Green Techniques in an UbUrban EiE nvironment …...Presentation Agenda • NEORSD and Green...

Controlling CSO UtilizingControlling CSO Utilizing Green Techniques in an

U b E iUrban Environment

Fleet Avenue Green InfrastructureInfrastructure

Presentation Agenda

• NEORSD and Green Infrastructure RequirementsRequirements

• City of Cleveland Coordination

• Alternative Evaluation and Design Selection

• Design– Hydrology and Hydraulics– Plan and Sections– Plant and Soil Selection

Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer DistrictSewer District

• Created in 1972 by Court Order• Created in 1972 by Court Order

• Servicing all or part of 62 b itimember communities

• 1 million customers

• 90+ billion gallons wastewater treated each yeartreated each year

• Consent Decree - Project Clean Lake

Combined Sewer Area

Combined Sewer Area

• 81 square miles in combined sewer area

• 65 square miles are impervious

• 80% impervious

Consent Decree Requirements for Consent Decree Requirements for Northeast Northeast Ohio’s CSO Ohio’s CSO Volume Reductions Volume Reductions Northeast Northeast Ohio s CSO Ohio s CSO Volume Reductions Volume Reductions

9

7

8

9

6.2

ng

5

6 4.5

cal Year

me R

emaini

BG)

2

3

4

0 494

Typic

CSO Vo

lum (B

0

1

Baseline (1970s) Early 2000s Re‐Baseline (2011) Target (2036)

0.494

Appendix 3: Gray plus Green

District submitted Green Infrastructure Plan in December 2011

City of Cleveland Coordination City of Cleveland Coordination

• Complete and Green Streets Ordinance in effect as of J 2012January 2012

• Fleet Avenue Reconstruction project is the first l t d t t i th di t b complete and green street since the ordinance to be

designed and constructed for the City

Fl t A ithi t t f CSO l • Fleet Avenue was within a target area for CSO removal for NEORSD

Actively coordinated with Slavic Village Development • Actively coordinated with Slavic Village Development Corp and the City’s ward councilperson

Project Area MapProject Area Map

Project Area MapProject Area Map

GI Project Limits

City Project Limits

Green Infrastructure Green Infrastructure AlternativesAlternativesAlternativesAlternatives

We have… SAND!!

Green Infrastructure Green Infrastructure AlternativesAlternativesAlternativesAlternatives

1. Bioretention along rights-of-way2 Offl di t W t (B k B k) 2. Offloading to Waterway (Burke Brook) 3. Infiltration

Green Infrastructure Green Infrastructure AlternativesAlternatives

1. Bioretention along rights-of-way2 Offl di t W t (B k B k)

AlternativesAlternatives

2. Offloading to Waterway (Burke Brook) 3. Infiltration


1. Bioretention along rights-of-way2 Offloading to Waterway (Burke Brook)


2. Offloading to Waterway (Burke Brook)3. Infiltration

• wells, trenches, basin(s)

Green InfrastructureGreen InfrastructureSelected DesignSelected DesignSelected DesignSelected Design

Final Selection: Infiltration Basin Final Selection: Infiltration Basin Reduce Utility ConflictsAvailable Land (Vacant)Available Land (Vacant)Overall CostsCost per gallon of CSO removedNo negative effect on scheduleControls typical year event, overflows to

bi d tcombined systemCentralizing O&M

Project Costs and ScheduleProject Costs and Schedule

Total Project Costs $9 1 millionTotal Project Costs $9.1 million

GI Project Costs $1.8 million

Design Nov 2012 – Dec 2013

Construction Jul 2014 – Jul 2016

GI Basin Construction Apr 2015 – Nov 2015

Contributing Drainage AreaContributing Drainage Area

Total CatchmentA

Area to GICM F t

Imp. Area t GICM

% Imp. to GICM Remaining Area to E i t C b SArea Feature to GICM Exist Comb. Sewer

19.4 acres 15.2 acres 10.0 acres 66% 4.2 acres% Area Captured: 78% Annual CSO Reduction = 0.8 MG

Non‐Building Scenario

All‐Building Scenario

Annual Runoff: 4.7 MG 6.7 MGAnnual Stormwater 4 7 MG 6 6 MG io

nio

n

Capture: 4.7 MG 6.6 MG

TY CSO Reduction: 0.8 MG 1.1 MGNo. of TY “Overflows” to Exist. Combined Sewer: NONE 2

edu

cti

edu

cti

SO

Re

SO

Re

ng

/C

Sn

g/

CS

odel

inod

elin

Mo

Mo

ssR

atio

Rat

ion

ing

Rn

ing

R P

lan

n P

lan

n--A

FP

AFP

G

IG

I--

0.45

0.535

nn

0.35

0.4

25

30

G)(CFS)

ecti

onec

tion

0 2

0.25

0.3

15

20

ume (M

G

eak Flow

m S

ele

m S

ele

0.1

0.15

0.2

10

VolPe

Sto

rmS

torm

Storm 54 Storm 60 Storm 86 5yr 6hr (1 5yr 6hr (15 0

0.05

0

5

sig

n S

sig

n S

Storm 54 Storm 60 Storm 86 hr peak) min peak)Macro Volume 0.27 0.16 0.41 0.44 0.47Macro Peak 4.5 6.3 2.7 14.4 30.5

De

De

Green InfrastructureGreen InfrastructureControl Measure (GICM)Control Measure (GICM)Control Measure (GICM)Control Measure (GICM)

Goals• Capture of • Capture of

Typical Year rainfallrainfall

• CSO ReductionCommunity • Community Amenity

NNS

IGN

SIG

ND

ED

E

wwn

Vie

wn

Vie

wN

: P

lan

N:

Pla

nS

IGN

SIG

ND

ED

E

lan

lan

ace

Pac

e P

bsu

rfa

bsu

rfa

N:

Su

bN

: S

ub

SIG

NS

IGN

DE

DE

CM

CM

N:

GIC

N:

GIC

SIG

NS

IGN

DE

DE

DESIGN: GICM Typical Year HGLDESIGN: GICM Typical Year HGL

Raised Planter = 686.5Stone Channel = 684.5

Overflow = 688.5

• Overflow Structure ElevationPl ti El ti /Pl t S l ti /S il• Planting Elevation/Plant Selection/Soil

• Stone/Pipe Storage Volume

DESIGN: GICM Typical Year HGLDESIGN: GICM Typical Year HGL

Raised Planter = 686.5

Stone Channel = 684.5

DESIGN: Storm Pipe HGLDESIGN: Storm Pipe HGL

GICM Overflow Elevation= 688.5

DESIGN: Storm Pipe HGL DESIGN: Storm Pipe HGL (All(All--Bldg)Bldg)

GICM Overflow Elevation= 688.5

DESIGN: H/H Design SummaryDESIGN: H/H Design SummaryGI Project Cost $1.8 M

Annual Runoff: 4.7 MGAnnual Stormwater

C 4.7 MG $0.38/galCapture: 4.7 MG $0.38/gal

TY CSO Reduction: 0.8 MG $2.25/galNo. of TY “Overflows” to Exist. Combined Sewer: NONE

• GICM Capture for Typical Year Storms• 5-year Design Storm for Pipe Network• Coordination with Landscape Architecture

design for frequency of inundationdesign for frequency of inundationTotal Catchment

Area Area to GICM

FeatureImp. Area to GICM

% Imp. to GICM Remaining Area to Exist Comb. Sewer

19.4 acres 15.2 acres 10.0 acres 66% 4.2 acres% Area Captured: 78% Annual CSO Reduction = 0.8 MG

GICM Functional Design

• Creating a Neighborhood Amenity with Multiple Benefits:

• Reduction in Stormwater Runoff

b l• Improving Livability• Reducing Heat Island Effect• Providing Habitat• Cultivating Public Education

Opportunities• Increase in Groundwater

Recharge• Reduction in Carbon Dioxide

GI Control Measure Aesthetic Design• Create a lush, vibrant public space• Create a natural feeling landscape within a structured

frameworkframework• Provide community access that promotes engagement

Why Plants and Soil?• Short and Long term Infiltration• Interception and Evapotranspiration• Nutrient Removal• Decreased hydrologic flow rates can increase TSS

Sequestration• Soil Mix: 30% Sand / 20% Organic / 50% Silt & Clay/ g / y

Plant Selection and Landscape Design

Celebration Maple Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry Washington Hawthorn Knock‐Out Rose

Green Velvet Boxwood Grey Owl Juniper Karl Foerster Reed Grass Day Lilies (Various Cultivars)

Raspberry Wine Bee Balm Blue Vervain Great Blue Lobelia Iris (Various Cultivars)

QuestionsQuestions

Kim Colich, [email protected]

216 881 6600

Mike Seluga, [email protected]

216 881 6600

Christian Lynn, [email protected]

216 622 2395216‐881‐6600 216‐881‐6600 216‐622‐2395

Green Techniques in an UbUrban EiE nvironment …...Presentation Agenda • NEORSD and Green...

Documents

Transcript of Green Techniques in an UbUrban EiE nvironment …...Presentation Agenda • NEORSD and Green...