Ten Tips for Reducing and Preventing Floods
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
Stream Restoration, a Natural Channel Design
Stream Restoration Prep8AICI by the North Carolina Stream Restonltlon Institute and North Carolina Sea Grant INC STATE UNIVERSITY I North Carolina State University and North Carolina A&T State University commit themselves to positive action to secure equal opportunity regardless of race, color, creed, national origin, religion, sex, age or disability. In addition, the two Universities welcome all persons without regard to sexual orientation. Contents Introduction to Fluvial Processes 1 Stream Assessment and Survey Procedures 2 Rosgen Stream-Classification Systems/ Channel Assessment and Validation Procedures 3 Bankfull Verification and Gage Station Analyses 4 Priority Options for Restoring Incised Streams 5 Reference Reach Survey 6 Design Procedures 7 Structures 8 Vegetation Stabilization and Riparian-Buffer Re-establishment 9 Erosion and Sediment-Control Plan 10 Flood Studies 11 Restoration Evaluation and Monitoring 12 References and Resources 13 Appendices Preface Streams and rivers serve many purposes, including water supply, The authors would like to thank the following people for reviewing wildlife habitat, energy generation, transportation and recreation. the document: A stream is a dynamic, complex system that includes not only Micky Clemmons the active channel but also the floodplain and the vegetation Rockie English, Ph.D. along its edges. A natural stream system remains stable while Chris Estes transporting a wide range of flows and sediment produced in its Angela Jessup, P.E. watershed, maintaining a state of "dynamic equilibrium." When Joseph Mickey changes to the channel, floodplain, vegetation, flow or sediment David Penrose supply significantly affect this equilibrium, the stream may Todd St. John become unstable and start adjusting toward a new equilibrium state. -
Economic Outcomes of Urban Floodplain Restoration
ECONOMIC OUTCOMES OF URBAN FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION IMPLICATIONS FOR PUGET SOUND JUNE 2020 PREPARED BY BRANDON PARSONS American Rivers LAURA MARSHALL ECONorthwest MARK BUCKLEY ECONorthwest Lower Snoqualmie Valley near Duvall,WA, JONATHON LOOS December 9, 2015 fl ood Dartmouth College Source: King County, WA A Acknowledgments For over 40 years ECONorthwest has helped its clients make sound decisions based on rigorous economic, planning, and fi nancial analysis. For more information about ECONorthwest: www.econw.com. ECONorthwest prepared this report for American Rivers. We received substantial assistance and contributions to the report from Brandon Parsons, PLA with American Rivers, Jonathon Loos (Ph.D. Candidate, Dartmouth College), as well as Spencer Easton and Susan O’Neil with Environmental Science Associates. Other fi rms, agencies, and staff contributed to other research that this report relied on. Signifi cant input and review was provided by the steering committee members, who include: • Doug Osterman, WRIA 9 Salmon Recovery Manager • Jason Mulvihill-Kuntz, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery • Suzanna Smith, WRIA 9 Habitat Projects Coordinator Manager • Matt Goehring, WRIA 9 Planning and Technical • Weston Brinkley, Principal, Street Sounds Ecology Coordinator • Tracy Stanton, Executive Director, The Emerald Alliance We specifi cally want to acknowledge the former Chair of the WRIA 9 Management Committee and Tukwila City Council Member - Dennis Robertson for his years of service. Dennis has devoted himself to restoring the Green-Duwamish River to benefi t the salmon and people that rely on it. Dennis is a strong proponent of healthy rivers that support healthy communities and tirelessly works to improve the environment for future generations which helped inspire this project. -
Johnson Creek Restoration Project Effectiveness Monitoring
Bureau of Environmental Services • City of Portland Johnson Creek Restoration Projects Effectiveness Monitoring Reporting on data collected from 1997 through 2010 DECEMBER 2012 Dan Saltzman, Commissioner Dean Marriott, Director Dan Saltzman, Commissioner • Dean Marriott, Director Acknowledgements Implementation of the effectiveness monitoring program for restoration projects in the Johnson Creek Watershed has drawn on the expertise, support, and dedication of a number of individuals. We thank them for making this report possible. City of Portland, Environmental Services Staff Jennifer Antak, Johnson Creek Effectiveness Monitoring Program Lead Sean Bistoff Trevor Diemer Mathew Dorfman Steven Kass Theophilus Malone Chris Prescott Gregory Savage Wendy Sletten Maggie Skenderian Ali Young Supporting Organizations and Consultants Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board Salmon River Engineering ‐ Janet Corsale, PE CPESC Portland State University ‐ Denisse Fisher Contents Introduction .........................................................................................................................1 Johnson Creek Overview ...................................................................................................1 Project Effectiveness Monitoring Program....................................................................12 Overview ........................................................................................................................12 Monitoring Methods.....................................................................................................13 -
Fluvial Geomorphic Assessment of the South River Watershed, MA
Fluvial Geomorphic Assessment of the South River Watershed, MA Prepared for Franklin Regional Council of Governments Greenfield, MA South River Prepared by John Field Field Geology Services Farmington, ME February 2013 South River geomorphic assessment - February 2013 Page 2 of 108 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 6 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 8 2.0 FLUVIAL GEOMORPHIC ASSESSMENT ............................................................... 8 2.1 Reach and segment delineation ................................................................................. 9 2.2 Review of existing studies ...................................................................................... 10 2.3 Watershed characterization ..................................................................................... 11 2.4 Historical aerial photographs and topographic maps .............................................. 12 2.5 Mapping of channel features ................................................................................... 13 2.5a Mill dams and impoundment sediments ............................................................ 14 2.5b Bar deposition ................................................................................................... 15 2.5c Bank erosion, mass wasting, and bank armoring ............................................. 15 2.5c Wood -
Njcat Technology Verification
NJCAT TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION BioPod™ Biofilter with StormMix Media™ Oldcastle Precast Inc. May 2018 Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. i List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. ii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. iii 1. Description of Technology ...................................................................................................... 1 2. Laboratory TestingTes ............................................................................................................. 3 2.1 Test Setup ......................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Test Sediment ................................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Removal Efficiency Testing ............................................................................................. 8 2.4 Sediment Mass Loading Capacity Testing ....................................................................... 9 2.5 Scour Testing.................................................................................................................... 9 3. Performance Claims .............................................................................................................. -
A Geomorphic Monitoring and Adaptive Assessment Framework to Assess the Effect of Lowland Floodplain River Restoration on Channel–Floodplain Sediment Continuity
RIVER RESEARCH AND APPLICATIONS River Res. Applic. (in press) Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/rra.911 A GEOMORPHIC MONITORING AND ADAPTIVE ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK TO ASSESS THE EFFECT OF LOWLAND FLOODPLAIN RIVER RESTORATION ON CHANNEL–FLOODPLAIN SEDIMENT CONTINUITY J. L. FLORSHEIM,a* J. F. MOUNTa and C. R. CONSTANTINEb a Geology Department and Center for Integrated Watershed Science and Management, University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA b Now at Department of Geological Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA ABSTRACT The state of the science of lowland river floodplain restoration reflects the relatively new and experimental nature of large river floodplain rehabilitation efforts. Based on results of a case study of floodplain restoration at the lowland Cosumnes River, California, we present a geomorphic monitoring and adaptive assessment framework that addresses the need to inform and utilize scientific knowledge in lowland floodplain river restoration activities. Highlighting hydrogeomorphic processes that lead to habitat creation, we identify a discharge threshold for connectivity and sediment transfer from the channel to the floodplain and integrate discharge magnitude and duration to quantify a threshold to aid determination of when geomorphic monitoring is warranted. Using floodplain sand deposition volume in splay complexes as one indicator of dynamic floodplain habitat, we develop a model to aid prediction of the sand deposition volume as an assessment tool to use to analyze future monitoring data. Because geomorphic processes that form the physical structure of a habitat are dynamic, and because the most successful restoration projects accommodate this fundamental characteristic of ecosystems, monitoring designs must both identify trends and be adapted iteratively so that relevant features continue to be measured. -
Restoration Opportunities at Tributary Confluences: Critical Habitat Assessment of the Big Chico Creek/Mud Creek/Sacramento River Confluence Area
Restoration Opportunities at Tributary Confluences: Critical Habitat Assessment of the Big Chico Creek/Mud Creek/Sacramento River Confluence Area A report to: The Nature Conservancy, Sacramento River Project1 By: Eric M. Ginney2 Bidwell Environmental Institute, California State University, Chico December 2001. 1Please direct correspondence to: TNC, Sac. River Project Attn: D. Peterson 505 Main Street, Chico CA 95928 [email protected] 2Bidwell Environmental Institute CSU, Chico, Chico, CA 95929-0555 [email protected] Cover: An abstract view of the Sacramento River, looking upstream. Big Chico Creek enters from the east, in the lower portion of the image. Photograph and image manipulation by the author. Table of Contents Section I Study Purpose, Methods, and Objectives 1 Purpose 1 Methods and Objectives 2 Section II Tributary Confluences: Restoration 3 Opportunities Waiting to Happen Ecological Importance of Tributary Confluences and 3 Adjacent Floodplain Importance of Sacramento River Confluence Areas in 5 Collaborative Restoration Efforts Conservation by Design 7 Site-Specific Planning 8 Section III Critical Habitat Identification and Analysis 10 of Physical Processes Location and Description of Study Area 10 Landscape Level 10 Historic Conditions of Study Area and Changes 10 Through Time Current Conditions and Identification of Critical Habitat 16 Hydrologic Data 16 Soils 17 Hydro-geomorphic Processes 17 Site-Level Description: Singh Orchard Parcel 18 On-The-Ground Observations: Singh Parcel 19 Critical Habitat for Species of Concern -
Accotink Creek Watershed Management Plan
ACCOTINK CREEK Watershed Accotink - Mainstem 4 Watershed Management Area AC9400 - Culvert Retrofit Address: Under Queensberry Avenue, near the intersection of Flag Run Drive and Queensberry Avenue Location: Lake Accotink Park Land Owner: County - FCPA PIN: 0792 01 0001A Control Type Water Quality Drainage Area 99.86 acres Receiving Waters Flag Run Description: This project is located on the upstream side of Queensberry Avenue between Flag Run Drive and Ravenel Lane. The upstream floodplain is flat and open with possible wetland areas. This culvert retrofit would add a weir wall control structure on the upstream side of the culvert to regulate discharge of smaller, more frequent storm events and provide water quality treatment. The project is located downstream of stream restoration project AC9229 and culvert retrofit AC9401. Design of all three projects should be performed concurrently. Project Area Map: Conceptual plan showing potential project location Accotink Creek Watershed Management Plan 5-432 Project Benefits: This project has the potential to manage high frequency smaller storms with the addition of a weir wall as a control structure. The retrofit provides detention that will reduce downstream channel erosion by reducing flow rates back to pre-development conditions. The project will also help remove suspended solids through sedimentation. It is estimated that an annual total of 17,390 lbs of sediment, 126 lbs of nitrogen and 19 lbs of phosphorus would be reduced by this project. Project Design Considerations: The upstream floodplain is bordered by a commercial / industrial park and several single family homes located adjacent to the stream channel, which should be considered in the design and construction phases. -
Stormwater Facility Maintenance Manual BG02.02 March 2019
Stormwater Facility Maintenance Manual BG02.02 March 2019 Public Works Department Engineering Division 109 SW 1st Street, Suite #122 Battle Ground, WA 98604 Special thanks to: Please save paper by duplex printing. Several pages throughout this manual have been purposely left blank to facilitate duplex printing. Table of Contents INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................................. 1 CATCH BASIN .................................................................................................................................................................. 7 MANHOLE ...................................................................................................................................................................... 13 DETENTION TANKS AND VAULTS .............................................................................................................................. 15 CONTROL STRUCTURE/FLOW RESTRICTOR ........................................................................................................... 17 TRASH SCREEN ............................................................................................................................................................ 19 ENERGY DISSIPATER .................................................................................................................................................. 21 BIOFILTRATION SWALE .............................................................................................................................................. -
Wallooskee-Youngs Confluence Restoration Project
B O N N E V I L L E P O W E R A D M I N I S T R A T I O N Wallooskee-Youngs Confluence Restoration Project Draft Environmental Assessment December 2014 DOE/EA-1974 This page left intentionally blank � Contents Contents .............................................................................................................................................................. i � Tables v � Figures ............................................................................................................................................................... vi � Appendices ....................................................................................................................................................... vi � Chapter 1 ......................................................................................................................................................... 1-1 � Purpose of and Need for Action ............................................................................................................. 1-1 � 1.1 Need for Action .................................................................................................................................. 1-3 1.2 Purposes ............................................................................................................................................... 1-3 1.3 Background ......................................................................................................................................... 1-4 1.3.1 Statutory Context ............................................................................................................. -
PWTB 200-1-116 Guidance for Low Impact Development (LID)
PUBLIC WORKS TECHNICAL BULLETIN 200-1-116 10 MARCH 2012 GUIDANCE FOR LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID) SITE SELECTION AND INTEGRATION ON MILITARY LANDS Public Works Technical Bulletins are published by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC. They are intended to provide information on specific topics in areas of Facilities Engineering and Public Works. They are not intended to establish new Department of the Army policy. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 441 G Street NW Washington, DC 20314-1000 CECW-CE Public Works Technical Bulletin 10 MARCH 2012 No. 200-1-116 FACILITIES ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL GUIDANCE FOR LOW-IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID) SITE SELECTION AND INTEGRATION ON MILITARY LANDS 1. Purpose. This Public Works Technical Bulletin (PWTB) provides the following assistance to military installations. a. Guidance and information on low-impact development (LID) and sustainable stormwater infrastructure site analysis and selection on military lands. b. An overview of LID for others involved in stormwater (e.g., stormwater maintenance crews) who do not require the detailed technical information required for design and development of sustainable infrastructure (SI). c. Benefits to organizations that wish to establish and prioritize the costs and benefits within different locations on an installation for a more integrated approach to LID implementation. d. Suggestions on retrofitting existing stormwater infrastructure with SI such as LID implementation. e. All PWTBs are available electronically at the National Institute of Building Sciences’ Whole Building Design Guide webpage, which is accessible through this link: http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/browse_cat.php?o=31&c=215 A-1 PWTB 200-1-116 10 MARCH 2012 2. -
Floodplain Restoration
Prepared By: Tom Parker Geum Environmental Consulting, Inc. Topics covered: Definition of riparian and floodplain restoration Floodplain attributes as a basis for developing criteria for restoration designs Evolution of floodplain restoration design approach Floodplain restoration planning for the Upper Clark Fork River—example of design criteria Riparian and floodplain restoration – Creating conditions that will sustain natural processes and support floodplain functions The following floodplains attributes reflect how we think about natural processes and floodplain functions to support designing floodplain restoration projects Disturbance regime Hydrologic connectivity Nutrient transport and storage Substrate Topographic diversity Biological interactions Light regime Frequent, low-intensity disturbances such as livestock grazing, haying, and weed control prevent plant communities from progressing to later successional stages Initially, we were designing restoration treatments to address the existing static condition based on a modified disturbance regime Our response was to address the local symptoms of this modified disturbance regime: restore organic matter, limit weed competition and facilitate establishing native woody riparian vegetation in the floodplain no modification of topography or substrate Experimental treatments addressed soil moisture, temperature, and competition from other plants Total Survival by Species for Each Treatment (N=794) 100% 80% 60% BP CM 40% CO MO 20% 0% BP = Black plastic, woven polyethylene