Los Angeles Basin Study The Future of Stormwater Conservation: Task 6 – Trade-Off Analysis & Opportunities

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | January 5th, 2016

The Los Angeles Basin Study (LA Basin Study) is a collaborative partnership between the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) and the U.S. Department of the

The Los Angeles Basin Study (LA Basin Study) is a collaborative partnership between the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) and the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). The purpose of the LA Basin Study is to investigate long-range water conservation and flood risk impacts caused by projected changes in climate and population in the Los Angeles region. The LA Basin Study highlights opportunities for potential modifications and changes to both the existing regional stormwater capture system as well as for the development of new facilities and practices, which could help to resolve future water supply and flood risk issues. The stormwater capture concepts and alternatives developed in the Task 5 – Infrastructure & Operations Concepts report are evaluated in the trade-off analysis and opportunities highlighted in this report.  The primary purpose of Task 6 – Trade-Off Analysis & Opportunities is to evaluate the quantifiable and non-quantifiable benefits and costs of the stormwater concepts identified in the Task 5 report and to provide an analysis of the trade-offs among concepts. In most cases, various project concepts would generate benefits for some impact categories but not others, and would also impose various types of costs. The trade-off analysis provides a methodology for comparing different types of benefits and costs that cannot all be quantified in monetary terms. These trade-offs include economic, financial, environmental, and social effects. Economic effects include the benefits associated with different types of goods and services supported by the concepts, the costs of the different concepts, the impacts of the different concepts on the regional economy through changes in the amount and type of spending, and the cost effectiveness of different project concepts. Financial effects reflect the impacts of paying for a project, such as paying off capital debt and covering operation and maintenance expenses. Environmental effects reflect the type and quality of environmental and natural resources that would be potentially influenced by a concept. Environmental effects include items such as water quality, energy consumption, impacts on habitat, and ecosystem function. Social effects reflect how the concepts may alter the social characteristics of a community or region such as impacts to education, environmental justice, and quality of life.  Benefits are quantified for three categories of resource impacts. The first category is additional stormwater conserved or stored, which is measured in terms of acre-feet per year. The second is recreation, which is measured in miles of new trails. The third is increased habitat acreage and additional acquisition of right-of-way acreage that would provide habitat benefits. Stormwater conservation benefits are valued as improved water supply reliability, recreation is valued as a type of general recreation activity similar to outdoor activities at a local park, and habitat acreage is evaluated as an ecosystem improvement. In the case of the Regional Impact Programs concept, right-of-way acreage also produces some ecosystem benefits. Quantified benefits and costs as well as categories of qualitative benefits are summarized in Table ES-1. All benefits and costs are present valued over a 50-year planning period using the current Fiscal Year 2016 federal water project planning rate of 3.125%.  The economic analysis of quantified benefits can be used to evaluate the magnitude of potential benefits of each project group, recognizing that many additional benefits may exist that are not accounted for in a traditional benefit and cost analysis. It is important to note that quantified benefits could only be developed for a subset of the total beneficial effects associated with the concepts identified in the Task 5 report. There are many potential benefits associated with environmental and social improvements, flood risk mitigation, environmental justice, and other effects that could be large but cannot be evaluated quantitatively for this level of analysis. These unquantified benefits may be larger than quantified benefits in some cases and smaller in other cases. The intent of the qualitative assessment is to provide an indication of the potential magnitude of unquantified benefits. 

Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Hydrology Manual

Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) | January 30th, 2006

This manual establishes the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works' hydrologic design procedures and serves as a reference and training guide. This manual contains

This manual establishes the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works' hydrologic design procedures and serves as a reference and training guide. This manual contains charts, graphs, and tables necessary to conduct a hydrologic study within the County of Los Angeles. Examples provide guidance on using the hydrologic methods.

Los Angeles County Water Plan 2023

Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) | December 5th, 2023

Over 200 agencies in Los Angeles County manage a complex network of water systems to meet the needs of our communities and environment. To achieve sustainability, resilie

Over 200 agencies in Los Angeles County manage a complex network of water systems to meet the needs of our communities and environment. To achieve sustainability, resilience, and equity, cross-sector teamwork and a holistic approach to best leverage natural systems and infrastructure are essential. This plan is a living document. The targets, strategies, and actions are a starting point in this effort. The CWP is not intended to address every water-related issue in Los Angeles County. Instead, it builds upon and complements the many existing local and regional water planning efforts by focusing on four key focal areas where new or additional regional collaboration can add value. These four key focal areas were established through a gaps analysis, which included a review of local and regional planning documents, along with initial stakeholder discussions encompassing a variety of perspectives. For each of the four key focal areas, the CWP describes shared desired outcomes, identified by Public Works through discussions with numerous groups and individuals. During our gaps analysis, Public Works evaluated disparities in water resilience throughout the County and specifically selected a focal area to address a pressing need. The CWP provides an approach for achieving these desired outcomes through collaboration and a platform for measuring progress.

Los Angeles County’s Climate Cost Challenge

Center for Climate Integrity | April 2nd, 2024

Within the first two months of 2024, the City of Los Angeles had already exceeded its average annual rainfall, receiving nearly 15 inches of rain in back-to-back deluges.

Within the first two months of 2024, the City of Los Angeles had already exceeded its average annual rainfall, receiving nearly 15 inches of rain in back-to-back deluges.1 The storms flooded roads, brought massive wind gusts, ripped down trees, and killed nine people.2 The year prior was the hottest year ever recorded, including unseasonably hot weather into the fall months in Southern California. In October 2023, a wildfire ripped through rural lands southeast of the City of Los Angeles, destroying multiple buildings and forcing approximately 4,000 people to evacuate. With climate-driven disasters in Southern California growing more intense every year, it’s more important than ever for communities to invest in a growing range of climate adaptation and resilience projects. This study is the first-ever attempt to calculate the costs of preparing for and adapting to 14 different climate impacts on municipal, county, state, and federal governments in Los Angeles County.

Los Angeles Department of Water & Power response to Mono Lake Committee Request for a Drought Emergency Regulation

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | January 11th, 2023

Los Angeles Department of Water & Power Urban Water Management Plan 2015

Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP) | July 1st, 2016

The California Urban Water Management Planning Act (Act-effective January 1, 1984) requires that every urban water supplier prepare and adopt an UWMP every five years

The California Urban Water Management Planning Act (Act-effective January 1, 1984) requires that every urban water supplier prepare and adopt an UWMP every five years. The main objective of producing these plans is to confirm that cities are performing the advance planning necessary to provide reliable water service in the future. Specifically, the UWMP forecasts future water demands and water supplies under average and dry year conditions; identifies future water supply projects such as recycled water; provides a summary of water conservation Best Management Practices (BMPs); and provides a single and multi-dry year management strategy. I. Chapters 1-3 Introduction / Water Demands / Water Conservation 2. Chapters 4-8 Recycled Water / Los Angeles Aqueduct System / Groundwater / Watershed Management / Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Supplies 3. Chapters 9-12 Other Water Supplies - Transfers, Brackish Water Recovery, Seawater Desalination / Integrated Resources Planning / Water Supply Reliability and Financial Integrity / Sustainable City pLAn Targets for Conservation and Local Supplies / Water Shortage Contingency Plan / Water Supply Assessments / Climate Change and Water-Energy Nexus Appendix A: Urban Water Management Planning Act Appendix B: Management Plan Checklist Appendix C: Water Rate Ordinance Appendix D: Public Notices, Outreach, Comments Appendix E: References Appendix F: Groundwater Basin Adjudications San Fernando Basin – Judgment 650079 Sylmar Basin – Judgment 650079 Verdugo Basin – Judgment 650079 Eagle Rock Basin – Judgment 650079 Sylmar Stipulation – Judgment 650079 West Coast Basin – Judgment 506806 Central Basin – Judgment 786656  

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power 2016 Annual Owens Valley Report

Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP) | December 1st, 2015

This report includes Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s (LADWP) proposed Owens Valley operations plan for the first six months of the 2016-17 runoff year, an u

This report includes Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s (LADWP) proposed Owens Valley operations plan for the first six months of the 2016-17 runoff year, an update on Owens Valley conditions, the current status of LADWP’s environmental mitigation projects, and the status of other studies, projects, and activities.

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power 2018 Annual Owens Valley Report

Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP) | December 1st, 2017

This report includes Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s (LADWP) proposed Owens Valley Operations Plan for the 2018-2019 Runoff Year, an update on Owens Valley

This report includes Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s (LADWP) proposed Owens Valley Operations Plan for the 2018-2019 Runoff Year, an update on Owens Valley conditions, and the current status of LADWP’s environmental mitigation projects and other legal obligations under the Agreement between the County of Inyo and the City of Los Angeles and its Department of Water and Power on a Long-Term Groundwater Management Plan for Owens Valley and Inyo County (Water Agreement); the 1991 Environmental Impact Report Water from the Owens Valley to Supply the Second Los Angeles Aqueduct, 1970 to 1990, 1990 Onward, Pursuant to a Long Term Groundwater Management Plan (1991 EIR); the Laws Type E transfer; the 1997 Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, County of Inyo, the California Department of Fish and Game, the California State Lands Commission, the Sierra Club, and the Owens Valley Committee (1997 MOU), the August 2004 and March 2010 Amended Stipulations and Orders in Case No. S1CVCV01-29768.

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Geologic Guidebook Los Angeles Aqueduct System

Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP) | December 1st, 1977

Los Angeles Sustainable Water Project: Ballona Creek Watershed

University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) | November 1st, 2015

Implementing integrated water management systems (IWM) that incorporate all components of the urban water cycle, including imported water, local groundwater, captured st

Implementing integrated water management systems (IWM) that incorporate all components of the urban water cycle, including imported water, local groundwater, captured stormwater, greywater, and treated wastewater is crucial to creating a sustainable water supply for the city of Los Angeles (City). The City has researched, written, and initiated implementation of recommendations from many reports critical to creating an IWM plan for the City as well as to defining the current capacity of the system. While work on this issue has been ongoing for many years, the extreme drought currently impacting water supplies throughout California has created a new urgency to increase the City’s ability to provide a secure water supply through local sources. In April 2015, Governor Brown directed the first-ever statewide mandatory cut of 25% in urban water use due to the continuing drought conditions. In addition to statewide efforts, many policies and plans have been created on a local level within the City that address urban water management, integrated resources planning, stormwater capture, and groundwater management. The Los Angeles Mayor’s Office recently set strong goals to increase the sustainability of the City’s water supply over the next several years. The goals included completing a comprehensive sustainability plan containing objectives for water supply and demand in the City, which was released in April 2015 (Sustainable City pLAn). In an emergency drought directive released in October 2014, the Mayor identified additional accelerated water goals including reducing per capita potable water use by 20% by 2017 (from 2014 base-line of 130 gallons per capita per day (GPCD) to 104 GPCD), reducing the City’s reliance on MWD water by 50% by 2025, and converting 85% of public golf course acreage to recycled water by 2017. Through building upon regional research and reports that have been generated on potential components of the local water supply portfolio (e.g., groundwater, recycled water, and stormwater), as well as gathering and analyzing current data on flows of water and wastewater throughout the City systems and environment, this project further identifies and refines opportunities to implement integrated water management throughout the City. As water quality regulation in the Los Angeles area currently drives much of the current water management practices, we examined greater water self-reliance through this lens. Therefore, the City has been divided by watershed to assess Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) compliance alongside integrated water management opportunities and challenges that exist and must be addressed in order to meet water quality compliance requirements and maximize local water supply. This first report focuses on the Ballona Creek Watershed and the Hyperion Service Area; following reports will focus on the Dominguez Channel and Los Angeles River watersheds.