workshoponimpervioussurfacedata,-cawaterboards（6页）.docVIP

Workshop on Impervious Surface Data Oct. 11, 2005, State Bldg, Room 11, 9:00 – 12:00 Agreed-upon items shown in bold with yellow highlighter. Attendance List attached Intro remarks by Shin-Roei Lee Larry Kolb, and meeting facilitated by Sandi Potter, all with RWQCB. First presentation by Sue Ma, RWQCB, summarized the project/impervious surface data collected and submitted by some SCVURPPP member cities. Power Point slides attached. Phil Bobel, Palo Alto, had a suggestion for how to determine San Jose’s impervious surface addition, because San Jose did not have data. Others said that analysis had been attempted. Kristy McCumby-Hyland, Sunnyvale, stated that some projects reduced impervious surface, which is not reflected in the data. Sue agreed that her analysis did not focus on this; there is also a question on how to account for second floor additions, as well as swimming pools. Adam Olivieri, EOA: difference between total impervious surface vs. directly connected impervious area is a very important issue, and is not represented in the data. Trish Mulvey, CLEAN SouthBay: interested in heat island and other effects as well. Chris Sommers, EOA: We need to think about the context of the data, how much impervious surface already exists, and what kind of an increase this represents. I think the new development is only about 1% of total existing development of the Santa Clara Valley. Jill Bicknell, EOA: We never intended the data Sue is discussing to be used for this reason, and never thought it was a high quality data set. Sandi: The purpose of this presentation is to show what data we do have. Introduced next presentation: Second presentation by Dr. Jack Gregg, CA Coastal Commission, discussed non-point source issues addressed by the Coastal Commission, including watershed and hydromodification issues. One project educates elected officials planners about impervious surfaces’ impact on water quality (non-point education for municip