Clean Rivers                         Clean Lakes                    8th Annual Conference New Projects on the KK and Menom...
Floodplain Managers Celebrating Job Security                                               2
Cycle of Increasing Risks                       Structure to                          Control                      More   ...
Natural Floodplain FunctioningSlide Courtesy of John Mc Shane
Structural Flood               ManagementUnnaturalFloodplain
Healthy Stream Ecosystems
Stressed Stream Ecosystem
Sustainable Flood Management
Flood Management ProjectsKinnickinnic River Watershed Objectives: Reduce Flood Risk Improve Public Safety Stream Channel R...
Kinnickinnic River WatershedWas voted one of the top ten worst rivers in North America in 2007
Lost Wetlands                                Kinnickinnic River                                Year 1836                  ...
Kinnickinick River                              1930-1960• Channel photos taken  April 1960 in vicinity  of S. 6th St Brid...
March 1960 Flood EventFlooding in S. 12th St South of the KK River
Old Flood Risk Management   Improved Channel ???
Concrete Channel Encouraged Development in the              “real” Floodplain
Kinnickinnic River9th Place and ClevelandJune 7, 2008 (50 Year Flood)
KK River “100 year ”Floodplain and Floodway
Stream Channel Rehabilitation: Water Quality, Stream      Function and Community Development
Kinnickinnic River Vision
KK River 6th Bridge (1960)                            Standing on the S. 6th St Bridge,                            looking...
S. 6th St Bridge (2009)
S. 6th St Bridge (2011)View from the West side of the Bridge.
KK River 6th                        Street to I -94                          Upstream                             2010•Exi...
Concrete Channel Removal
Channel Construction Completed
Menomonee River Stream Channel Rehabilitation              Objectives:Improve Fish PassageSustain Water ResourcesPart of a...
Impacts to Flood Elevations• MCG Flood  Management Facility                        • Valley Park                          ...
Project Design• Construction Document Preparation  – Topographic Survey  – Structural Evaluations  – Plans and Specificati...
Current Conditions• Concrete Invert with  Low Flow Channel   – Steep Slope   – High Velocities   – Problems for Fish• Ston...
Project Design•   Riffle and Pool Layout     – Fish Passage Support•   WPA Wall Repairs     – Areas of Failure and        ...
Project Design• Construction Document Preparation  – Topographic Survey  – Structural Evaluations  – Plans and Specificati...
Rendering of PotentialDesign
Anticipated Results• Fish Passage• Flood Elevations• Future Segments
Underwood Creek Project     Menomonee Watershed              Objectives:Improve Fish PassageSustain Water ResourcesPart of...
Underwood Creek – Before Construction 2008
Underwood Creek – Typical Upstream (Phase 1) Segment
Rehabilitated Channel Phase I - Riffle Section
Rehabilitated Channel – Pool Section
Underwood Creek Phase I Construction - 2009
Underwood Creek Phase I Construction - 2009
Underwood Creek Phase I – Post Construction 2009                   Pool                              Riffle
Underwood Creek – Downstream (Phase 2)
43
Questions?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Clean Rivers, Clean Lake 8 -- New Projects on KK and Menomonee Rivers -- Dave Fowler

622 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Sports
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
622
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
16
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Physical habitat encompasses all the physical features and attributes that describe the home of creatures that live in a stream. This is similar to the physical shelter a house provides for humans. Healthy stream ecosystems can be identified by some particular habitat features. [VIDEO CLIP OF HEALTHY STREAM WITH OVERHANGING VEGETATION, LOGS, RIFFLES AND POOLS]First, healthy streams have a complex diversity of habitats, provided by a variety of flow and depth combinations, such as shallow and fast in rapids and slow and deep in pools. These variations in flow and depths are accentuated in meandering streams that have many bends and curves.Second, healthy streams offer cover, or hiding places, for fish and insects and also places of refuge where organisms can go during floods. Grass and shrubs along a bank, or boulders and logs in the middle of the channel make good cover. Small tributary entrants, variations in the bank line, or riparian wetlands provide refuge from high velocities and scour during floods. Third, in a healthy stream the stream bottom, or streambed, has a variety of substrate types, from rocks to gravels, with spaces between the larger rocks for food to grow and small creatures to hide [UNDERWATER VIDEO OF GRAVELS (SEE USGS BEDLOAD CORECAST).The specific habitat features in a healthy stream may vary for particular regions, depending on such things as topography, geologic setting, natural vegetation, soils, and climate. Finally, the ability of organisms to move up and down the length of a stream, called longitudinal connection, is also very important. Organisms may use different habitat settings depending on their life cycle requirements for spawning, nursery, or food sources. [SHOW VIDEO OF SALMON SPAWNING]
  • When waterhsheds become developed, several things can happen to change a stream’s physical habitat. Increases in impervious cover and addition of storm sewers cause the volume and rate of storm runoff to increase, and also change the timing of various types of streamflows. The end result of urban development tends to be streamflows that are more flashy. Flashy streamflows can degrade stream habitats by erosion and scour of streambeds and streambanks. Excessive sediment contributions from construction sites can transport large amounts of sediment into streams during storm events. Streambanks become unstable and start to fall in as the channel is enlarged. Contributions of sediment from construction sites or streambanks bury important habitat features downstream or may clog channels and cause more scour and erosion.When channels unravel from too much runoff they can also result in extensive damage to infrastructure….roads and bridges.[SHOW DIAGRAM OF CHANGES IN RUNOFF HYDROGRAPH?]
  • MMSD also provides regional flood management protection to residents in the service area.Some people question why the District does flood management projects.These pictures show homes with flood waters around them; if this water enters the basement, it will drain out through the floor drain, which is a direct connection to the MMSD system. This can overload the system causing sewer overflows.
  • Flood Risk reduced, Reduction of aquatic habitat, public safety issues from “flashy flows”
  • Current channel, housing encroaching on channel, concrete deteriorating
  • June 2008flood peak going down
  • In upcoming years Milwaukee will improve habitat conditions and fish passage in the Kinnickinnick River, the smallest but most densely populated of the three rivers that drain Milwaukee. XX miles of the Kinnickinnick are cement lined, which poses a hazard and eyesore for neighboring residents as well as severely limits use of the stream by any aquatic species. The restoration is starting from the mouth and working its way up stream. The new design channel for the Kinnickinnick has steps and hiding places so that fish and other creatures can move up and down the river corridor. The design includes a low flow channel which keeps the water deep enough for fish to swim in. The rock lined banks are stepped upward to provide some additional flood storage and allowing use by humans. All the designed features are armored with very large rocks to be able to withstand the high flows during floods.[ONSITE VIDEO CLIP –Kinnickinnik cement channel removal in progress]Interview –Tom Chapman, Dave Fowler, Eric (MMSD?) Questions for MMSD – How has MMSD changed their practices over the last couple of years in regard to storm-water management? Why have the changes been done? (mandated or voluntary?). Are there special things that have to be done for cold climates/frozen ground situations in designs? Are there specific stream restoration techniques that both mitigate stormwater effects and improve water quality and physical habitat?What has been the impact of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative on your activities?Has climate change predictions been considered in design?
  • .
  • MMSD Objectives, Diverse stakeholder groups, citizens community groups, city SEWRPC, WDNR, business groups, City of Milwaukee (planning and engineering
  • MMSD Objectives, Diverse stakeholder groups, citizens community groups, city SEWRPC, WDNR, business groups, City of Milwaukee (planning and engineering
  • Clean Rivers, Clean Lake 8 -- New Projects on KK and Menomonee Rivers -- Dave Fowler

    1. 1. Clean Rivers Clean Lakes 8th Annual Conference New Projects on the KK and Menomonee RiversDavid C. Fowler CFMAssociation of State Floodplain Managers Region VDirectorMilwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District Senior ProjectManager
    2. 2. Floodplain Managers Celebrating Job Security 2
    3. 3. Cycle of Increasing Risks Structure to Control More Floods Development Placed at RiskDevelopment at Risk Changes in the Watershed Structure Rendered Inadequate • Loss of natural functions & services • Increased runoff • Deterioration • Changing climate • Maintenance Issues 3
    4. 4. Natural Floodplain FunctioningSlide Courtesy of John Mc Shane
    5. 5. Structural Flood ManagementUnnaturalFloodplain
    6. 6. Healthy Stream Ecosystems
    7. 7. Stressed Stream Ecosystem
    8. 8. Sustainable Flood Management
    9. 9. Flood Management ProjectsKinnickinnic River Watershed Objectives: Reduce Flood Risk Improve Public Safety Stream Channel Rehabilitation Neighborhood Development
    10. 10. Kinnickinnic River WatershedWas voted one of the top ten worst rivers in North America in 2007
    11. 11. Lost Wetlands Kinnickinnic River Year 1836 Vs Year 2009 (Increased Stream Chanel Miles)Slide Courtesy of Tom Slawski
    12. 12. Kinnickinick River 1930-1960• Channel photos taken April 1960 in vicinity of S. 6th St Bridge• Channel constructed by WPA in 1930’s
    13. 13. March 1960 Flood EventFlooding in S. 12th St South of the KK River
    14. 14. Old Flood Risk Management Improved Channel ???
    15. 15. Concrete Channel Encouraged Development in the “real” Floodplain
    16. 16. Kinnickinnic River9th Place and ClevelandJune 7, 2008 (50 Year Flood)
    17. 17. KK River “100 year ”Floodplain and Floodway
    18. 18. Stream Channel Rehabilitation: Water Quality, Stream Function and Community Development
    19. 19. Kinnickinnic River Vision
    20. 20. KK River 6th Bridge (1960) Standing on the S. 6th St Bridge, looking east.Standing on the former RRTrestle, looking NW.
    21. 21. S. 6th St Bridge (2009)
    22. 22. S. 6th St Bridge (2011)View from the West side of the Bridge.
    23. 23. KK River 6th Street to I -94 Upstream 2010•Existing concrete channel•Channel bound by MMSD facilities & abandoned RR trestle
    24. 24. Concrete Channel Removal
    25. 25. Channel Construction Completed
    26. 26. Menomonee River Stream Channel Rehabilitation Objectives:Improve Fish PassageSustain Water ResourcesPart of a Sustainable Watershed Plan 26
    27. 27. Impacts to Flood Elevations• MCG Flood Management Facility • Valley Park Floodwall and Levee
    28. 28. Project Design• Construction Document Preparation – Topographic Survey – Structural Evaluations – Plans and Specifications – Plan for Contractor Operations • Construct from Upstream to Downstream • Maintenance of Normal and High Flows • Fish Passage Boulder Placement • Final Restoration
    29. 29. Current Conditions• Concrete Invert with Low Flow Channel – Steep Slope – High Velocities – Problems for Fish• Stone Walls – Significant Deterioration• Accessibility Issues
    30. 30. Project Design• Riffle and Pool Layout – Fish Passage Support• WPA Wall Repairs – Areas of Failure and in Need of General Repair• Existing Outfalls to River – Maintained During Construction• Railroad Bridge Issues – Fragile Abutments and Structure• Access During and After Construction• Modeling – HEC-RAS – Sediment Transport
    31. 31. Project Design• Construction Document Preparation – Topographic Survey – Structural Evaluations – Plans and Specifications – Plan for Contractor Operations • Construct from Upstream to Downstream • Maintenance of Normal and High Flows • Fish Passage Boulder Placement • Final Restoration
    32. 32. Rendering of PotentialDesign
    33. 33. Anticipated Results• Fish Passage• Flood Elevations• Future Segments
    34. 34. Underwood Creek Project Menomonee Watershed Objectives:Improve Fish PassageSustain Water ResourcesPart of a Sustainable Watershed Plan 34
    35. 35. Underwood Creek – Before Construction 2008
    36. 36. Underwood Creek – Typical Upstream (Phase 1) Segment
    37. 37. Rehabilitated Channel Phase I - Riffle Section
    38. 38. Rehabilitated Channel – Pool Section
    39. 39. Underwood Creek Phase I Construction - 2009
    40. 40. Underwood Creek Phase I Construction - 2009
    41. 41. Underwood Creek Phase I – Post Construction 2009 Pool Riffle
    42. 42. Underwood Creek – Downstream (Phase 2)
    43. 43. 43
    44. 44. Questions?

    ×