1 / 46

Flood Bypasses As A Floodplain Management Technology

Flood Bypasses As A Floodplain Management Technology . University of California Washington – 27 January 2012 G. Mathias Kondolf University of California, Berkeley, and Clarke Scholar, Institute of Water Resources, USACE Anna Serra Llobet University of California, Berkeley.

raphael
Download Presentation

Flood Bypasses As A Floodplain Management Technology

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Flood BypassesAs AFloodplain Management Technology University of California Washington– 27 January 2012 G. Mathias Kondolf University of California, Berkeley, and Clarke Scholar, Institute of Water Resources, USACE Anna Serra Llobet University of California, Berkeley

  2. Purpose, goals of workshop • Propose a typology of flood bypasses - advantages/disadvantages - ecological benefits, land requirements • Review performance of flood bypasses on the - Mississippi River (2011) - Sacramento River • Consider when most effective, limitations/barriers to implementation • Develop guidelines for flood bypasses

  3. Agenda 9.00Flood bypasses: what do we mean? Flood bypasses: examples in China, EU & US Matt Kondolf and Anna Serra Llobet 9.15Bypassing floods on the Sacramento: history and future prospects Katie Jagt, American Rivers Discussion 10.00Ecological functions of flood bypasses Todd Strole, TNC St Louis 10.45Break 10.45 Bypasses in the 2011 Mississippi Valley floods: Lessons learned Scott Whitney, Mississippi Valley Division Discussion

  4. Agenda 11.30 Panel 1. What made the Sacramento/Mississippi bypasses effective? What are limitations/barriers to bypasses in current policy? Scott Whitney; Shana Udvardy, American Rivers; Pete Rabbon, USACE HQ, (Moderator: Scott Nicholson) 12.00 Lunch 13.00Panel2. Can we develop guidelines for when are flood bypasses applicable? Panel: Sam Riley Medlock, ASFM; Todd Strole; Paul Wagner IWR;Katie Jagt, American Rivers (Moderator: Matt Kondolf)

  5. Agenda 14.00 Small groups break out to develop guidelines, identify topics for Berkeley graduate student research 15.00 Reconvene, report 15.30 Adjourn

  6. Flood BypassesWhat do we mean? G. Mathias Kondolf University of California, Berkeley, and Clarke Scholar, Institute of Water Resources, USACE Anna Serra Llobet University of California, Berkeley

  7. Definitions – disappointing? • “A flood bypass, referred to as a floodway, is created by diversion works and topography that permits excessive amount of water in a river or stream to be directed into a depression that will convey the flood water across land which can tolerate flooding.” (Masoudian, 2009) Commentary: Definition assumes bypasses must be on low-lying land, would not encompass engineered channels. ‘Floodway’ is typically used in broader sense. Need a better definition. SOURCES: Mohsen Masoudian (2009). The topographical impact on effectiveness of flood protection measures. Kassel university press GmbH, Kassel.

  8. Definition • “The defining characteristic of a bypass is that it routes waters around a constrained reach where consequences of flooding are particularly undesirable” (John Cain) Among key variables to consider: • Frequency and duration of inundation (dry in non-flood?) • Potential ecological functions • Land use and land costs • Mechanisms for purchase or easement

  9. Room for the River (The Netherlands) • The Netherlands Population: 16,783,092 Land below sea level: 25% + 25% more subject to flooding • Room for the River Current maximum discharge capacity 15,000 m3/sec Discharge capacity on completion 16,000 m3/sec Improve the environmental quality of river areas “Living With Water” will promote communities that value and adapt to water instead of fearing it Reason The water in the rivers reached extremely high levels in 1993 and 1995. 250,000 people had to be evacuated in 1995 Budget € 2.3 billion Planning Start: 2007 Completion: 2015

  10. Room for the River (The Netherlands) Objective Room for the River will reduce high water levels in the Rhine, Meuse, Waal and Ijssel Rivers. By 2015, these rivers will be given more room at 39 locations, using a variety of strategies.

  11. Room for the River (The Netherlands) Lowering of floodplains Deepening summer bed Water storage Dike relocation Lowering groynes High-water channel Depoldering Removing obstacles Strengthening dikes Only in areas in which creating more room for the river is not an option. video SOURCES: RoomfortheRiverProject

  12. Flood Bypasses: What do we mean? Levee setback/removed Transitory water storage Flood bypass or overflow basin A high-water channel is designed to route overflow away from the river. Some water can be routed to lake beds for temporary storage. Pulling levees inland makes the flood plain wider. Some levees can be removed completely to allow once-reclaimed land to flood. SOURCES: RoomfortheRiver Project / American Rivers. Alberto Cuadra and Bonnie Berkowitz / TheWashington Post. PublishedonMay 8, 2011, 9:59 p.m.

  13. Flood Bypass vs. Reconnected Floodplain • Flood bypass (high water channel, flood overflow channel) • Conveys flood waters • Usually implication: separated from the channel • Transitory storage • On time scale of flood, water does not return to channel • Reconnected floodplain • Set back levees-floodplain conveyance adjacent to channel

  14. Flood Bypasses: What do we mean? Upstream Downstream Reservoir Off channel storage Reconnected floodplain/polder Flood bypass

  15. Flood Bypass systems Reconnected floodplain Sigma Project (Belgium) Floodplain bypass channel Yolo Bypass (CA, US) Engineered bypass channel Waal River (The Netherlands) Natural channel bypass Dijle River (Belgium) Bypass tunnel Guadalupe River (CA, US) Residence time Ecological benefit Land requirements

  16. Flood Bypass systems Reconnected floodplain Sigma Project (Belgium) Floodplain bypass channel Yolo Bypass (CA, US) Engineered bypass channel Waal River (The Netherlands) Natural channel bypass Yangtze River (China) Bypass tunnel Guadalupe River (CA, US) Residence time Ecological benefit Land requirements

  17. Flood Bypasses:some examples in China, Europe and the US Anna Serra Llobet University of California, Berkeley

  18. Flood Protection System, Yangtze River Region: Downstream Three Gorges Dam (China) River: Yangtze River Measures: Natural flood bypasses leading to off channel floodplain lakes Summary: For centuries the Chinese people have been building earthen dykes and diversion works to prevent floods in the Yangtze River. Ironically, the risk of a flood disaster has grown dangerously high.

  19. ThreeGorgesDam

  20. ‘Room for the River Waal’ Region: Nijmegen (The Netherlands) River: Waal Year: 2013-2016 Practical measures: levee setback Summary: The dike along the river Waal will be replaced 350 meters land inwards, leaving an island in the middle of the river. Source: www.floodresiliencity.eu

  21. The Danube Island Project Region:Vienna (Austria) River: Danube Year: 1972 Practical measures: flood bypass channel Summary:In 1972, an approximately 21 km-long flood bypass canal – the “New Danube” was constructed to direct the water during the floods and used the excavated material to create a flood free island –Danube Island – between the new waterway and the existing river bed. Source: www.unhabitat.org

  22. Sigma Plan Region: East Flanders (Belgium) River: Schelde Year: 1997/2005 Practical measures: reconnectedfloodplain - bypass channel Summary: The plan contains the following trends: - Heightening of the dikes - to give water more space. The creation of approximately 4000 hectare of free water space in case of a flood. Source: www.gogkbr.be/index.php?page=wat&hl=en_US

  23. Yolo bypass Region:Upstream Sacramento Delta(California, US) River: Sacramento Year: 1933 Practical measures: Floodplain bypass channel Summary: During the winter months, weirs in the levee systems release water into the floodway to avoid flooding inhabited areas of the counties.

  24. Yolo bypasslocation

  25. Guadalupe River Project Region: San José (California, US) River: Guadalupe Year: 1997-2001 Practical measures: flood bypass tunnel Summary: A key outcome of the project was to include a double box bypass culvert to help convey flood flows while avoiding and maintaining critical riparian and shaded riverine aquatic habitats.

  26. Guadalupe River Project Collaborative Key element: Underground bypass box culvert system Plan view

  27. Napa River bypass Region:Napa (California, US) River:Napa Year: 2010-2015 Practical measures: flood bypass channel Summary:Project: The $400 million Napa River/Napa Creek Flood Control Project is lowering dikes, creating floodplains and a bypass, relocating bridges and restoring 900 acres of wetlands according to “living river” principles.

  28. Bypass

  29. Flood control bypass channel Overview

  30. Flood control bypass channel High tide

  31. Flood control bypass channel Flood Source: www.napavalleyregister.com

  32. Bird’s Point-New Madrid Floodway Region: Missouri, US River: Mississippi Year: Mississippi River and Tributaries Project, 1928 Practical measures:floodplain bypass Summary: Performed well in the 2011 floods, protecting Cairo, IL.

  33. Bird’s Point-New Madrid Floodway

  34. Morganza Spillway Region: Louisiana, US River: Mississippi Year: 1930-1954 Practical measures: floodplain bypass Summary: Its purpose is to divert water from the Mississippi River during major flood events and tohelp prevent the Mississippi from changing its present course through the major cities of Baton Rouge and New Orleans.

  35. Bonnet CarréSpillway Region: St. Charles Parish (Louisiana, US) River: Mississippi Year: 1931 Practical measures: Floodplain bypass (delta distributary) Summary: Is a flood control operation in the Lower Mississippi Valley, which allows floodwaters from the Mississippi River to flow into Lake Pontchartrain and then into the Gulf of Mexico.

  36. Bypassing floods on the Sacramento: history and future prospects Katie Jagt American Rivers

  37. Ecological functions of flood bypasses Todd Strole TNC St Louis

  38. Bypasses in the 2011 Mississippi Valley floods: Lessons learned Scott Whitney Mississippi Valley Division

  39. Panel 1.What made the Sacramento/Mississippi bypasses effective? What are limitations/barriers to bypasses in current policy? Moderator: Scott Nicholson Scott Whitney; Shana Udvardy, American Rivers; Dave Wegner, Water & Power Subcommittee, House T&I Committee; Pete Rabbon, USACE HQ

  40. Panel 2.Can we develop guidelines for when are flood bypasses applicable? Taking a systems perspective, when is this technology applicable: environmental context, socio-economic context, and at what scale in the landscape? How can this technology support sustainable growth and resilience? Moderator: Matt Kondolf Sam Riley Medlock, ASFM; Todd Strole, TNC St Louis;Paul Wagner, IWR

  41. Small groups break out to develop guidelines, identify topics for Berkeley graduate student research-Reconvene, report

  42. Next meeting“Wise-Use of Floodplains: Adaptation in America and Europe”Workshop Fri-Sun 9-10 March 2012University of California, Berkeley

  43. Thank you! G. Mathias Kondolfkondolf@berkeley.edu Anna Serra Llobet annaserrallobet@berkeley.edu

More Related