Res 2003-152 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e. Alternatives Considered. Three alternatives were initially identified and examined during the Preliminary Restoration Plan phase. These alternatives include the No Action Plan, Preliminary Restoration Plan, and Other Potential Plans. The No Action Plan examines future without project conditions whereas the Preliminary Restoration and Other Potential Plans examine future with project conditions. (1) Alternative 1 (No Action Plan): The no action alternative would result in not implementing the proposed project measures within and along the San Marcos River. Environmental conditions within the project area would remain in their existing state with little or no maintenance. The lack of a well- established riparian corridor along the San Marcos River would likely result in continued invasion by exotic and generalist lant species, p p enhanced erosion and loss of bank stability within the floodplain, decreased filtration capacity of the corridor and continued fragmentation as development continues. Aquatic habitat would continue to deteriorate due to invasion of exotic plant species, inflow of polluted runoff and sedimentation of in- stream habitat. Existing debris and detrimental hardpan surfaces would remain and negatively influence area aesthetics. The flow regime of the San Marcos River would remain fragmented and altered due to the existing dam structures and expansion of exotic plant species. Additional educational, recreational and monitoring benefits would not occur under this alternative. (2) Alternative 2 (Preliminary Restoration Plan): The full implementation of the Preliminary Restoration Plan would result in riparian, in- stream, prairie and wetland habitat restoration along and within the San Marcos River. The proposed project measures would consist of restoring a high quality riparian forest corridor, creation of in- stream habitat, removal of sediment and exotic plant species, implementation of sediment and nutrient control measures, removal of debris and hardpan surfaces, bank stabilization, restoration of natural flow regimes and creation of wetland complexes. Secondary benefits associated with this alternative include improvement in pollutant filtration and subsequent water quality, expansion of rare and endangered aquatic plant species, increased habitat and carrying capacity for resident and migratory wildlife, increased wildlife biodiversity and productivity, and de- fragmentation of terrestrial and aquatic habitat. Benefits associated with recreation, public education, soil- monitoring and natural aesthetics will also be improved with implementation of the preferred alternative. (3) Alternative 3 (other Potential Plans): Other potential restoration plans will be examined in further detail during the Feasibility phase of the project through the use of Incremental Analysis. Various project measures will be compared through Incremental Analysis based on average annual costs and habitat units to identify an array of feasible restoration alternatives, known as "Best Buy" plans. The recommended restoration alternative will then be selected from all feasible "Best Buy" plans based on sponsor requirements, public opinion, total project cost, environmental benefits, O&M requirements, project durability and ease of project implementation. Individual project measures outlined in the Preliminary Restoration Plan and other "Best Buy" plans identified through the Incremental Analysis process may deviate from their original intent due to implementation constraints such as negative public opinion, sponsor priorities and feasible O &M costs. 14