UNIQUE WETLAND RESTORATION CONSIDERATIONS IN THE MAUMEE RIVER AND BAY
Phil Hicks, P.E., Hull & Associates, Inc. Cassie Lovall, ERT Contractor, NOAA Restoration Center
Ohio Stormwater Conference Kalahari Resort & Conference Center, Sandusky, Ohio May 12, 2017 Sandusky
LOWER MAUMEE RIVER AND BAY CONDITIONS
Hosts largest fish spawning migrations of any Great Lakes tributary
Lower Maumee River and Maumee Bay has filled and hardened shoreline . Floodplain wetland habitat is almost non-existent . Essential for healthy fish communities and wildlife
Maumee River Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs) include BUI 3: Degradation of Fish and Wildlife Populations and BUI 14: Loss of Fish and Wildlife Habitat
This area absolutely needs more wetlands . Fish nursery habitat is a special need CITY OF TOLEDO’S PENN 7 FORMER CONFINED DISPOSAL FACILITY RESTORATION
PENN 7 RESTORATION OPPORTUNITY
Former confined disposal facility . Filled in 1972 – 1973 with approximately one million cubic yards of dredged material from the Toledo shipping channel . Berm surrounds perimeter . Heights range from 3 -12 feet . Creates a hydrologic barrier between the land and river . Interior area with hydric soils supports some wetland vegetation, but wetlands are isolated from the river, dry completely for at least a portion of the year, and have little value as wildlife habitat . Owned by City of Toledo
NOAA GREAT LAKES RESTORATION INITIATIVE GRANT
City of Toledo sought and received a $175,000 NOAA GLRI grant in 2015 . Site characterization activities and feasibility study to determine the restoration potential of creating emergent coastal/floodplain wetland habitat at Penn 7 . City of Toledo hired the Hull Project Team (MBI, Stock Drilling, Garcia Surveyors, Pace Aalytical) to complete activities. . Toledo-NOAA-Hull Project Team worked closely throughout 2015-2017 project period DATA COLLECTION/EVALUATION TASKS
Task 1: Preparation of Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)
Task 2: Existing Data Acquisition and Site Reconnaissance
Task 3: Site Characterization
Task 4: Topographic Survey/Mapping
Task 5: Surface Water/Ecological Evaluation
Task 6: Hydrologic and Hydraulic Evaluation
Work also included a conceptual grading plan and feasibility determination. NOTEWORTHY DATA COLLECTION/EVALUATION FINDINGS
Some Chemicals of Concern are present in Penn 7 soils and sediments
Analysis Findings . Penn 7 materials are no more impacted than surrounding Maumee River sediments . Restoration activities would not have a deleterious impact on the surrounding area, even if some Penn 7 materials are released or come in contact with the Maumee River . Future confirmatory sampling needs should be considered once the final design of the restoration area is complete NOTEWORTHY DATA COLLECTION/EVALUATION FINDINGS
The presence, condition and numbers of types of biological habitat (fish, macros, etc.) were evaluated to determine the quality of existing conditions.
Evaluation/Analysis Findings: . All three sampling sites near Penn 7 had low quality biological habitat for Lake Erie lacustuary criteria. . Results fit with the highly modified shoreline habitat of the lower Maumee River and are consistent with historical findings. . Any effort to improve shoreline habitat should result in improved biological quality scores and eventually an increased level of lacustuary criteria. FEASIBILITY DETERMINATION
Restoration of wetlands at and near Penn 7 will create ideal fish habitat and will improve wildlife habitat conditions . Especially ideal in this location (traditionally neglected Riverine Connectivity sub-region) identified as a priority area by the Maumee AOC Advisory Committee
PROJECTED RESTORATION BENEFITS
Restoration should improve conditions related to BUIs 3 and 14
USGS scientists believe that this project will support an extraordinary number of fish per unit area . Over 40 species of Lake Erie fish are anticipated to use restored wetlands for food, spawning & nurseries . Penn 7 is expected to provide critical habitat for: • Juveniles of river spawning and migratory fish, which presently lack delta nursery habitat • Other fish, reptiles, amphibians, and mammals • Resident and migratory birds » Important stopover habitat » Important food source with expected high fish density and proliferation of native aquatic vegetation PENN 7 NEXT STEPS
The City of Toledo hopes to secure funding for the next project phases: . Final engineering and design . Public involvement . Permitting . Bid specification preparation . Contractor procurement . Construction/restoration CITY OF OREGON’S FACILITY 3 BACKBAY WETLAND RESTORATION PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY BACKGROUND TOLEDO SHIPPING CHANNEL ISSUES & OPPORTUNTIES
For illustrative purposes
This figure reflects four options of a combination alternative that was the preferred approach identified in the Toledo Harbor Sediment Management and Use Plan (December 2012). TOLEDO – MAUMEE BAY AREA OHIO HEALTHY LAKE ERIE FUND WETLAND RESTORATION EVALUATION PROJECTS
Cullen Park Wetland
Oregon/Facility 3 Wetland City of Toledo
City of Oregon
* Early drawing prepared by ODNR in 2016 CITY OF OREGON’S WATERFRONT RESOURCES OPPORTUNITIES EVALUATION - PRELIMINARY CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS
* Preliminary Concept prepared by Hull in fall 2016 EVOLUTION OF HEALTHY LAKE ERIE FUND ALLOCATIONS TO THE CITY OF OREGON
FY2015-2016 State of Ohio capital budget bill provided $10 million for the Ohio Healthy Lake Erie Fund . $7,350,000 awarded to the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority (TLCPA) . Focused on alternatives to the practice of open lake disposal of dredged materials • TLCPA-ODNR Agreement signed October 24, 2014 • Project period end date: June 30, 2017 • Original Allocations: » Demonstration Agricultural Field Improvement Project ($3M) • Edge of Field Filter System Project ($300,000) • Blended Soil Production Facility ($550,000) » Long Term Pumpout Area and Shoreline Protection Planning Projects ($3.5M)
Subgrants were later issued by TLCPA
TLCPA subgrant with City of Oregon established in December 2016 for up to $400,000 HULL TEAM
City of Oregon hired Hull’ Project Team to complete activities, and work the began in early 2017. CITY OF OREGON PHILIP HICKS, PE | PROJECT MANAGER | HULL
JENNY CARTER-CORNELL, APR JOHN HULL, PE, BCEE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT TECHNICAL ADVISOR
SITE CHARACTERIZATION MODELING PRELIMINARY DESIGN SUBCONTRACTORS
KRISTIN JENKINS, MS, CE MARK BONIFAS, PE, ECOLOGICAL RECREATIONAL AND CH2M LEED AP CONSTRUCTABILITY KELLY BENSMAN CONSIDERATIONS DAN STARKEY CONSIDERATIONS GARCIA SURVEYORS
JORDAN ROFKAR, PhD HARTMAN: DOYLE HUGH CROWELL, PWS JOHN HULL, PE, BCEE G&P: GRAY & PAPE HARTMAN HUGH CROWELL, PWS BRAD FALKINBURG, PWS PHILIP HICKS, PE HARTMAN: HARTMAN
ENGINEERING BRAD FALKINBURG, PWS KRISTIN JENKINS, MS, CE TRENT HATHAWAY, PE
MBI: MIDWEST BIODIVERSITY SHAWN McGEE, PE JORDAN ROFKAR, PhD SHAWN McGEE, PE INSTITUTE G&P: MICHAEL TUTTLE, TNC: MARK BONIFAS, PE, LEED AP PH.D. PACE ANALYTICAL MATTHEW KOVACH, MS CONNER SMITH MBI: LON HERSHA STOCK DRILLING AMY BRENNEN, MS DENNY GARVIN MBI: MARTIN KNAPP, MS STONE ENVIRONMENTAL ALEXIS SAKAS CH2M: GEORGE HICKS, PE TNC: MATTHEW KOVACH TNC: THE NATURE CONSERVANCY GARCIA SURVEYORS
STOCK DRILLING
PACE ANALYTICAL
OHIO HEALTHY LAKE ERIE FUND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY OBJECTIVES
To characterize the back bay area by compiling existing relevant information and collecting the necessary spatial, physical, chemical, and biological data that is of sufficient quantity and quality.
Determine the feasibility of restoring emergent coastal/floodplain wetlands near Facility 3 or within the Maumee Bay area.
Prepare preliminary design components to support the feasibility and potential final design and construction of a wetland restoration project near Facility 3. GENERAL STUDY AREA
Potential Restoration Area DATA COLLECTION/EVALUATION TASKS
Existing Literature Review
Soil/Sediment Characterization . Chemical . Geotechnical . Sediment Thickness Investigation
Aquatic Habitat & Community Assessment . Wetland . Ecological
Survey . Bathymetric . Topographic
Hydrologic & Hydraulic (H&H) Modeling
Preliminary Design & Feasibility Determination
Public Involvement NEARBY ATTRIBUTES FOR CONSIDERATION SOIL/SEDIMENT CHARACTERIZATION CHEMICAL SAMPLING SOIL/SEDIMENT CHARACTERIZATION GEOTECHNICAL SAMPLING AQUATIC HABITAT & COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT AQUATIC HABITAT & COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT (CONT.)
Existing Literature Review . Identify sources of wetland, fish, and macroinvertebrate data previously collected in the vicinity of the project area
Aquatic Habitat & Community Assessment . Wetland survey – Spring 2017 . Map location, extent, and community composition of any fringing or submerged wetlands within the vicinity of the site . Assess quality and Ohio Antidegradation Category of all wetlands . Fish community – Late Summer 2017 . Complete two passes of electrofishing at three locations in the project area . Calculate baseline Ohio Lacustuary QHEI, MIwb, and Lacustuary-IBI . Macroinvertebrate sampling – Late Summer 2017 . Quantitative macroinvertebrate sampling based on placement and retrieval of Hester- Dendy samplers in the project area . Calculate a baseline Lacustuary-ICI SURVEY HYDROLOGIC & HYDRAULIC (H&H) MODELING H&H MODELING (CONT.)
Scenario 1 - Existing Conditions (Flows to the Back Bay Area) . Focus on flows and sediment loading from existing studies . Existing sediment load from Maumee River . Affects from open-lake placement of dredged materials . Driftmeyer Ditch inflow . Power Plant non-contact cooling water . WWTP discharge
Scenario 2 – Potential Future Condition (no Power Plant flows) . Considers discontinuation of flow from the Power Plant and all other existing conditions remain H&H MODELING (CONT.)
Scenario 3 – Implementation of a Wetland Restoration near Facility 3 (no other changes to existing conditions) . Determine how the restoration area will affect sediment loading in the back bay area from the following sources: . Maumee River . Dredging Operations . Power Plant Discharge . Driftmeyer Ditch . WWTP Discharge H&H MODELING (CONT.)
Scenario 4 – Implementation of a Wetland Restoration without Power Plant flow
Scenario 5 – Implementation of a Wetland Restoration without Power Plant flow and creation of flow from a new channel
Source: Toledo Airport Speed: m/s Occurrence: % PRELIMINARY DESIGN & FEASIBILITY DETERMINATION
The preliminary design will incorporate viable Lake Erie coastal wetland management practices; design principles of functional wetlands to create a restored site with diverse native flora and minimum invasive species; and engineering considerations including: . Results of study area evaluation . Resilience to fluctuating water levels . Recreational amenities . Aesthetically suitable landscape . Native plant communities (aquatic and terrestrial) . Effects of design on surrounding bay area PROJECTED RESTORATION BENEFITS
Restoration should provide: . Varied aquatic and terrestrial habitats complementary to the region; . Nursery area for juvenile migratory fish as well as ideal habitat for many other aquatic, and upland avian species; . Improved access for hiking, fishing, birding, and paddling; and . Other potential improvements to soften the existing shoreline. POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS
Based on the results of the study, and feedback from the community, the next project phases may include: . Final engineering and design . Permitting . Logistics and coordination for incorporation of dredged material . Restoration implementation OPEN DISCUSSION Phil Hicks, P.E. Cassie D. Lovall Project Manager Great Lakes Habitat Restoration Hull & Associates, Inc. Specialist; ERT Contractor 219 S. Erie Street NOAA Restoration Center Toledo, Ohio 43604 National Marine Fisheries Service (419) 385-2018 (734) 741-2339 [email protected] [email protected]