Upper Des Plaines River & Tributaries, IL & WI Feasibility Study



Similar documents
Swannanoa River Flood Risk Management Study

Flood Risk Management

Flood Risk Management

Lower Raritan Watershed Management Area Stormwater & Flooding Subcommittee Strategy Worksheet LRSW-S3C1

US Army Corps of Engineers Los Angeles District. Rio Salado Oeste Salt River-Phoenix, Arizona FEASIBILITY REPORT SUMMARY

DRAFT SOUTH FORK SKYKOMISH RIVER

5.0 OVERVIEW OF FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION MEASURES

Liquid Capital. Cochran s Creek: A Case Study in Stream Mitigation Banking in Georgia

COMMUNITY CERTIFICATIONS

LEAGUE NOTES ON APPROVED COMMUNITY WATER SUPPLY PLAN

Sims Bayou Federal Flood Damage Reduction Project

US Army Corps of Engineers Authorities and Programs

Flood Plain Reclamation to Enhance Resiliency Conserving Land in Urban New Jersey

Restoration Planning and Development of a Restoration Bank

Appendix F Benefit-Cost Analysis of Flood Protection Measures

1.7.0 Floodplain Modification Criteria

Federal Triangle Stormwater Working Group Federal Triangle Floodproofing Seminar BUILDING STRONG SM

Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Capital Budget Approved by Legislature in June 2013

How the Chicago District, US Army Corps of Engineers Conducts Project Management 20 November 2013

CHAD R. GOURLEY SPECIALTY EMPLOYMENT

Tres Rios del Norte Feasibility Study

FINAL TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM AWD FLOWS THROUGH FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION AREA July 16, 2012

4.2 Buena Vista Creek Watershed

Chapter 9. Selected Watershed Initiatives in the Great Basin Region

AN INITIATIVE TO IMPROVE

Environmental Restoration - Flood Plains vs Potholes

Community Workshop 5. Overarching Goals for Machado Lake Ecosystem and Wilmington Drain Multi-Use Projects

US Army Corps of Engineers Los Angeles District. Santa Cruz River, Paseo de las Iglesias Pima County, Arizona PROJECT SUMMARY

Henry Van Offelen Natural Resource Scientist MN Center for Environmental Advocacy

Lower Crooked Creek Watershed Conservation Plan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Development of Technical Data For Long Term Flood Solutions For the Red River Basin

How To Manage Water Resources In The Yakima Basin

General Permit for Activities Promoting Waterway - Floodplain Connectivity [working title]

HCP Team Meeting. November 18, icfi.com

13. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION/ RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

RE: Docket # COE ; ZRIN 0710 ZA05 Submitted via to NWP2012@usace.army.mil and Rulemaking Portal at

King County Flood Hazard Management Plan Update Cedar/ Sammamish Rivers. Public Meeting December 5, 2012

Urban Stream Restoration Defining the Full Benefits of a Project. Warren C. High MACTEC Engineering and Consulting

2013 Water Resource Development Act (WRDA) Status Report and Update

Appendix A. Lists of Accomplishments and Project Costs. UMRWD 10 Year Plan Update. Appendix A UPPER MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED DISTRICT

Michigan Wetlands. Department of Environmental Quality

March Prepared by: Irvine Ranch Water District Sand Canyon Avenue. Irvine, CA Contact: Natalie Likens (949)

Arkansas River Corridor Vision & Master Plan

OVERVIEW MIDDLE CREEK FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT October 3, 2012 INTRODUCTION

2. BENEFIT:COST ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

Oklahoma Governor s Water Conference

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION. Lower Carmel River Floodplain Restoration and Enhancement Project

A Global View of Ecological Restoration and the Role of SER International

Post-Flood Assessment

WHAT ABOUT WREGULATIONS? CHAPTER 7. 1.

Rhode Island NRCS received approximately $2.4 million in ARRA funds to implement four floodplain easement projects.

The Basics of Chapter 105 Waterways and Wetlands Permitting in PA

3. The submittal shall include a proposed scope of work to confirm the provided project description;

Integrated Restoration Prioritization

Pajaro River Watershed Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Update Project Solicitation Form

Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago Stormwater Management Program Annual Report

Estimating Potential Reduction Flood Benefits of Restored Wetlands

Plan Groundwater Procurement, Implementation and Costs, prepared for the Brazos River Authority, July 2005.

MIDDLE CREEK, LAKE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION

Floodplain Connectivity in Restoration Design

Final Report. Dixie Creek Restoration Project. Funded by Plumas Watershed Forum

United States Army Corps of Engineers, Civil Works

BLACK/HARMONY/FAREWELL CREEK WATERSHED EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT CHAPTER 12 - STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

Public Law and Non-Structural Alternatives to Levee Repairs

Alternative (Flexible) Mitigation Options Proposed Rule - Revised

GLOSSARY OF TERMS CHAPTER 11 WORD DEFINITION SOURCE. Leopold

Managing Complexity: Implementing an Ecosystem Restoration Program*

Floodplain Development Land Use Review

South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Program

Using an All lands Framework for Conservation of Ecosystem Services

Appendix J Online Questionnaire

7.0 Stream Restoration

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Tulsa District

Everglades Restoration Progress

MITIGATION STRATEGY OVERVIEW

Briefing Paper on Lower Galveston Bay and Bayou Watersheds Lower Bay I: Armand Bayou to Moses Lake and Adjacent Bay Waters

ALTERNATIVE SOURCES OF FUNDING FOR

ROSE CREEK WATERSHED HYDROLOGIC, HYDRAULIC, SEDIMENT TRANSPORT, AND GEOMORPHIC ANALYSES TASK 1 EXISTING DATA AND INFORMATION SUMMARY REPORT BACKGROUND

The project site lies within an AE Zone and portions lie within the regulated floodway. Development of this site is subject to TCLUO, Section

The answers to some of the following questions are separated into two major categories:

Joel Tillery, P.E., CH2M HILL. SESWA 2010 Annual Conference October 7, 2010

Travel Time. Computation of travel time and time of concentration. Factors affecting time of concentration. Surface roughness

Develop hazard mitigation policies and programs designed to reduce the impact of natural and human-caused hazards on people and property.

Rocky EEP Preliminary Findings Report Summary February 2005

Hawlings River Watershed Restoration Action Plan December 2003

Series 2016A-2 (Green Bonds) Final Proceeds Allocation April 2016

Restoring Ecosystems. Ecosystem Restoration Services

Oregon. Climate Change Adaptation Framework

Toward a Resilient Denver: Preparing for Climate Change. Celia VanDerLoop Denver Environmental Health

Northern Nevada Water Planning Commission

DISCUSSION PAPER. The Economics and Politics of Green Flood Control

North Branch Chicago River Watershed-Based Plan

3.4 DRAINAGE PLAN Characteristics of Existing Drainages Master Drainage System. Section 3: Development Plan BUTTERFIELD SPECIFIC PLAN

Chapter 4. Flood Control

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SOUTH ATLANTIC ONISI ON, CORPS OF ENGINEERS ROOM 10M15, 60 FORSYTH ST, S.W. ATLANTA. GEORGlA

The Muddy River: A Century of Change

HEADWATERS CONTROL STRUCTURE MANAGEMENT POLICY AND OPERATING PROCEDURES

9.1. Adequacy of Available Data and Monitoring Efforts

Gold Ray Dam Interagency Technical Team Meeting

San Francisco Water Powe Sewer Services of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission

Transcription:

Upper Des Plaines River & Tributaries, IL & WI Feasibility Study Jeffrey Zuercher Project Manager Chicago District February 19, 2014 Study Partnership: US Army Corps of Engineers

Agenda Background Study Process Recommendations Next Steps Questions 2

Study Authorized in Water Resources Development Act of 1999, Section 419 Study initiated 2002 Cost-shared 50/50 with non-federal Sponsors: Illinois Department of Natural Resources Cook County Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago Lake County Stormwater Management Commission Kenosha County Additional study partners: Background Information Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission Forest Preserve District of Cook County Lake County Forest Preserve District U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 3

Study Purposes Flood Risk Management Reduce mainstem flood risk Reduce tributary flood risk Ecosystem Restoration Reestablish natural processes Increase biodiversity Increase connectivity Secondary Purposes Increase recreational opportunities Improve water quality 4

Identified Watershed Issues Overbank Flooding $52M Average annual flood damages across watershed 1986 & 1987 Record flooding 2004 & 2008 Major flooding in Lake & Cook respectively April 2013 Extensive damage with new record flood levels Degraded Aquatic Ecosystems Only 9% of watershed remains as natural open space Loss of native plant and animal communities Riverine system fragmented by dams and structures Recreation Inadequate available recreational opportunities Water Quality Impairments throughout watershed 5

Study Area 477 square miles WI: Racine & Kenosha Counties IL: Lake, Cook, & DuPage Counties 86 total communities Mainstem: From headwaters to Salt Creek 87 river miles Tributaries: 330 total miles of streams 15 modeled tributaries 6

Flood Risk Management Analysis Hydrology & Hydraulics Des Plaines River Mainstem Model (updated) 15 Tributary Models (new) Economics Flood Damage Assessment Model Structure Inventory >10,000 homes and businesses Road Transportation Network Model 108 potentially flooded road segments (parallel & crossings) 7

Flood Risk Management Planning Measures Reservoirs Floodwalls/Levees Road Raises/Bridge Modifications Modify Existing Infrastructure Non-Structural (Floodproofing) Evaluation Identify and Screen Sites (300) Evaluate Sites(29) Select Sites (20) 8

Ecosystem Restoration Analysis Community based habitat assessment Prairie Savanna Woodland Isolated Wetlands Floodplain Wetlands Riverine Planning Methodology Integrated multiple habitat models Evaluated Cost Effectiveness 9

Ecosystem Restoration Planning Measures Disable Drain Tiles & Unnatural Ditches Stream Re-meandering Dam Removal / Riparian Corridor Diverse Native Planting Invasive Species Control Evaluation Identify sites (713) Screen sites (131) Determine most effective alternative at each site Select most effective combination of sites (18) 10

Recreation Secondary Purposes Trails and interpretive signs where compatible Water Quality Restoration will naturalize hydrology Dam removals allow sediment to move naturally Reservoirs moderate flashy flows 11

Recommendations Purpose Ecosystem Restoration Flood Risk Management Plan Element NED/ Comp NER CAP Restoration 7 7 Dam Removals 5 5 Reservoirs 2 2 Floodwalls/Levees 4 3 1 Road Raise/Bridge Mod 1 Infrastructure Mod 1 Non-structural 13 8 Benefits Flood Risk: 19% reduction in annual overbank flood damages Ecosystem: 32% increase in watershed habitat quality 12

Overall Study Comp. Plan NED/NER Plan CAP Plan First Cost $229,541,000 $192,088,000 $7,498,000 Flood Risk Management Net Benefits $7,195,000 $3,622,000 $166,000 Benefit to Cost Ratio 2.4 1.9 1.7 Ecosystem Restoration First Cost $242,235,000 $237,172,000 $5,063,000 Habitat Quality Imp. 32% 31% 1% Total Project Total Cost $471,776,000 $429,260,000 $12,561,000 13

Recently Completed Work Site/Design comp storage for levees Update NER Plan Update Real Estate Estimates Update CSRA Finalize ATR Model Certifications Letters of Intent 14

Next Steps Submit Final Report to LRD February 24 DE s Letter Transmittal March 7 Go/No-Go CWRB March 13 Mock CWRB April 4 CWRB April 25 State and Agency Review - May 1 Chief s Report - July 15

Final Steps Transmit to OMB (Fall 2014) Transmit to Congress (Winter 2014/Spring2015) Congress authorization (WRDA??) 16

Upper Des Plaines River & Tributaries, IL & WI Feasibility Study For more information on this study: http://www.lrc.usace.army.mil (under District Projects) Submit Comments: email: UDPR&T@usace.army.mil Comment form on project website 17

Cook County

Groveland Avenue Levee, Riverside Plan: CAP Site ID: DPLV01 Length: 3,000 feet Max Height: 7 Cost: $5-$10 million 19

First Avenue Bridge Modification, River Grove Plan: Full Site ID: DPBM04 Cost:$10-$12M Max Height: 5.5 20

Lake Mary Anne Pump Station, Des Plaines Plan: Full Site ID: FPCI01 Cost:$500k-$1M 21

Fullerton Woods Reservoir Plan: NED Site ID: DPRS04 Cost:$15-20M Storage: 150 ac-ft 22

Fullerton-Grand Levee, River Grove Plan: NED/NER Site ID: DPLV04 Length: ~6,200 levee/floodwall Cost: $25-30 million Max Height: 14.5 Mitigation for induced stages required 23

Belmont Irving Park Levee, Franklin Park/Schiller Park Plan: NED/NER Site ID: DPLV05 Length: 8,500 levee/floodwall Cost: $20-25 million Max Height: 12 Mitigation for induced stages required 24

Harry Semrow Driving Range Reservoir Plan: NED Site ID: WLRS04 Cost:$20-25M Storage: 200 ac-ft 25

Plan: NED/NER Site ID: DPLV09 Length: ~11,000 levee/floodwall Cost: $35-40 million Max Height: 15.5 Mitigation for induced stages required Touhy-Miner Levee, Des Plaines 26

Cook County Non-structural Participation is voluntary Subject to verification of structure characteristics, first floor elevation, low water entry point Communities Range of Measures: Wheeling Des Plaines Rosemont River Grove Riverside Park Ridge (Full Plan) Wet Floodproofing Dry Floodproofing Elevation Buyouts Ring Levee 27

Non-Structural Measures Wet Floodproofing Dry Floodproofing Elevation Ring Levee 28

Plan: CAP Dam Removals Sites: Dam #1, Dam #2, Dempster Ave Dam, Touhy Ave Dam, and Dam #4 Cost: $500k - $1M Ecosystem Benefits 29

Beck Lake Meadow & Floodplain Forest Plan: NED/NER Site ID: C15 Acres: 1,007 Cost:$25-$30M Restore Hydrology Control Invasives Native Plantings 30

Northbrook Floodplain & Riparian Complex Plan: NED/NER Site ID:C09 Acres:811 Cost:$30-$35M Restore Hydrology Control Invasives Native Plantings Restore Geomorphology 31

Lake County 32

Lake County Non-structural Participation is voluntary Subject to verification of structure characteristics, first floor elevation, low water entry point NED/NER Plan Communities Range of Measures: Gurnee Buffalo Grove Riverwoods Libertville Wet Floodproofing Dry Floodproofing Elevation Buyouts Ring Levee 33

Non-Structural Measures Wet Floodproofing Dry Floodproofing Elevation Ring Levee 34

Gurnee Woods Riparian Wetland, Wadsworth Plan: NED/NER Site ID: L31 Acres: 698 Cost: $25-30M Restore Hydrology Control Invasives Native Plantings 35

Pollack Lake and Hasting Creek Riparian Wetlands, Antioch Plan: NED/NER Site ID: L39 Acres: 429 Cost: $10-15M Restore Hydrology Native Plantings Restore Riverine Habitat 36

Red Wing Slough and Deer Lake Wetland Complex, Antioch Plan: NED/NER Site ID: L43 Acres: 1,578 Cost: $40-45M Restore Hydrology Control Invasives Native Plantings 37

Kenosha County 38

Kenosha County Non-structural Participation is voluntary Subject to verification of structure characteristics, first floor elevation, low water entry point Full Plan Communities Range of Measures: Salem Bristol Somers Paddock Lake Wet Floodproofing Dry Floodproofing Elevation Buyouts Ring Levee 39

Non-Structural Measures Wet Floodproofing Dry Floodproofing Elevation Ring Levee 40

Dutch Gap Forested Floodplain, Plan: NED/NER Site ID: K41 Acres: 689 Cost: $25-30M Restore Hydrology Control Invasives Native Plantings Restore Riverine Habitat Pikesville 41

Plan: NED/NER Site ID:K47 Acres: 1,619 Cost: $60-70M Restore Hydrology Control Invasives Native Plantings Restore Riverine Habitat Bristol Marsh, Bristol 42

Previous USACE Study (Upper Des Plaines River, IL) Study Area: Mainstem in Illinois Single purpose: Flood Risk Management 6 projects authorized Project Levee 50 Levee 37 Big Bend Reservoir Buffalo Creek Reservoir North Fork Mill Creek Dam Status Complete Construction On Hold On Hold Eliminated Van Patten Woods Lateral Storage In Design 43

Flood Risk Management Strategy Major Sources of Flooding Overbank Within Study Authority Sewer Backup Outside Study Authority Groundwater Seepage Outside Study Authority Structural vs. Non-Structural Solutions Structural Protect multiple structures from flooding Levees / Floodwalls protect overbank flood prone areas Reservoirs alter frequency, stage, duration of floods Non-Structural Protect individual structures from flooding Wet & Dry Floodproofing Raise Structures Buyouts 44

Study Recommendations 45

Remaining Flood Risks Why are there remaining risks? Sources sewer backup, seepage Locations non-economically justified Flood events in excess of design level How can remaining risks be addressed? Flood Insurance Zoning and Building Codes Other local efforts Residual Risks always remain! 46

Identification Screening Evaluation Optimization Reservoirs 200 (70) 9 1 1 Floodwalls/Levees 23 4 4 4 Road Raises/Bridge Mods 25 3 1 1 Modify Existing 16 -- 1 1 Non-Structural 24 13 -- 13 47