A River of Refuse Runs Through ItNina Kim
Staff Writer, San Diego Union Tribune
13-Apr-2000 Thursday
ESCONDIDO -- Most people hike in Elfin Forest for the serenity of the area. Frank McCullough goes to pick up trash along Escondido Creek. McCullough has collected mattresses, barbecues, camper tops, engine blocks, bicycles and car bodies dumped along the shore of the creek, which runs through Harmony Grove and Elfin Forest.
McCullough, who lives near Harmony Grove, walks a stretch of creek several mornings a week. He carries a plastic bag and picks up hundreds of cans and bottles, hundreds of pounds of paper, cardboard and plastic bags floating downstream along the two miles of the creek he adopted several years ago along Harmony Grove Road.
The Escondido Creek Conservancy was established in 1990 with the mission of protecting as much natural land within the creek watershed as possible. McCullough and other members spend many hours each year protecting and preserving about 21 acres the conservancy owns in the creek's watershed. Urban runoff, trash dumping and plants such as eucalyptus and arundo complicate their efforts. The group may get some help soon. Escondido is planning a multimillion-dollar creek improvement project over the next six months designed to restore a stretch of the creek to a more natural state.
Escondido Creek flows though Lake Wohlford northeast of Escondido and then through the city, eventually emptying into San Elijo Lagoon in Encinitas. Most of the 13 miles of the creek that travels through Escondido is hardly picturesque, however. It has been a concrete channel since the late 1960s. But at the Harmony Grove Road bridge in southwest Escondido, near the city's Hale Avenue waste-water treatment plant, the concrete channel ends. The city's improvement project would focus on about half a mile of the creek there, from the bridge to where the creek enters county land.
The city expects to spend about $3.5 million on the project, which will include raising existing levees, and widening and clearing about 2,500 feet of the stream bed. Most of the trees, brush and other plants will be removed. The creek channel will be widened by up to 200 feet, and a 50-foot-wide, low-flow channel will be built. Nearly 2 acres of native southern willow scrub will be left in place. After the clearing work, the area will be replanted with native vegetation, restoring more than 11 acres surrounding the creek to its natural wetland habitat. The city also plans to plant about 3 acres of native oak forest. Conservancy members say any work to improve the creek is a long time coming. In its 10 years, the conservancy has collected more than 200 tons of trash and junk, members say.
Although it is a constant battle to keep the creek free of litter, two plants, eucalyptus trees and arundo reeds, present the biggest hurdles to maintaining the creek, conservancy members say. They are non-native and considered invasive plants because they spread and regenerate quickly, choking off the flow of water. Arundo, a giant reed that can grow as much as 7 inches a day, is difficult and costly to remove. In Riverside County, where there is an arundo removal program, county officials estimate it costs $37,000 per acre to remove the reed and keep it out for 20 years. Given the hefty price tag for plant removal, some conservancy members say the city's effort on a small stretch of the creek may be a waste of money, considering the size of the entire creek watershed. They add that much of the trash that ends up in the creek washes downstream from Escondido, where it is dumped.
"The city has not been a friend to Escondido Creek through the years," said Deborah LeLevier, a conservancy member. "There has been trash everywhere. Escondido Creek takes it on the chin. The city's effort may not be enough." Creek conservancy members want the city to participate in a regionwide arundo removal program, but there is no money to even begin such a project. The Carlsbad Watershed Network, which the creek conservancy is a part of, is applying for a grant to pay for the reed's removal.
In addition to the city's improvement project, there is some other good news on the horizon for the creek. David Resnick, a developer of the proposed Cielo Norte subdivision along Del Dios Highway west of Escondido, plans to preserve about 375 acres as natural open space between Escondido and Misha creeks. Resnick will deed the land either to the Escondido Creek Conservancy or another land preservation group. In devising the open-space plan for 186 homes, Resnick worked with environmental groups including the Sierra Club, the Environmental Defense League and the Escondido Creek Conservancy. "Their interests are in maintaining open spaces. It's smart planning," he said. "We worked on the best environmental plan until I got their support."
Return to TECC News Page
Board to adopt new storm-water runoff controls next year MICHAEL J. WILLIAMS Staff Writer SAN DIEGO ---- Spurning municipal officials' requests for a postponement, a state board Wednesday decided to forge ahead toward adoption of tougher regulations on pollution resulting from storm-water runoff. The state Regional Water Quality Control Board overseeing the San Diego region voted 6-0 to halt public comment on a proposed permit strengthening existing pollution controls and to schedule a meeting early next year to adopt the permit. In a hearing attended by more than 200 people, the board acted despite pleas from city and county officials as well as some business representatives for 90 more days during which they could further analyze and respond to the proposed regulations. Officials said the requirements, which give the county and its 18 cities more responsibility for identifying and halting pollution from urban runoff, will be difficult and expensive to institute within the six-month time frame called for by the proposal. "We are firmly committed to stand with you to solve this problem, but we do need the time to comment and comply," said Poway Mayor Mickey Cafagna. "This is truly a regional problem that has a tremendous impact on some of the cities financially." Yet, Deborah Jayne, the board's environmental specialist supervising preparation of the document, reminded the board that adoption of a new permit replacing the existing one is long overdue. The revision had been scheduled for 1995. Meanwhile, the quality of the region's streams, lagoons and coastal waters has continued to worsen primarily because of polluted urban runoff, Jayne said. She said the public and government agencies have had plenty of time to address issues relating to the permit, which is now in its third draft in nearly six years. The new regulations specifically prohibit development from increasing ground-water runoff above existing levels and require cities, the county and Port of San Diego to monitor specific sites and enforce violations. While the law wouldn't prohibit residents from engaging in activities such as washing cars and watering lawns, it does prohibit them from causing pollution entering storm drains, which empty into the region's waterways. "If properly implemented this permit has the ability to slow down the ongoing degradation of coastal receiving waters and has the potential to improve the quality of these receiving waters along the coast of San Diego County," Jayne said. "The restoration of our natural waters so our waters will be swimmable, our waters will be fishable and our waters will support quality aquatic habitat ---- that is why we're here today. That is what this permit is all about." More than 30 officials and residents appeared before the board during the four-hour-plus hearing to voice their viewpoints. A number of water-quality advocates expressed strong support for the proposed permit and urged the board to keep the process moving forward toward adoption as scheduled in February. "We've got a 10-year permit that is not working and hasn't worked," said Bruce Resnik, the executive director of San Diego Baykeeper. "We know what we have is not effective. I get tired of the attitude of 'We've tried nothing and we're out of ideas.' " Activist Donna Frye said the permit will finally put some teeth in enforcing so-called "best management practices" for limiting ground-water flows. "Without enforcement, BMP will continue to mean 'bare minimum practices,' "Frye said. Contact staff writer Michael J. Williams at (760) 901-4082 or mwilliams@nctimes.com. 12/14/00Return to TECC News Page
Polluted waters inspire new storm-water regulations MICHAEL J. WILLIAMS Staff Writer Deteriorating water quality at local bays and beaches ---- a countywide ecological and economic disaster in the making ---- has led the state Regional Water Quality Control Board to do something about the principal culprit ---- polluted storm-water runoff. The board is proposing tighter, tougher regulations than existing controls on the amount of gunk that enters storm drains and eventually spills into creeks, lagoons and the ocean from Oceanside to Imperial Beach. A public hearing on the draft municipal storm-water permit for San Diego County, including its 18 cities, the county unincorporated area and the Port of San Diego, is scheduled for 9 a.m. Wednesday at the Metropolitan Wastewater Department, 9192 Topaz Way. Final approval is scheduled for Feb. 14. The proposed permit revises and refines regulations that have been in effect for the past decade and have been overdue for an update, said regional board storm-water specialist Deborah Jayne, who has supervised the new document's preparation. The revisions put teeth into an order that has lacked bite, according to Jayne. As a result, the region's waterways and coastal areas have continued to experience unhealthy increases in pathogens such as fecal coliform and streptococcus, toxic pesticides and heavy metals such as cadmium, copper, lead and zinc, the water board's report on the permit states. If adopted, the revised permit is much more rigorous in demanding that developments and businesses block pollutants from reaching storm drains. The permit also would require the cities, county and Port District to provide greater scrutiny of storm-water runoff and controls. The state Legislature has provided enough money to more than double the regional board's staff so that it can effectively establish and enforce the regulations. "The main reason is because of the public outcry culminating with the beach closures (from contamination)," Jayne said. "In other words, people are very unhappy. They don't want to go to the beach and find that their favorite beach is posted with warnings or closed because it's not safe to swim. There has been a lot of public outcry. That got the attention of public officials and the Legislature. So they said, 'Fix this problem. We're tired of it.'" Coastal pollution proliferates The significance of storm-water runoff as a polluter hit home with a recently released study assessing bacterial levels in coastal waters during the rainy season. The study conducted by the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project found that 56 percent of 251 sites along a 690-mile stretch of coastline from Santa Barbara County to Ensenada Baja California experienced high bacteria levels after a major rainstorm, when storm-water runoff is at its peak. During dry weather, when runoff is low, 94 percent of the sites met standards for safe water, the study found. "That study points out that there's a real need to have effective storm-water pollution control," said Ed Kimura, a member of the San Diego Sierra Club's committee on water issues. "You lose an awful lot of money by not having clean beaches because of the tourist trade and people who have businesses along the coast that depend on people visiting the beaches. The permit is saying we recognize this problem and we have to start taking real steps to control it." The Sierra Club and the Surfrider Foundation are among the environmental groups supporting the proposed permit, while businesses are leery and municipal officials are concerned about the work and costs generated by the requirements. The proposed permit would do the following: Require that local governments oversee urban runoff discharges. Require local governments and agencies to institute management practices reducing polluted runoff flows in conjunction with development planning, construction and resulting land uses. Set up specific water-quality standards for storm-water discharges. Prohibit non-storm runoff discharges into drainage basins. Require local governments and agencies to ensure that runoff discharges do not deteriorate water quality below standards and to eliminate sources of illicit discharges. Require local governments and agencies to establish an urban runoff management program and participate in creating a more widespread management program for each watershed. Require local governments and agencies to create extensive monitoring programs for water-quality objectives. "Essentially what this permit does is hold the municipalities responsible for the long-term and short-term water quality consequences of their decisions on land use and development," Jayne said. "The decisions they make when they're writing their master plans and planning development could have a big impact on water quality. Urbanization is an enormous contributor to pollution in our streams and bays. There's a way to continue growth that is protective of water quality." The permit does not directly restrict agricultural or residential activities such as washing cars and lawns, although cities could enforce specific situations where runoff from those activities is identified as polluting. Rather, the permit emphasizes the role of educating the public to non-polluting practices in a cooperative effort between the regional board and the local agencies. "The municipalities are not being asked to be water cops and drive around the streets writing tickets for somebody over-watering their lawn," Jayne said. "What we will do is educate residents that they are contributing to pollution and there are better ways of watering lawns so that you can avoid runoff resulting in pollution. It's based on educating people, so over the long run we become aware gradually that we are contributing to the problem and if we do things a little differently we can be part of the solution for the same reasons." Agencies wary While supportive of the goals, municipal leaders are concerned the new permit would require them to expend much greater efforts in monitoring and enforcing runoff practices and discharges even though the state has not promised additional funding for such efforts. City officials have voiced those concerns to the board and have asked for a three-month postponement in the hearing and adoption schedule. Representatives of the cities contend the permit imposes 31 different tasks for them to complete in six months and mandates how those tasks must be done. Encinitas Public Works Director Lin Wurbs said that while her city is ahead of other cities in meeting the new permit demands because of a lawsuit, the demands are too much to ask, especially without financial backing. "Some of the new deadlines, regulations and rules are very onerous and will be very difficult to comply with," Wurbs said. The new permit would place a much greater responsibility on inland cities like Escondido, San Marcos and Vista for controlling the flow of storm water downstream into other jurisdictions. "Generally, we're supportive of the concept and have been since day one," said Vista Public Works Director Bill Basham. "This basically takes the existing permit and kicks it up one more notch. Our biggest concern is that the timing to implement all these things is really quick. It requires us to do 31 tests for certain heavy metals at different locations. "If we test an area and there's nothing there, we've got to come back and test again and again. What we're suggesting is if we do one test and there's nothing there, we shouldn't have to do 11 more tests in the same year unless there's a reason to suspect a problem." Environmental advocates contend the more restrictive provisions are justified because, they say, local government agencies have failed to fulfill their responsibilities under the federal and state clean water laws. The proposed permit prevents the agencies from looking askance at storm-water pollution, said Marco Gonzalez, executive director of the Surfrider Foundation's San Diego chapter. "This is the strongest (permit) in California ever," Gonzalez said. "The cities have never basically wanted to do this and have said we need more guidance. Now that they have it, they don't want to do it, because it's a fundamental shift in the way they approach development. It's going to have a huge impact." Contact Michael J. Williams at (760) 901-4082 or mwilliams@nctimes.com. 12/9/00Return to TECC News Page