20260204-004: Beverley Sheffield duck pond presentation — original pdf

Backup

Duck Pond Improvements Austin Watershed Protection | Feb 4, 2026 Background / History  1955 - City of Austin acquires the Park  1986 – Park added functionality of flood storage facility  Partnership: Austin Watershed Protection (AWP) and Austin Parks and Recreation (APR)  Duck Pond built in current location  Great recreational value  Water quality benefits  2022 – Vision Plan is adopted 2 Recent Water Level Issues  January 2025 – Pool construction began  August 2025 – Community concern re: duck pond water level  Oct 23, 2025 – CM Siegel Community Meeting  APR + AWP short- and long-term solutions  Oct 25, 2025 – Pond full after 3.2” rain  January 2026 – Community concern re: duck pond water level 3 Concerns  Reduced water supply  Lack of rain  Potable water leak repaired with pool construction  Runoff from smaller rains blocked  Possible pond leakage  Limitations on Makeup Water  Monitoring water level  Tree and Aquatic life threat  Supplemental water as needed  Prepared for fish relocation 4 We Are Listening Short-Term Solution (In Progress)  AWP + APR Partnership  Improve drainage to pond  Sediment removal and berming to help more runoff enter pond  Site visit held in November  Survey in progress  Design expected summer 2026  Construction anticipated fall of 2026 5 Long-Term Solution 1 (Unfunded) **Engineering needed for feasibility**  Add flow from 72” storm drain  Add bentonite liner  Expand pond to southwest  Minimize tree impacts  Remove accumulated sediment  Reduce leakage and preserve tree roots  Formalize as AWP Asset for Maintenance 6 Long-Term Solution 2 (Unfunded) **Engineering needed for feasibility**  Same as Solution 1  No flow added from 72” storm drain 7 Long-Term Improvements  Ensure the dam and detention facility can handle more flow  Significant new design and permitting work  Working on funding solutions for design and construction Option Complexity 1 2 High Low Solution Strength High Low Cost $2-3M $1.25-$2M Watershed Health Benefits Time to Implement High Low 2 year minimum 1 year minimum 8 Questions? 9 Restrictions with make-up water  Code restrictions on potable water  CHAPTER 6-4. - WATER CONSERVATION.  Quantity of water needed would be substantial  (based on limited available information)  3 feet down in 4 months - 600,000 gallons to fill  Pool Backwash water is reduced following renovation  Reclaimed water not appropriate due to high nutrients 10 Short-Term Solutions  Purple = improve flow to pond  Orange = prevent flow around  Issues will remain  Smaller drainage area  Vulnerable in drought conditions  Water leaking through bottom despite shale  Austin Parks & Recreation limited resources to maintain this type of asset 11 Short-Term Solutions  Improve or re-route inlet for better flow to pond  Cypress roots make it tricky 12