Laserfiche WebLink
ALTERNATIVES MATRIX- REGIONAL OPTIONS <br />t7 abed - Ve <br />ORDER OF <br />MAGNITUDE COST <br />RELATIVE TIME <br />ENVIRONMENTAL <br />OTHER AGENCY <br />EASEMENT/ LAND <br />OPERATIONS & <br />ALTERNATIVE <br />ESTIMATE <br />PARTICIPATION <br />EFFECTIVENESS OF OPTION (PROS & CONS) <br />(CONSTRUCTION <br />REQUIRED <br />PERMITTING <br />REQUIRED <br />AQUSITION <br />MAINTENANCE <br />ONLY) <br />Pros: <br />• Depending on sheetpile height, can provide different levels of protection, <br />even in high tide condition <br />Sheetpiles along Bayfront <br />Yes - BCDC, Corps, <br />• Provides protection to the entire area <br />1 <br />Canal &Atherton Channel <br />$10 million <br />3 - 5yrs <br />Water Board, <br />Yes, Menlo Park <br />Construction <br />Minimal <br />without existing tidegate, or <br />Easement <br />Cons: <br />with modified tidegate <br />USFWS <br />• Aesthetics <br />• Without the tidegate, gravity systems may be impacted by the "backflow" <br />effect during high tide <br />Pros: <br />• Reduces flow into the Bayfront Canal <br />Cons: <br />Redirect Flow from <br />Yes -BCDC, Corps, <br />No, but County, <br />Easement for new <br />O &M of additonal <br />2 <br />Broadway & Douglas <br />3 -Syrs <br />Water Board, <br />Menlo Park, Atherton, <br />force main and new <br />force main and <br />• Flow reduction may on be 25 %- Ba y f ront Canal may still lack eno <br />Y Y Yf Y h g <br />drainage basin to <br />USFWS <br />Woodside <br />pump station <br />pump station <br />storage capacity, especially during high tide <br />Steinberger Slough <br />participation desired <br />• Not likely to protect Menlo (Atherton Channel) area <br />• Redirecting flows may impact other areas (along Steinberger Slough) <br />• High O &M cost <br />Pros: <br />• Atherton Channel, which contributes over 60 %offlow into the Canal, will not <br />No additional <br />impact the storage capacity ofthe Canal <br />Separate Bayfront Canal <br />Yes - BCDC, Corps, <br />Yes, Menlo Park & <br />Easement for new <br />O &M (Canal &tide <br />3 <br />from Atherton Channel <br />? <br />3 -Syrs <br />Water Board, <br />Atherton <br />Canal Alignment <br />gates already <br />Cons: <br />USFWS <br />under RWC O &M) <br />• Bayfront Canal may still not have enough storage capacity, especially during <br />high tide <br />• Atherton Channel may still overflow and back -flood Haven Ave., Fifth Ave. <br />areas <br />Pros: <br />No, but County, <br />• Can provide different levels of protection, even in high tide <br />Large Pump Station (1,300 <br />Corps <br />Yes - BCDC, , <br />Menlo Park, Atherton, <br />Easement for new <br />O &M of new <br />• Provides to the entire area <br />p <br />4 <br />$10 million <br />3 -Syrs <br />Water Board, <br />pump station at the <br />cfs +) at tide gate <br />Woodside <br />pump station <br />Cons: <br />USFWS <br />participation desired <br />tide gate <br />• High O &M cost <br />Pros: <br />• Maybe able to pump a small volume of water out ofthe Canal before small <br />No, but County, <br />storm events <br />Smaller Pump Station (300 <br />Corps <br />Yes -BCDC, , <br />Menlo Park, Atherton, <br />Easement for new <br />O &M of new <br />5 <br />cfs) at tide gate <br />Less than $5 million <br />3 -Syrs <br />Water Board, <br />Woodside <br />pump station at the <br />pump station <br />Cons: <br />USFWS <br />participation desired <br />tide gate <br />• Due to the small capacity ofthe pump, it is ineffective during bigger storms <br />• Most likely will not relieve flooding ofthe Fifth Ave., Atherton Channel areas <br />• High O &M cost <br />t7 abed - Ve <br />