Watershed urbanization is the “transformation of land from rural land uses, such as agriculture to urban land uses, such as housing” (Brown et. al., 2005). The alteration of vegetated landscapes with impervious surfaces and the introduction of environmental stressors through increased human activity cause direct and indirect deleterious impacts to aquatic ecosystems. These include, in part, disruptions to the natural hydrologic cycle, increases in delivery of nonpoint source contaminants, and reduced biotic richness and diversity with increased dominance of tolerant species (Paul and Meyer, 2001). The Eagle River Basin Stakeholders ‐ representing a diverse array of perspectives, including water supply and wastewater providers, commercial, government, recreation, and environmental interests ‐ agree that the recreation and tourism‐based economy of Eagle County is tied directly to the water quality and biological health of its water resources. There is also agreement that effective management of these resources requires an integrative, adaptive, and collaborative process engaging all stakeholders. Effective management strategies to protect and improve water quality and aquatic health within the Eagle River basin will be developed and implemented in a phased manner under the leadership of local stakeholders.

1‐1

GoreCreekWaterQualityImprovementPlan 1‐2

The purpose of this effort is to develop a Water Quality Improvement Plan (WQIP) for Gore Creek that will guide the planning and implementation of measures to improve stream health as indicated by macroinvertebrate community metrics. This Plan marks a shift to a new emphasis on the implementation of water quality improvement measures paired with monitoring studies to evaluate the effectiveness of these measures. The geographic scope of the WQIP includes Gore Creek from the area near the confluence of Black Gore Creek to the mouth of Gore Creek, with emphasis on development of water quality improvement measures for stream reaches through East Vail and Vail Village above Red Sandstone Creek. This Plan identifies specific measures and strategies to reduce point and nonpoint source pollution including, but not limited to, the following: :

urban drainage Best Management Practices (BMPs); stormwater system BMPs; stream habitat and riparian area improvement and protection

measures; community educational programs and voluntary measures; and, regulatory reform to encourage sustainable land use practices.

The WQIP’s purpose aligns with that of the Eagle River Watershed Plan currently being updated by Eagle County (EC) in cooperation with Eagle River Watershed Council (ERWC). Development of the WQIP has required a coordinated and collaborative effort involving key stakeholders including the Towns of Vail and Avon, the ERWC, the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (ERWSD), Eagle County, the Vail Recreation District (VRD), Vail Resorts (VR), the U.S. Forest Service, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), and homeowners and/or neighborhood associations.

The WQIP will provide a template for identification and implementation of water quality and stream habitat improvement measures for other areas within the Eagle River watershed. Ongoing implementation of the Eagle River Watershed Plan will likely include development of water quality improvement plans for other stream segments in the watershed and it is anticipated that components of the Gore Creek WQIP, such as education programs, regulatory measures, and certain Best Management Practices (BMPs), will be directly transferable to other areas within the Eagle River Basin.

1.2 WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN PURPOSE & GOALS


In early 2011, Eagle River watershed stakeholders formed the Urban Runoff Group (URG) to address the problem of biological degradation occurring in streams and rivers within the urbanized areas of the Eagle River watershed. The threat of listing Gore Creek and other Eagle River watershed streams on the Clean Water Act’s 303 (d) list for aquatic life use impairment called to action the focused effort to develop initiatives aimed at identifying the causes of the biological impacts, and management strategies to protect and improve existing water quality and biological conditions. This Water Quality Improvement Plan is the outcome of the URG’s efforts. URG stakeholders include the Town of Vail (TOV), the Eagle River Water & Sanitation District, Eagle County, Vail Resorts, Inc., the Colorado Department of Transportation, the Vail Recreation District, the Town of Avon (TOA), and the Eagle River Watershed Council.

1.3 THE WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLANNING PROCESS

1.3.2 Plan Development

Development of the Gore Creek WQIP has involved the following process:

involvement of local interest and stakeholder leadership; cooperative action between stakeholders and other interested parties; compilation and synthesis of current and best available scientific knowledge; identification of potential stressors and their sources; identification of linkages between corrective action and management targets to the

resource condition targets; identification and prioritization of appropriate corrective actions; and recommendations of management strategies and programs needed to implement

corrective actions and water quality improvements.

The WQIP complements and builds upon other plans and programs relevant to the Gore Creek watershed and/or water quality and include the following:

1.3.1 Urban Runoff Group Stakeholder Initiative

BackgroundtotheGoreCreekWaterQualityImprovementPlan

Ch.1


Prepared by the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments for the Town of Vail, this Plan was initiated “to evaluate the impacts on Gore Creek from stormwater associated with the increasing urbanization of the Town, and to posture the town for possible stormwater permitting requirements. Later in the project the scope was expanded to provide guidance to the Town in protecting water quality and the aquatic environment.”

“Environmental Sustainability Goal #5: Water Quality: Maintain Gore Creek watershed as a Gold Medal fishery, while working to maintain tributaries that meet and/or exceed aquatic life standards set by the state of Colorado.”

Open Space Plan:

“Greenbelt Natural Open Space: Greenbelt Natural Open space is designed to protect environmentally sensitive areas from the development of structures and to preserve open space in its natural state. Areas designated as Greenbelt Natural Open Space are dominated on the south by undeveloped portions of Vail Mountain adjacent to the Village. Stream tracts in the Village are also designated as Greenbelt Natural Open Space. Development in these areas is limited to recreation related amenities such as ski base facilities, pedestrian walkways, bikeways, and passive recreation areas.”

“Goal #3: Ecosystem Health: Ensure that the natural environment, specifically air and water quality, water quantity, land use and habitat are maintained to current or improved levels of biological health.”

Vail Nonpoint Source Water Quality Management Plan – March, 1995

Vail 20/20: Focus on the Future Strategic Action Plan – November 6, 2007

Vail Village Master Plan – 1990 (Updated 2008)

The Town of Vail 2009 Environmental Strategic Plan

CDOT Sediment Control Action Plan Black Gore Creek I‐70 Corridor (SCAP)– May 2002

“The SCAP is a planning document that includes relevant background information, an evaluation of I‐70 sediment sources, volume estimates, hydraulic/drainage analysis, and maintenance practices to develop a [sediment] source control strategy.”


Ch.1


Gore Creek Water Quality Protection Plan: Through stormwater pollution prevention (Draft Report) – March11, 2009

The Eagle River Watershed Plan– 1996

“The purpose of the program is to create a proactive stormwater program that follows the guidance and regulations developed by the EPA and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment’s (CDPHE) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) program”

“This plan defines actions that can be taken to ensure that the attributes of the watershed are protected and enhanced through the years to come.”

2012 Eagle River Watershed Plan (draft)

"The purpose of the Eagle River Watershed Plan is to outline a collaborative local philosophy for protecting and improving water quantity, water quality, wildlife habitat and recreational opportunities, and promote compatible and complimentary land use strategies and practices."

1.4.1 Overview of Urban Stream Impairment and Regulatory Implications

“Urban Stream Syndrome”

Urbanization is often cited as a primary cause of water quality degradation, and studies performed in even lightly‐developed watersheds indicate that urbanization can cause negative impacts to water quality and biological health. Urban and suburban runoff, in addition to delivering pollutants to receiving waters, cause physical changes to surface waters as a result of the volume and energy of stormwater discharges. Further, scientific literature implicates urban runoff from impervious surfaces – roads and highways, parking lots, and roofs, primarily – as a key factor in water quality degradation (Schueler 2003). “Urban Stream Syndrome” is a term used to describe the consistently observed ecological degradation of streams draining urban lands (Walsh et. al. 2005) and generally include the following symptoms:

Riparian buffer degradation – Development often displaces riparian habitat, thus disrupting connections between streams and the surrounding habitat and causing a reduction in riparian functional integrity. Riparian vegetation at the water’s edge stabilizes banks, helps to reduce stream temperature variability and provides shade habitat; returns beneficial nutrients in the form of needles, leaves and branches back to the aquatic system; provides habitat through influx of large woody debris; and, perhaps most importantly in the context of Gore Creek, protects water quality by filtering trapping, and transforming pollutants.

1.4 URBAN STEAM IMPAIRMENT AND THE REGULATORY LANDSCAPE

1‐6


Ch.1


.

Water chemistry changes – Urbanization adds many pollutants that would be minimally present, or not present at all, in undeveloped watersheds: lawn fertilizers and pesticides; oil, grease and other hydrocarbons from cars, exhaust, and machinery; heavy metals that have accumulated on roads and paved surfaces from vehicular use; salts from snow and ice management; sediment from construction sites and traction sanding operations; hazardous materials from spills, and others (animal waste, atmospheric deposition of nitrogen and mercury). These pollutants are often delivered in pulses during rain events (particularly after extended antecedent dry periods), during spring snowmelt, and in meltwater from snowstorms.

Temperature changes – Impervious surface cover can warm (and sometimes cool) urban runoff. As such, the potential to alter natural temperature variability and increase stress to aquatic organisms could be cause for concern. The loss of riparian vegetation and altered stream baseflows can also negatively impact stream temperatures.

A “flashier” hydrograph and increased peak flows during rain events ‐ Human development increases the extent of impervious surfaces (including compacted soils) which keep water from infiltrating the ground and forcing it to flow overland and into stormwater infrastructure. The speed at which stormwater reaches streams during rain events increases the frequency and intensity of high flows.


Ch.1


Cumulative and synergistic impacts of physical and chemical changes attributed to urbanization show consistent changes to the biological composition of streams which include increases in algal biomass, reduction of native biodiversity, reduction or complete elimination of sensitive species, and a shift of biotic assemblages to those dominated by disturbance‐tolerant taxa (Walsh et. al. 2005).

The goal of this Plan is to guide implementation of measures designed to improve stream health as indicated by macroinvertebrate community metrics. However, the process of finding solutions to urban stream degradation resulting from many different stressors, as observed in Gore Creek, is inherently complex. The combined influence of multiple stressors associated with land uses and activities including the addition of multiple pollutants to the waterbody, changes to flow regimes, and habitat loss, work simultaneously and cumulatively to cause degradation. Watershed scientists are still working to completely understand the mechanisms of incremental and synergistic harm that result from urban stream degradation, and while there is still uncertainty about the most optimal solutions and relative effectiveness of some restorative approaches, a wide variety of prevention and mitigation tools have been identified and will be discussed.

Altered base flows – Groundwater flows into streams can be impacted by reduced infiltration potentially altering stream baseflows. Lower baseflows may become evident between storm events especially during dry periods.

Stream habitat alterations – With development, channelization and other

physical changes to streams alter and reduce the beneficial and complex habitats for aquatic organisms.

Clean Water Act Section 303 (d)

Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to develop a list of waters – referred to as the “303(d) List” ‐ that fail to meet assigned water quality standards and classifications. The State of Colorado Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC) recently adopted the Aquatic Life Use Attainment Methodology (Policy Statement 10‐1) which sets forth procedures for making a determination of whether aquatic life uses are in attainment, or not. 2012 marked the first year that the State of Colorado has ever proposed listing streams for failing to achieve aquatic life use classifications.

In December 2012 Gore Creek, along with several other Eagle River Basin streams, was listed for aquatic life use impairment based on macroinvertebrate data collected by the Water Quality Control Division in 2008. The Gore Creek Aquatic life 303(d) listing is deemed “provisional” because there is no known pollutant causing the impairment. The listing will remain provisional until a pollutant ‐ one that is either the cause of the impairment, or one that fails to meet a different water quality standard ‐ is identified. The identified pollutant will be assumed to be the cause of the aquatic life use impairment (even if a direct cause and effect linkage cannot be determined) and will become subject to more stringent controls and permit limitations.

In addition to requiring states to set water quality standards and identify water bodies that are failing to meet standards, Section 303(d) requires states to develop overall pollution budgets (Total Maximum Daily Loads or “TMDL”s) for those water bodies that fail to meet water quality standards or use classifications. More specifically, TMDLs quantify how much pollutant loading the surface water can accommodate while still attaining water quality standards. However, when the pollutant causing the impairment is unknown, as is the case for Gore Creek, the TMDL method is generally inadequate as a regulatory protection mechanism. Further, when existing water quality data indicate that there are no exceedances of the water quality standards that can be successfully linked to the impairment, point and nonpoint source control regulations would have no practical relevance.

The TMDL requirement, as currently administered, presumes that state regulators can determine what each contributing pollutant (causing the degradation) is and what amount of that particular pollutant(s) the water body can assimilate. With urban stream impairment ‐ caused by a multitude of stressors acting concurrently –it would be exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to separate out the combined effects of stressors to generate allowable loads for each individual pollutant. In fact, this process, if it could be done, might completely miss key stressors that are a result of riparian buffer, habitat, or hydrological impacts.

1‐9

Category 4(b) Demonstration Plan

The primary purpose of the WQIP is to define actions needed to improve the aquatic health of Gore Creek, as indicated by macroinvertebrate indices, so that Gore Creek can be removed from the State’s 303(d) List. EPA’s regulations recognize that for some impaired water bodies, alternative pollution control requirements, implemented on the local level, may be more appropriate and effective than a TMDL. Such alternative pollution control plans must be documented in a “Category 4b Demonstration Plan” and approved by the Water Quality Control Division and EPA. A Category 4b Demonstration Plan must be designed to assure attainment of all applicable water quality standards through the implementation of appropriated pollution control mechanisms within a reasonable period of time. The pollutant control measures can include those needed to address point and nonpoint sources and must be enforceable. Approval requires that a Category 4b Demonstration Plan include the following fundamental elements:

1. A statement of the problem causing the impairment; 2. A description of

a. the pollution controls to be used; b. how these pollution controls will achieve attainment with all applicable

water quality standards; c. requirements under which those pollution controls will be

implemented; 3. An estimate of the time needed to meet all applicable water quality standards; 4. A schedule for implementation of the necessary pollution controls; 5. A schedule for tracking progress, including a description of milestones; and 6. A commitment from the demonstration plan proponent to revise the

implementation strategy and pollution controls if progress towards meeting all applicable water quality standards is not shown.

The Gore Creek WQIP provides much of the documentation needed for a Category 4b Demonstration Plan and could therefore obviate the need for development of a TMDL and expedite the removal of Gore Creek from the 303(d) List. However, additional work will be needed to adequately establish that the aquatic life impairment in Gore Creek is caused by certain pollutants. It appears that there is some regulatory precedent for basing 4b plans on pollutant sources rather than specific numeric standards. For example, it may be possible to develop a 4b plan designed to control multiple pollutants including pesticides and stormwater constituents with the goal of attaining the State established aquatic life use numeric thresholds. Additional work will also be required to develop the institutional, regulatory, and funding mechanisms needed to fully implement the plan. 1‐10


Ch.1


Aquatic organisms are sensitive indicators of water quality. The presence, condition, quantities, and types of macroinvertebrates (insects), fish, periphyton (algae), macrophytes (plants) and other aquatic organisms provide information about the biological health of freshwater ecosystems. The State of Colorado uses macroinvertebrates as indicator organisms to determine whether waterbodies meet aquatic life use standards. Macroinvertebrates, and

their communities, are considered an appropriate surrogate for the entire aquatic community because, in part, of their limited migration patterns, short life spans and their ability to integrate effects of physical and chemical stressors over relatively short time periods (CDPHE Policy Statement 10‐1, 2010). Streams impacted by urbanization are often characterized by macroinvertebrate assemblages with low diversity, limited numbers and abundances of sensitive species (i.e. Ephemerotera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera) and pollutant tolerant species (i.e., oligochaetes and chironomids) dominance (Paul and Meyer2001; Walsh et. al. 2005b). A wide range of environmental stressors are known to cause negative impacts to the health of macroinvertebrate communities. These include riparian corridor buffer degradation, impacts of impervious cover and untreated urban runoff, pollutants associated with land use activities, and impacts associated with channel and stream habitat degradation among others (i.e., hydrologic modification, temperature, drought, climate).

The following categories of stressors are considered most responsible for existing Gore Creek water quality and biological health concerns and will serve as the primary focus of recommendations for restoration and rehabilitation projects and pollution reduction efforts:

riparian zone degradation; impacts of impervious cover and urban runoff; and pollutants associated with land use activities (i.e., pesticides, de‐icing salts, lawn‐care chemicals, metals, petroleum‐based chemicals, etc.).

There are many other factors that influence aquatic health included stream habitat disturbance, flood events, hydrologic modifications, climate factors such as drought and temperatures, presence of algae (e.g. Didymosphenia geminate, aka didymo), natural disturbances, etc), etc., many of which are not human controlled. These influences act together, in some cases synergistically, and their interrelationships are complex.

1.4.2 Factors Affecting the Aquatic Life Use of Gore Creek

Sculpin in Gore Creek‐ East Vail


Ch.1


The terms “riparian area”, “riparian buffer zone”, “riparian zone”, and “riparian corridor” are used interchangeably in this document. Healthy riparian areas are critical to the water quality and biological health of streams and are described as three‐dimensional zones of biological, physical, and chemical interactions between terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems (Gregory et al. 1991). Research shows that continuous ecologically functioning riparian corridors are essential for benefitting overall ecosystem function, water quality and biological health, wildlife and aquatic habitat, and landscape quality (Forman and Godron 1986). They also function to stabilize streambanks, help slow and temporarily store flood flows, and recharge groundwater. Equally important are the benefits healthy riparian areas provide in support of recreation, education, economic and quality of life values.

Riparian Zone Degradation


Ch.1


Substantial riparian area degradation along the Gore Creek corridor is manifested by moderate to severely altered riparian vegetation and habitat where human development has occurred. Many residential areas have removed the natural riparian vegetation and replaced it with grass that is often mowed and maintained to the edge of the creek. Willows and other woody plants are regularly cut down in these areas or removed to ensure unobstructed access to, and views of, the creek. In more commercial areas, riparian vegetation has been removed during construction and replaced with grass, or not replaced at all. In other areas, building has taken place so close to the creek that the existing riparian area is completely gone or severely altered. These examples are ubiquitous and symptomatic of the relatively unrestricted human development that has occurred along Gore Creek over time.

Protecting and improving the quality of these riparian buffer zones is necessary to start improving water quality and biological health conditions in Gore Creek. Projects to reclaim these areas will focus on improving riparian ecological function which is influenced through processes such as bank stabilization, shading, and regulation of sediment, nutrients, pesticides and other toxins found in the urban environment.

Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1 provides more discussion of the riparian degradation and impacts to biological health. Chapter 4 identifies areas where corrective actions are needed to improve Gore Creek’s critical riparian habitat. Chapter 5, Section 5.2 discusses potential strategies for managing impacts associated with riparian zone degradation.


Ch.1


Impervious cover represents the hard surface areas (i.e. streets, sidewalks, rooftops, driveways, parking lots, compacted soils) in developed watersheds. These surfaces collect and accumulate pollutants deposited from the atmosphere, leaked from vehicles, and applied directly, or indirectly, by residents, maintenance crews, and others to control pests, maintain lawns and gardens, manage winter travel conditions, and perform other land use activities. Accumulated pollutants are washed into the creek during runoff events (precipitation and snowmelt) and can cause negative impacts to the receiving water quality and stream biological health conditions. With the exception of fertilizer and pesticides which derive primarily from lawns and landscaped areas, loading of most urban contaminants increase in proportion to the area of impervious surfaces. The impervious cover within a stream or riparian buffer is a metric of interest to many natural resource managers and those concerned about watershed health. It can serve as an important predictor of the condition of the aquatic ecosystem (Brabec 2002), especially where buffer disturbance can directly impact conditions in the waterway. There is a large body of evidence that impervious cover within riparian buffers, a surrogate for disturbance, strongly correlates to aquatic life degradation. The use of imperviousness as an indicator of habitat quality rests on the assumption that impervious areas are connected, allowing rain that falls onto these areas to flow into the storm drain system and discharge into the local waterway. A preliminary impervious surface area analysis performed for this Plan shows that approximately 31 percent of the Vail valley floor is impervious. Nearly all development in the Gore Creek watershed has taken place in the valley floor in close proximity to Gore Creek. In the spatial extents chosen for analysis (described in more detail in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2), the lowest percentage impervious covers are expected and found in undeveloped locations above the confluence of Black Gore Creek and near Katsos ranch open space (12 and 13 percent, respectively). In the heavily developed areas around Vail Village, Lionshead and West Vail, impervious cover is observed in percentages ranging from the upper 30s to low 40s with the highest being 45 percent near the Main Vail interchange. The Eagle River Inventory Assessment cites that the majority of impervious surface areas in the watershed are within 30 meters of either side of the main stem of Gore Creek (Bledsoe 2005). The pattern of development in the Gore Creek watershed is concentrated in the corridor immediately adjacent to Gore Creek and contributes to the creek’s current state of stressed and degraded biological health conditions.

Impacts of Impervious Cover and Urban Runoff


Ch.1


Impacts of Impervious Cover and Urban Runoff Projects and management strategies to reduce the influence of impervious surfaces on water quality and ecosystem health should therefore center on reducing effective impervious areas. Strategies include adopting and implementing low impact development and green infrastructure practices to help reestablish, or at least not further disrupt, natural hydrological pathways; improving the efficiency ‐through replacement or retrofit ‐ of existing stormwater treatment structures to gain better pollutant reductions; and, ensuring implementation of best management practices for stormwater infrastructure maintenance activities.

Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2 provides more discussion of the Gore Creek impervious cover analysis and impacts. Chapter 5, Section 5.3 provides strategies for managing impacts associated with impervious cover and urban runoff.


Ch.1


Pollutants Associated with Urban Land Use Activities

The composition of urban runoff differs from runoff in undeveloped areas. Nearly all urban streams have elevated concentrations of chemical contaminants, many of which are toxic to aquatic life (Roy et. al. 2010). Contaminants enter stormwater runoff from a range of sources in the urban landscape. Catchments (areas that drain individual development sites to their first intersection with the stream) with untreated point source discharges, high impervious surface connectivity, high pesticide application rates and high population and traffic densities are likely to have the highest contaminant levels (Steele et al. 2010).

Urban land use activities add many pollutants: lawn‐care chemicals and pesticides; oil and grease from cars, machinery, and other equipment; heavy metals scraped from brake pads and tires; salts from snow and ice treatment; sediment and traction sand from construction sites and winter road maintenance; and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from incomplete fuel combustion, among others. Urbanization can also affect temperatures as urban landscapes warm, and sometimes cool runoff, leading to greater temperature variability and potential impacts to aquatic life. Nutrients discharged from wastewater treatment facilities (WWTFs) can also cause indirect negative impacts on macroinvertebrate assemblages.

Reducing input of toxic contaminants and pollutants associated with urban land use activities into the stream system is integral to mitigating their impacts. This can be accomplished through a variety of strategies including adopting alternative strategies for pest control, adopting water quality protection ordinances and regulations that restrict or reduce the use of pollutants, and, physically removing pollutants from paved surfaces before they can be carried to the creek.

More discussion regarding the impacts of pollutants associated with urban runoff and land‐use activities can be found in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.3. See Chapter 5, Section 5.4 for recommendations to manage impacts of pollutants associated with land‐use activities and urban runoff.


Ch.1

1‐18

1.5 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

1.5.1 Adaptive Management

It is anticipated that the WQIP will provide the framework needed to support ongoing planning, design, implementation, and maintenance of water quality improvement measures and programs at the local level. As such, the WQIP will be periodically updated, refined, and modified over time as new information becomes available regarding the need to:

address regulatory processes and requirements associated with the existing 303(d) listing, and potential TMDL development (as necessary);

adopt local controls including regulations, ordinances, and incentives; implement educational programs; establish funding mechanisms; evaluate and implement state and/or federal regulatory approaches that

support watershed management strategies; and, revise, modify, or add to existing water quality improvement projects.

Recommendations for aquatic ecosystem improvement are often based on the critical tasks of riparian restoration and local management efforts conducted within the watershed ecosystem context to achieve a multi‐scale, tiered approach to water resource management. Optimization and implementation of urban drainage and stormwater controls, riparian restoration and management measures, land use best management practices, continued compliance of WWTFs with current and future water quality protection regulations, and water quality focused education programs are integral to improving water quality and biological stream health and will be most effective when integrated into a suite of urban catchment management efforts. For developing areas within the Eagle River watershed, consideration to thoughtful design, which incorporates certain basic controls to be installed at the time of development, and protection of stream habitat will greatly improve the ability to protect and maintain beneficial uses as watersheds become urbanized.

1‐17


Ch.1

GoreCreekWaterQualityImprovementPlanPRELIMINARY DRAFT. FOR INTERNAL REVIEW. NOT FOR ATTRIBUTION

1‐18

Management recommendations take into consideration the biological, geological, and climatic nature of the ecosystem; the degree of urbanization, past and present land uses, and the nature of the urban stressors. The greatest benefits will likely be realized through collective assessment, adaptive management of restoration projects, and regulatory and educational practices performed at smaller spatial scales. These practices will, by default, result in a higher level of success on a larger watershed scale. Stressors associated with urban runoff and land use activities in the Gore Creek watershed will be curtailed and reduced through implementation of best management practices (BMPs) using the following adaptive management approach:

implement BMPs strategically through a phased approach which focuses on achieving the most benefit to water quality and stream health for the least cost in most impacted and sensitive areas first (i.e. begin with riparian restoration, pesticide and fertilizer management, and treatment of I‐70 stormwater runoff in Upper Gore Creek – East Vail area);

maintain remedial actions to geographically focused areas within the upper, middle, and lower sections of Gore Creek to affect a higher probability of success. Avoid fragmented restoration projects where the probability of success will be compromised;

establish ongoing monitoring and data collection to support improvements and refinements to the WQIP and evaluate effectiveness of water quality improvement efforts;

establish maintenance programs for BMPs; assess monitoring data for compliance with aquatic life use standards; and, continue to evaluate ongoing program requirements.

Corrective actions and prioritization of water quality improvement projects are detailed in Chapter 4 of this Plan. Chapter 5 discusses recommended management and implementation strategies. Focus is placed on projects involving:

riparian restoration; pollutant concentration and load reduction to Gore Creek (through potential stormwater

treatment facility and drainage infrastructure improvements); reduction of impacts associated with connected impervious cover (i.e. downspout

disconnection, planning and zoning tools); working to re‐establish, and maintain existing, natural hydraulic pathways with infiltration and

source runoff abstraction (i.e. infiltration swales, rain gardens, constructed wetlands, porous pavement, and regulatory measures).

bank stabilization; and management/regulatory controls for fertilizers, pesticides, and other contaminants.

Generally, practices and corrective actions that can achieve multiple improvements at lower costs is recommended in the short term to initiate stream recovery. As BMP effectiveness is evaluated, and the need for additional more costly BMPs is determined, a longer‐term implementation strategy should be established. As has been described, implementation of future remedial actions will be based on insights gained during the restoration process to ensure that selection of additional corrective actions will achieve the maximum benefit possible.

1‐18

ReportCoverChapter1

report prepared report prepared creek wqip state designation...of its water resources. there is also...

Documents