Drainage Channel Restoration Drainage Channel Restoration Construction ProjectConstruction Project
Wood Co. Engineer’s Office
Great Lakes
Protection Fund
A.D. Ward, D. Mecklenburg , R. McCall, D.J. MearsV. Bouchard, P. Richards, B. Sohngen, and L.C. Brown
Typical Two-Stage Ditch
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
Ditch Width Left to Right (ft)
Ele
vatio
n (f
t)
bench
small main channel
Two-Stage Design Method for ditches being developed by Ward and Mecklenburg
Cross Sectional Area Small Main Channel
y = 6.25x0.64
R2 = 0.60
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Drainage Area (square miles)
Cro
ss
Se
cti
on
al A
rea
(ft
2 )
Width and depth of small main channel can be estimated from drainage area (this case based on data obtained in Ohio’s Portage River Watershed by Ward, Mecklenburg, others)
Width and Depth of Small Main Channel
y = 6.8x0.3303
R2 = 0.56
y = 0.91x0.3124
R2 = 0.60
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Drainage Area (square miles)
Dim
en
sio
ns
(ft
)
width
meandepth
Factors such as amount of maintenance, depth of ditch, bed material, depth to bed rock, and other factors influence ditch
stability (data obtained by Ward, Mecklenburg, others)
Ditch Width and Stability
y = 12.9x0.2718
R2 = 0.93
y = 15.8x0.24
R2 = 0.90
0
10
20
30
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Drainage Area (square miles)
Dit
ch W
idth
(ft
)
stable
unstable
Aerial photo showing project location (Mary E. Smith farm) and cross-sections along Fast Road ditch in Wood County, Ohio.
Ohio County Ditch Law
• Chapters 6131, 6133, 6135, 6137 of the Ohio Revised Code
• Chapter 6133 specifically addresses Joint County Ditches
• ORC provides for review, feasibility, design, construction, assessments, and maintenance
Typical Design/Proposed Cross Sections
Original elevations within ditch
Excavated spoils
redred New elevations within ditch
yellow yellow New cross-sectional elevation (2-stage design)
Sequential development at station 69+00 May 2002Before construction looking upstream
Before construction looking downstream
After construction looking upstream After construction looking downstream
Estimated Project Costs SummaryMary E. Smith, Joint County Ditch Improvement
Project No. 2458
• Process, engineering costs
• Advertisement, mailings, materials, construction staking, inspection, engineering design, contingencies, and initial maintenance fund
• $24,865
• Construction costs• Excavation, tree and
debris removal, rock work, subsurface drain outlet replacement and splash apron, seeding, fertilizer, etc.
• $13, 606
Project Summary
• Total project cost = $38,471• % Process and Engineering = 65%• % Construction = 35%• Acres benefiting = 2323 ac• Appraised benefits = $299,473• B/C = 7.78• For ORC Ditch Petition Projects, benefits
must exceed costs
Design Method and Future WorkDesign Method and Future Work
• Study of other Ohio watersheds being conducted (engineering, hydrology, ecology, economics, etc.)
• Design process being refined by Ward and Mecklenburg, others
• Other demonstration sites being developed• New, multi-state project funded by USDA and
EPA initiated in 2003 (Ohio, Minnesota and Illinois)
Project Collaboration / Sponsored Funding
• The Ohio State University: Departments of Food, Agricultural, and Biological Engineering; School of Natural Resources; and Agricultural, Environmental and Developmental Economics
• Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Soil and Water Conservation
• Heidelberg College, Water Quality Laboratory• University of Findlay• Wood County Engineer’s Office• Ohio State University Extension, Ohio Agricultural
Research and Development Center, Soil and Water Conservation Districts
• Great Lakes Protection Fund