PowerPoint Presentation
Glassy Creek Restoration ProjectUrban Restoration ProjectsCity of Charlotte- Danee McGee, P.E., C.F.M.Wildlands Engineering- Aaron Earley, P.E., C.F.M.
Program Goals: Past, Present and FutureWhy did Charlotte Storm Water Services start implementing these projects in FY 2000?Clean Water Act: Physical and Biological GoalsCreate Insect HabitatCreate Fish HabitatAddress Severe Channel Erosion, Slope Failure, Undercut, &Turbidity
All Charlotte streams are designated as impaired by Clean Water Act Standards
Urban runoff is the stated cause, and conditions must improve
Existing impervious contributes to existing impairment
Program Goals: Past, Present and Future
Stopping Future Water Quality Costs and Problems by being Proactive rather than Reactive:
No Regulatory Deadline but we must have programs in place, know the costs and know what works for our region
Program Goals: Past, Present and Future
Things we have learned after 15 years of implementationThen
Habitat :Initial channel work was 2:1 with rip rap and straightened bends
Costs and Benefits:All opportunities for restoration were given consideration
Now
Habitat :Stream Stuctures and Channel Cover Providing for Aquatic Life (Insects and Fish); Meanders to adjust flow and velocity
Costs to Benefits:Long un-interrupted channels with few property owners (easements), few sewer lines, utilities and fences
Program Goals: Past, Present and FutureThe Watershed Approach?Looking at all projects in the Watershed and all costs associated with them.
How do we streamline our process?Design Build: Planning, Design and ConstructionMinimize Site Constraints: NCDOT, Contaminated Areas, Property Issues
Case Study:Glassy Creek Stream Restoration
Management TechniquesPrimavera- Schedule and Budget: Balanced Scorecard, Team Commitments
Tracking Progress with 360 Degree Reports and Monthly Status Meetings:Consultant Accountability, Scope Ammendment
IPDS:Initiation Documents,Project Plan, Change Controls
Construction Monitoring:Inspector Diaries, Monthly Meetings
Case Study:Glassy Creek Stream Restoration
Interagency CollaborationCharlotte Mecklenburg Schools: Reviews with CMS Architects and Property Managers; Time Constraints and Property Access for Construction
Mecklenburg County:Ownership and Easement Access
Charlotte Storm Water Services:Program Goals and Needs
Real Estate Special Provision for Charlotte Mecklenburg SchoolsParcel # 13.1 and 14.1, The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education_14 days notice before beginning improvements on property.Any construction of improvements at the school driveways must be performed during a scheduled school student closure for Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools. The improvements must be completed, the school driveway open, the street must be open to vehicular traffic during the regular school calendar.From August thru May, the contractor is permitted ingress/egress on Parcels 13.1 and 14.1,occuring on weekdays prior to 8:45 a.m. and after 4:45 p.m. Additional equipment may be mobilized on weekdays between 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. as approved by School Staff and City Represenatatives. Construction will not be allowed during the two week period for spring testing. Contractors will ensure separation of the construction area from the school buildings.The Contractor will be in regular communication with the principal about any noise, safety, or disturbance issues.The Contractor will receive, acknowledge in writing, and be responsible to abide by CMS policy regarding activities of visitors on school property. ie: Registered Sex Offenders. Contractor acknowledges that CMS policy on, Registered Sex Offenders, prohibits anyone registered or required to register as a sex offender from being present on any CMS Property for any reason, whether before, during or after school hours, or on or off of CMS property. CMS Property includes all property owned or operated by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, including school campuses and buildings, athletic fields, playgrounds, parking lots, bus stops, vehicles, school buses, activity buses and any other properties owned or controlled by CMS.
Case Study:Glassy Creek Stream Restoration
Site OverviewSite OverviewAerial (features, roads, Irwin, FEMA)DA, %IMPBank failure (R1B) Widening (R2) Downcut (R1-3) PICS
8
Case Study:Glassy Creek Stream Restoration
Site ConstraintsSite ConstraintsCMS & HillsideSewer easements and aerial crossingCulvertsDOT R/W(aerial highlighting each constraint in different color along with bullet points)
Case Study:Glassy Creek Stream Restoration
Design Challenges
Design Approachurban, flashy, hungry water (WSEL fluctuation, sediment supply bedload)Revolution Pond (design detail, rating curve, pics of weir wall, R2 vs R3 xsec)confined, steep valley (step pool channel; no meanders or riffles, PICS from Rosgen classification)
Upstream Design Bankfull Area = 29 ft2 Downstream Design Bankfull Area = 8 ft2
Case Study:Glassy Creek Stream Restoration
Design Challenges
Design Approachurban, flashy, hungry water (WSEL fluctuation, sediment supply bedload)Revolution Pond (design detail, rating curve, pics of weir wall, R2 vs R3 xsec)confined, steep valley (step pool channel; no meanders or riffles, PICS from Rosgen classification)
Rosgen A Stream TypeUrban Watershed
Case Study:Glassy Creek Stream Restoration
Construction Time
Construction Timetree save (Reach 2 multiple meetings before/during clearing with city arborist, PICS)log substitute juncus plugs, wood in channel (PICS of all three)contaminated soil (pics, 300 Tons)PICS/VIDEO of rain events (include Irwin backwater on R3)
Selective ClearingMultiple meeting with City arborist
Backwater from Irwin Creek
Case Study:Glassy Creek Stream Restoration
Construction Time
Construction Timetree save (Reach 2 multiple meetings before/during clearing with city arborist, PICS)log substitute juncus plugs, wood in channel (PICS of all three)contaminated soil (pics, 300 Tons)PICS/VIDEO of rain events (include Irwin backwater on R3)
Substituted logs for rock structuresPlanted juncus plugs with savings
Approximately 400 tonsof contaminated soil (diesel fuel spill)
Case Study:Glassy Creek Stream Restoration
Post-Construction
Case Study:Glassy Creek Stream Restoration
Design and Construction Techniques for Urban EnvironmentsLesson LearnedUrban A-channels are powerfulSelective clearing makes a big differenceAdvances in restoration science (project designed years ago)
77
85
485
16
7416
73
24
27
49
29
277
77485
_
Mecklenburg County, NC
Figure 1. Project Location MapGlassy Creek Stream Restoration Project
SSMPCharlotte, NC
Reach 3
Reach 1B
Reach 1A
Reach 2
Barr
inge
r Dr
Clanton Park
Marie G. DavisMiddle School
Revolution ParkGolf Course
Irwin Creek
S I-7
7 Hy
N I-7
7 Hy
Barringe
r Dr
Barfield Dr
Griffith St
Bank
St
Gra
ymon
t Dr
Manchester Dr
May
St
Toom
ey Av
Fairwood Av
Chicago Av
Delm
ar Ln
Foster AvTracy Dr
Baltim
ore A
v
77
0 500 1,000250Feet
2009 Aerial Photography
'
'
'
''
'
''
'
'
'
'
'
''
'
'
'' '''
'
'
'
''
'
'
'
''
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
' '
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
' '
'
'
'
'
'
''
'
'
'
'
''
'
'
''
'
'
'
'''
'''
'
'
'
'
'
'
''
'
'' '''
' '
'
'
'
'
' '
'
'
''
'
'''
'
'
'
'
'
' '
'
' '' '
'
''
''
''
'
'
''
'
'
'
'
''
'
'
'
' '
'
'
' '
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
' '
'
'
''
'
'
'
'
'
''
' '
'
'
'
'
' '
'
'
'
'
'
'
' '
'
'
'
'
' '
'
'
'
'
' '
*2009 Aerial Photography
Clanton Park
Revolutionary ParkGolf Course
Marie G DavisMiddle SchoolBa
rrin
ger D
r
S Tr
yon
St
N I-
77 H
y
S I-7
7 Hy
Clanton Rd
Griffith St
Barringe
r Dr
South
Bv
Baltim
ore Av
Fairwood Av
May
St
Bank
St
Gra
ymon
t Dr
Youngb
lood S
t
Hartford Av
Foster Av
Dewi
tt Ln
Remount Rd
Wes
ton S
t
Bowman Rd
Blairhill RdDe
xter S
t
Pelto
n St
Chicago Av
Trad
e Pa
rk C
t
Miller St
Stegall St
Tryclan Dr
Benjamin St
Toom
ey Av
Greystone R
d
Herman Av
Manch
ester
Dr
New Bern St
Hollis RdW C
ama
St
St V
arde
ll Ln
Yorkshire Dr
Norfo
lk Av
Sarah
Dr
Cla
nton
to N
I-77
Ra
Nb
Belton St
Foster Av
Wes
ton
St
Fairwood Av
0 650 1,300325Feet
Figure 2. Watershed MapGlassy Creek Stream Restoration Project
SSMPCharlotte, NC
Legend
Reach 1A
Reach 1B
Reach 2
Reach 3
'
' Stormwater System
Watershed
10' Contour