Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-11-09 Minutes�F,W PpRT �� n City of Newport Beach Coastal/Bay Water Quality Citizens Advisory Committee Minutes DATE: 6/11/09 TIME: 3:00 P.M. LOCATION: Fire Conference Room 1. Welcome/Self Introductions Committee Members: Chairwoman/Council Member Nancy Gardner Council Member Mike Henn George Drayton Ray Halowski Tom Houston Jim Miller Janet Rappaport Randy Seton Guests: Monica Mazur Jack and Nancy Skinner Dr. Steven N. Murray, Cal State Fullerton Dr. Jayson R. Smith, Cal State Fullerton Stephen G. Whittaker, Grad Student, Cal State Fullerton City or County Staff: Dave Kiff, Assistant City Manager John Kappeler, Code & WQ Division Supervisor Bob Stein, Assistant City Engineer Mark Reader, Consultant with Public Works Michelle Clemente, Marine Protection and Education Supervisor Shirley Oborny, Administrative Assistant 2. Approval of Previous Meeting's Minutes The minutes from the April 9, 2009, meeting were approved. 3. Old Business (a) Bay and Ocean Bacteriological Test Results Ms. Mazur reviewed the latest bacti reports. 4. New Business (a) Little Corona del Mar Rockweed Program Dr. Smith explained that Mr. Stein contacted him and Mr. Murray to find out how long it would take for the rocky intertidal weeds to recover if, for example, water quality issues and human impacts were removed. Dr. Smith responded that it could take 8 to 10 1 years but they could potentially speed up the process by restoring the populations. Dr. Smith gave a PowerPoint presentation on the restoration experiments they performed (attached). Ms. Gardner asked if they witnessed people attempting to remove the experimental samples. Dr. Smith said the canopies used in the experiments did draw attention. He agreed with her suggestion that certain areas could be roped off using signage and the City's Tide Pool Rangers to help keep people off the rocks. Mr. Seton asked if there were any influence or measurements of the fresh water lens at the control site in Morning Canyon on calm days vs. heavy days of runoff. Dr. Smith said they didn't take any measurements of water quality as part of this experiment but he said both locations have creek terrestrial runoff. He said the top predators are probably sea stars or sea snails. Mr. Kappeler asked how long it takes for a new species to establish. Dr. Smith said survivor rates drops off over time and it probably takes three years to determine how old the individuals of the population are. Ms. Skinner asked what the source is of the non-native plants. Dr. Smith said a lot of it comes from Japan but he's not sure. They believe it's on oyster spat or oyster aquaculture. Mr. Skinner asked if the new MPA designations are important to his experiments. Dr. Smith said a no -take reserve is very effective but there is no law affecting trampling or handling. When he studied mussels in a protected -by-law area vs. unprotected, the results were virtually the same suggesting the MPA regulations aren't effective when only collecting is taken into account. Mr. Drayton asked what the benefit is of Rockweed. Dr. Smith said a lot of species rely on it. If there are a lot of species there, it will increase visitation and the economy. Ms. Gardner asked why the seeding was unsuccessful. Dr. Smith said he thinks the bags attracted sand and sediment which could scour off any new individuals. Mr. Stein said there is a Phase II in the NOAA Grant. Dr. Smith said in that phase he wants to transplant more material in an aggregation in order to see enhanced populations and survival. He wants to monitor diversity underneath the canopies and outside the transplanted material. He also wants to remove non-native seaweeds in the tide pools. In response to Mr. Seton, Dr. Smith said he doesn't think there are areas as abundant with Rockweed as there were in the '70s; however, Shaw's Cove and Dana Point have some good populations. He said there could be many different reasons for the decline in the Rockweed but the most obvious are in the high human -use sites. (b) Big Canyon Creek Restoration Program Mr. Reader said he assists Mr. Stein with management duties on this project. He 2 provided handouts (attached) and explained the project. In response to Ms. Skinner's question about whether the plants could be harvested to remove the selenium, Mr. Kiff said there isn't a good way, thus far, to remove selenium. It may or may not be pulled up with the roots so that's why this is a pilot program. In response to Mr. Seton, Mr. Kiff explained that there is an urban runoff component but the selenium is likely coming from a Monterey Rock formation in the local hills. It doesn't matter what the water source is because whenever there's an opportunity for it to pond, that's when it converts to selenite, which is more bio-available to fish and then to birds. The reason the pond must stay is to replace previous mitigation required as part of the Back Bay sewer trunk line. Discussion ensued regarding potential water sources that could be used to fill the pond. Mr. Reader continued with his presentation. In response to Chairwoman Gardner, Mr. Reader said the Department of Fish and Game plan to introduce the Western Pond Turtle to this area. Council Member Gardner questioned the wisdom of the introduction of the pond turtle. Mr. Stein said the various agencies involved have had a series of conference calls and have been very accommodating. He said Mr. Reader has been doing a great job moving the project through the pre -permit process. He's very hopeful to get on the California Coastal Commission's agenda within four months and start construction at the end of November '09. Mr. Kiff said the Upper Bay Ecosystem Restoration Project is contingent upon adding mudflat and this is the project that adds the mudflat. Mr. Reader talked about the project schedule. The revised mitigated negative declaration may go to the City Council on September 8tn In response to Mr. Houston's question about why plans are submitted incomplete, Mr. Reader said plans typically go through several rounds of plan checks. In response to Council Member Henn, Mr. Reader said the latest cost estimate for the project is between $8 and $9 million. Mr. Kiff added that $900,000 has been funded to date through grants and about $5 or $6 million has been set aside by other agencies for this project. In response to Mr. Seton, Mr. Kiff said there will be a maintenance component to the wetlands. The final document will project those costs. 5. Public Comments on Non -Agenda Items Mr. Miller commented on MiOcean's beach monitors discussed at the last meeting. He thinks it's a great idea. He suggested a live feed of the surf conditions be included to alleviate driving from place to place to view the surf. Mr. Skinner announced Mr. Kappeler's storm drain study on Balboa Island. He said some bacterial samples have been taken where the San Diego Creek and Delhi Channel 3 enter the bay. The bacterial level there is lower than it is up in the creeks. He thinks it's due to the weir that acts as a catch basin. As it fills and empties out during high and low tides it prolongs the dilution of what's coming down San Diego Creek as well as promoting die -off because travel time is increased. He thinks this is also happening at the Delhi Channel. Discussion ensued. Mr. Skinner said Newport is getting blamed for everything that's running off the islands and the Peninsula. He thinks Mr. Kappeler's study will show bacteria regrowing in the gutter and storm drains. The public will need to be educated about the importance of preventing water from running off the grass, etc. 6. Topics for Future Agendas (a) Carnation Stormdrain (b) DWR Model Landscape and Irrigation Ordinance (c) Poseidon Desalination Project (d) Pacific Oyster Restoration Program (e) NOAA Grant Update (f) Update on Integrated Watershed Planning Efforts Mr. Kappeler said Harbor Resources and California Coastkeeper would like to give an update on the Copper Reduction Program. Ms. Rappaport suggested having a presentation by Aquafied, a company that uses a method to treat water so less is needed for irrigation purposes. 7. Set Next Meeting Date The next meeting was scheduled for July 9tn S. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 4:35 p.m. W