South Bay Salt Ponds: Ravenswood Complex - Ponds R3, R4, R5, S5, S5W

Status Completed County San Mateo
Project Type Non-mitigation Location 37.48668° N, -122.15530° W Map
Project Area (Acres) 664.5 Last Updated 30 January 2025
Project Abstract The goals of this project were to restore seasonal ponds to tidal marsh and managed ponds, maintain or improve flood protection, improve habitat for western snowy plover, and create public access.
Project Groups San Francisco Bay Adaptation | San Francisco Bay Joint Venture | San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority (Eligible) | San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority (Funded) | South Bay Salt Ponds | South Bay Salt Ponds: Phase 2
Administrative Region San Francisco Bay Joint Venture - Jemma Williams, SFBJV

Project Identification

IDType
850 JV - Record Number
RA-005 SFBRA - Project ID

Habitat Plan

Site NamePhaseActivitySubActivitiesHabitatSubHabitatAcresActivity StatusWater Regime
Pond R3 Implementation Restoration/Rehabilitation Polder Management Seasonal Wetland Diked wetland 270.0 Implementation in-progress
Pond R4 Implementation Restoration/Rehabilitation Buffer area None 26.20 Implementation in-progress
Pond R4 Implementation Restoration/Re-establishment Estuarine Wetland Marsh 295.0 Implementation completed Fully tidal
Pond R5 Implementation Restoration/Rehabilitation Polder Management Seasonal Wetland Diked wetland 35.41 Implementation in-progress
Pond S5 Implementation Restoration/Rehabilitation Polder Management Seasonal Wetland Diked wetland 30.00 Implementation in-progress
Pond S5 west Implementation Restoration/Rehabilitation Polder Management Seasonal Wetland Diked wetland 7.91 Implementation in-progress

Related Habitat Impacts

Impact Project NameHabitatAcres LostType of Loss
No Data

Sites

NameStatusAcres
Pond R3 Completed 270.0
Pond R4 Completed 321.2
Pond R5 Completed 35.41
Pond S5 Completed 30.00
Pond S5 west Completed 7.91

Events

DateTypeDescriptionSite Name
2024-07-31 Project end date All of the restoration work completed in 2023, but the public access features (trail, viewing area, signs, gates, fences, etc.) was completed in 2024.
2024-06-01 Completion The trail surfacing plus fencing and interpretive signage and such was done, completing the Phase 2 construction at Ravenswood.
2023-12-09 Phase end This ends Phase 2 at Pond R4. Pond R4
2023-12-09 Groundwork end The breach on this date (not December 1) was the end of work at this site. Pond R4
2023-12-09 Levee breach planned This completed tidal marsh restoration in Pond R4.
2023-12-01 Levee breach planned 7/30/2024: Levee Breach added (pers. comm. Donna Ball) Pond R4
2022-03-04 Completion This completed managed pond enhancements in R5, S5, and R3.
2022-03-03 Groundwork end Pond S5
2022-03-03 Phase end This is the end of Phase 2 at this managed pond. Pond S5
2022-03-03 Groundwork end Pond R5
2022-03-03 Phase end This is the end of Phase 2 at this managed pond. Pond R5
2022-03-03 Groundwork end Pond R3
2022-03-03 Phase end This is the end of Phase 2 work on this managed pond. Pond R3
2022-03-03 Phase end This is the end of Phase 2 at this managed pond. Pond S5 west
2022-03-03 Groundwork end Pond S5 west
2019-07-01 Groundwork start Material import and placement.
2018-10-15 Permit Environmental permitting completed.
2016-04-22 Report Final Environmental Impact Statement/Report, Phase 2 Alviso and Ravenswood Ponds
2012-03-01 Project start date Phase 2 construction began with the start of material import, listed as event 4 here. But Phase 2 PLANNING and DESIGN began in 2012.

People

TypeNameOrganizationDepartment
Contact Dave Halsing State Coastal Conservancy Not applicable/Unknown
Agency Staff Laura Cholodenko State Coastal Conservancy SF Bay Program

Funding

PhaseActivityFunderAmount
Implementation Restoration/Rehabilitation SFBRA San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority - Measure AA
Implementation Restoration/Re-establishment SFBRA San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority - Measure AA $6,221,730
Implementation Restoration/Rehabilitation Unknown/Unspecified $5,800,000
Implementation Restoration/Re-establishment Unknown/Unspecified $5,000,000

Related CRAM Assessments

Visit DateVersionSite NameWetland TypeIndex Score
No Data

Performance Measures

Plan NamePlan GoalPerformance MeasureMeasure ValueStatusEvaluation Date
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority Community Engagement Benefits economically disadvantaged communities Yes in-progress/partially achieved
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority Community Engagement Has significant youth involvement component Yes in-progress/partially achieved
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority Community Engagement Number of unique volunteers expected to participate 0 count in-progress/partially achieved
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority Community Engagement Number of volunteer hours expected to be contributed 5000 count in-progress/partially achieved
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority Community Engagement Number of youth participants expected to be engaged 0 count in-progress/partially achieved
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority Flood Protection Miles of levee to be constructed 1.7 miles in-progress/partially achieved
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority Public Access Miles of Bay Trail to be constructed 0 miles in-progress/partially achieved
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority Public Access Number of public access facilities to be constructed 2 count in-progress/partially achieved
Name File Type Submitted On Submitted By
Monitoring Reports Monitoring Report 2024-08-28 Emma Railey, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture
Staff Recommendation Other 2021-02-22 Emma Railey, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture

How to Use the Habitat Development Curve

Habitat Development Curves (HDCs) are used to determine the developmental status and trajectory of on-the-ground projects to create, restore, or enhance California wetland and stream habitats. Each HDC is based on assessments of habitat condition for different age areas of one habitat type that in aggregate represent the full spectrum of habitat development. The assessments of condition are provided by expert applications of the California Rapid Assessment Method (CRAM). Visit the CRAM website for more information about CRAM.

For each HDC, reference condition is represented by areas of a habitat that consistently get very high CRAM scores, have not been subject to disruptive management practices, and exist within landscapes that are protected and managed for their natural conditions. The horizontal lines intersecting the top of an HDC represent the mean CRAM score and standard deviation of scores for 25 qualifying reference areas.

The age of a project is estimated as the elapsed time in years between the groundwork end date for the project and the date of the CRAM assessment. To add or update a groundwork end date, use the Project Events form in Project Tracker (ptrack.ecoatlas.org). The minimum age in years of a non-project area, including any natural reference area, is estimated from all available local information, including historical maps and imagery, historical written accounts, and place-specific scientific studies of habitat development.

An HDC can be used to address the following questions:

  1. At what time in the future will the area of assessed habitat achieve the reference condition or other milestones in habitat development? The HDC can answer this question if the CRAM score for the assessed area is within the confidence interval of the HDC. The answer is the time in years along the HDC between the current age of the assessed area and the future date corresponding to the intersection of the HDC and the reference condition or other milestone.
  2. Is the area of assessed habitat likely to develop faster, slower, or at the same pace as most other areas of the same habitat type? The habitat area is likely to develop faster, slower, or at the same pace if the CRAM score for the area is above, below, or within the confidence interval of the HDC, respectively.
  3. What can be done to improve the condition of the habitat area or to increase its rate of development? HDCs by themselves cannot answer this question. Possible answers can be inferred by the following analysis that involves HDCs:
    1. Examine the HDC for each of the four CRAM Attributes;
    2. Identify the Attribute(s) scoring below the HDC;
    3. For any low-scoring Attribute, examine the component Metric Scores (note: the Metric Scores for any public CRAM assessment in the CRAM database can be obtained through EcoAtlas);
    4. Assume the low score of an Attribute is due to its low-scoring Metric(s);
    5. Consider modifying the design or management of the habitat area in ways that will sustainably increase its score(s) for the low-scoring Metric(s).

For more information about CRAM Attributes and Metrics, including their scientific rationale, see the CRAM Manual.

Display Habitat Development Curves For Wetland Type:

CRAM Site Scores