View
6
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE1
Feasibility study by Ben C. Gerwick, Inc.
New OrleansEast Land Bridge StudyLPV 111 to Chef Menteur, Chef Menteur to Rigolets
Presentation to the SLFPA-Eby Dale E. Berner, PhD PEand Jean O. Toilliez, PhD, PE
› Existing Studies
› Published research and body of results available
› Background information and key vulnerable locations
› Met ocean assessment and coastal state of the art
› Plan formulation
› Definition of goals, constraints, performance criteria and screening
› Preliminary levee design parameters
› Rationale for numerical model tests
› Hydrodynamic model test results
› Definition of test cases, goals of the modeling efforts
› Proposed plan and analysis
› Proposition for immediate implementation and concept design, draft cost analysis
› Conclusions and recommendations
› Action plan, recommendations for immediate implementations and future efforts
Outline
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE2
East Land Bridge feasibility study
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE3
East Land Bridge feasibility study
Chapter 2Existing studies
› Louisiana Draft Master Plan (2007 and 2012)
› General framework; use it to define objectives and constraints for plan formulation
› UNO Report on Hydrodynamic Modeling of the Tidal Prism in the Pontchartrain Basin
› Optimal pass opening widths study using FVCOM model
› Recommend wide openings at both passes to minimize disruption on tidal hydrodynamics (tidal prism and hydro-period)
› Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration (LACPR) Final Technical Report
› Very large database available directly applicable to current study, with information on:
› Storm surge
› Present day/future condition hazard
› Future projects
› Large collection of case studies directly connected to the East Land Bridge
› Major basis for future work; this study to draw on these results
› Framework for Environmental Assessment of Alternative Flood Control Structures on Chef Menteur and Rigolets Passes
› Rigorous assessment of pass impact on ecosystem; framework for future installations
› NRC Review of the LACPR Technical Report
› Others: see report for complete list of references
Background References
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE4
Existing studies
ELB as Critical Feature and Location for Future Flood Protection System
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE5
› Land bridges
› "These features are critical contributors to the long-term sustainability of a comprehensive risk reduction system for coastal communities. The coastal landscape, and the restoration and maintenance of that landscape, are important considerations in a comprehensive system for risk reduction"
› ELB as Strategic Location for Flood Defense System
› Several alignment directly on ELB path
› CPRA (2007) states:
› "levees, or some other form of flood control structure, are recommended for high risk areas that must be protected in order to avoid severe consequences for the state and nation"
LACPR Technical Report // CPRA
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE6
› In LACPR Technical Report
› Two solutions were envisaged for the partial or complete hydraulic closure of Lake Pontchartrain.
› Both solutions dismissed based on cursory review of engineering feasibility issues
› This report to investigate this matter in greater depth and scope
› Barriers and levees considered along US 90 alignment in LACPR against various design storm surge cases
› Use this information when devising additional cases to evaluate
Levee at ELB – Overtopping vs. Non-overtopping and Consequences
LACPR Technical Report
Hurricane storm surge scenario
Full barrier elevation[ft-NAVD88 2004.65]
Weir barrier [ft-NAVD88 2004.65]
100-YRP 25 12.5
400-YRP 32 12.5
1000-YRP 36 12.5
Added value: design basis for flood control system to be investigated in this study
Present Day and Estimated Future Condition Storm Surge Hazard at ELB
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE7
› In LACPR Technical Report
› Include high estimates for future sea-level rise conditions
› Estimates provide a good reference for the existing flood risk in the South Lake Pontchartrain region, in the absence of a flood control system
› Return periods: 100, 400 and 1000-YRP
› Double check with most recently (1984) FEMA FIRM stating 18ft-NGVD29 storm surge elevation
LACPR Technical Report // FEMA
Return period Present conditions (base case) [ft]
Future conditions [ft]
100-YRP 14.6 17.9
400-YRP 17.8 21.5
1000-YRP 19.4 23.8
Added value: design basis for flood control system to be investigated in this study
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE8
› Alternative EA
› Full closure at US-90 with presence of closed flood control structures at the Chef Menteur and Rigolets passes. The levee is non-overtopping, with a design crest elevation of 27ft. This option is the most effective at reducing storm surge near Slidell.
› Alternative EB
› Same as EA but with an overtopping levee, with top crest elevation of 12.5ft. Again, the two passes at ELB Are in a closed position.
› Alternative EC
› This alternative is identical to EB, however in this case the two passes are in an open position (i.e. no flood control structures).
Structures at ELB: Existing ResultsLACPR Technical Report
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE9
Effect of Structures: Value of High-Crested Levee System
LACPR Technical Report
Alt. EA Alt. EB
Alt. EC
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE10
Effect of Alternatives on MEOW and MWLD at Key Locations at and Near ELB
LACPR Technical Report
MEOW (left) and MWLD (right) bar charts show the impact of hard overtopping and non-overtopping structures at different sites near the ELB for various alternatives. The massively non-overtopping flood control structure (Alt. EA)
diverts some amount of storm surge toward neighboring areas, in exchange for a large reduction in storm surge near Slidell, LA.
Undeniable value of high-crested levee system to reduce storm surgeMust balance hydraulic burden created by that system!
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE11
East Land Bridge feasibility study
Chapter 3Background information
Timeline for study: 2060
NOAA DEM
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE12
Critical location: direct line of defense against storm surge
Regional influence: St. Tammany, Orleans, St. Bernard parishes and State of Mississippi
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE13
Federal Levee Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity (LPV) 111 to Rigolets Pass. As delineated in the project, the area of
considered here covers approximately 40 square miles.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE14
Projections 20-YRP [ft] 50-YRP [ft] 100-YRP [ft] 500-YRP [ft]
Maximum water level
10 11.6 12.715.4
Minimum water level
-1.8 -2.0 -2.1-2.3
Wind speed 25-YRP [mph] 50-YRP [mph] 100-YRP [mph] 500-YRP [mph]
Bay Waveland, MS 74 77 79 82
Shell Beach, LA 82 88 94 107
WIS Station Water depth Significant wave height
Peak Period
73145 15 m 6.5 m (21 ft) 12.50 s
73143 20 m 7.3 m (24 ft) 12.50 s
73142 20 m 8.0 m (26 ft) 12.50 s
73141 21 m 8.8 m (29 ft) 12.50 s
Large waves near ChandeleurIslands capable of entering into Lake Borgne and vicinity
Estimated wind speeds: exposed location
Subject to frequent, severe floodingSource: Shell Beach, LA
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE15
Local wave climateLACPR Technical Report
STWAVE maximum wave height spatial distribution for 150 storms evaluated for the 2007 (current) conditions near the ELB, per (USACE 2009)
6-8 ft significant wave height expected near ELB
Degraded Chandeleur Islands still provide significant reduction in wave height (breaking/friction)
Evidence of value of marhsland in wave attenuation
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE16
Sea-level RiseLACPR Technical Report // IPCC // State guidance (Calif.) // Vermeer and Rahmstorf
Coastal feature SLR by 2060 (confidence level)
Low-lying shoreline protection where primary purpose is to slow down erosion/shoreline retreat where failure would be local and limited in severity.
0.47m or 1.55ft(calculated from the mid-range VR, akin to a 50% confidence level)
Critical feature (e.g. levee or floodwall) destined to protect public and private properties and where failure would be catastrophic.
0.7m or 2.3ft(upper limit of VR results, akin to a 90% confidence level)
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE17
Impact of Static Relative Sea Level Rise on ELB
The majority of the ELB terrain, as delineated in this study, lies between 0 and 1ft.
A rise in the mean sea level would have significant consequences on the ELB
A relative area analysis reveals that only 13.7% of the ELB lies above 3ft
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE18
Residual dry land at ELB assuming a +1ft RSLR
Residual dry land at ELB assuming a +3ft RSLR
Note US 90 and CSX railroad as assets
RSLR includes SLR and subsidence
› A vulnerable location
› Large waves
› Low-lying land, subject to frequent flooding (temporary) and inundation (permanent) even relatively small permanent variations in the relative MSL.
› Combined action of waves in conjunction with an appreciable rise in sea level could further accelerate marshland degradation and coastline recess.
› Establish relevant objectives
› If global accelerating trends in SLR continue complete disappearance of the ELB becomes a plausible scenario.
› Mitigation and resiliency plan to strike a balance between shoreline preservation and flood risk reduction
› Leverage pre-existing assets
› Here, it is the well-consolidated railroad that traces across the ELB and along GIWW, standing at over 6ft (1.83m) on average
SummaryMet-ocean Assessment and Relative Sea-level Rise
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE19
Statistical analyses // Buoy data // NOAA-NGDC
Historical and Projected Shoreline Change
› Potential loss of an additional 5,200 square miles (13,468 square kilometers) of Louisiana coastal area by 2100 assuming a 3-ft (0.9-m) RSLR over that period.
› Non-conservative estimate of RSLR
› Historical loss of approximately 2,400 square miles of Louisiana coastal lands since that time
› Reference: Blum, Michael D., and Harry H. Roberts. 2009. “Drowning of the Mississippi Delta Due to Insufficient Sediment Supply and Global Sea-level Rise.” Nature Geoscience 2 (7) (June): 488–491. doi:10.1038/ngeo553.
Blum and Roberts
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 201220 EAST LAND BRIDGE
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE21
Photographic EvidenceCoastal degradation
Location Observed changes
Petites Coquilles Visible signs of shoreline erosion on the South side of US-90
East of Unknown Pass
New interior water bodies have replaced elevated vegetative cover.
Alligator Bend, interior area
Larger water bodies in lieu of vegetative cover.
Comparison of ELB aerial photographs, spanning approximately 30 years (1980-2011). Note that useful comparative visual data covering the West end of the ELB is not available. Source: Google Earth compiled from USGS and NOAA data.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE22
Shoreline Movement RatePenland et al.
Location of shore-normal transects for Lake Borgne. From (Penland et al. 2002)
Measured trends in shoreline rates for transects 27-38, as per . Bars indicate historical trends, as recorded between 1850 to 1995. Curves represent more recent trends.
Reference: Penland, S., A. Beall, D. Britsch, and S.J. Williams. 2002. Environmental Atlas of the Lake Pontchartrain Basin. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Geological Survey. http://coastal.er.usgs.gov/pontchartrain/.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE23
› Data provided by USGS reveals that at the ELB, the historical average shoreline movement rate is 5.7ft/year, with accelerating trends recorded in more recent epochs
› Between 1930 and 1995, the rate is approximately 9.4ft/year
› Slows down to 7.2ft/year when measured between 1960 to 1995: restoration projects
› While no data exists for the region of the ELB located at the Lake Pontchartrain side
› Assume from satellite imagery that this area is less likely to undergo coastal recess rates as severe as those recorded on Lake Borgne side
› Prone to severe retreat
› Alligator Bend has the fastest recorded rate of erosion with over 12ft per year;
› Justifies the on-going shoreline protection efforts
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE24
Design Subsidence RateLACPR // USGS // Design values
Location Easting Northing Subsidence by 2060 [m (ft)]
[m] [m] Low Average High
Chef Menteur,
LA229904 3329253
0.15 (0.49)
0.35 (1.15)
0.6 (1.97)
Michoud, LA
217710 33255640.35
(1.15)0.75
(2.46)1.2 (3.94)
LocationSubsidence
rate [mm/year]
Subsidence over 50 years
[m (ft)]
Subsidence over 100
years [m (ft)]
ELB 3.0 0.15 (0.50) 0.30 (1.0)
LAPCR: 2.0 mm/year regional rate; or 0.3ft in 50 years.
USGS: 3.0 mm/year local subsidence rate; or 0.5ft in 50 years.
Design subsidence rate
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE25
Key Vulnerable Locations within the ELB Project AreaAnticipating changes and implementing solutions
Key vulnerable locations within the ELB area: orange for marsh degradation; red for observed shoreline retreat.
In general, the ELB exhibits more vulnerable spots on the Lake Borgne (surge side) region than on the Lake Pontchartrain (protected side) region, with coastal erosion visible from satellite data near the Petites Coquilles area.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE26
On-going projects
Name Completion date Purpose Location Sponsors
PO-22 Dec. 2001 Shoreline protection against wave action on marsh
Bayou Chevée area
NRCS (federal) and LACPR (state)
PO-34 Sep. 2012 (anticipated) Shoreline protection and marsh restoration
South-west bend of ELB
USACE (federal) and LACPR (state)
Nearby projects that directly affect the ELB restoration and protection efforts can be found from the Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force database.
Most notably, the Bayou Chevée Shoreline Protection (PO-22) and the Alligator Bend Marsh Restoration and Shoreline Protection (PO-34) projects are the immediate vicinity of the ELB
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE27
East Land Bridge feasibility study
Chapter 4Plan Formulation
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE28
Risk reduction and shoreline stabilizationPlan FormulationRisk framework: USACE ER 1105-2-100 (USACE 2000)
› Objective 1: To reduce flood risk at the LPB by placing a physical flood barrier against storm surge.
› Objective 2: To preserve the integrity and encourage efforts to expand and strengthen the shoreline at the ELB.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE29
› Absolute constraints
› Do not contradict or otherwise negatively interfere with Master Plan requirements and guidelines.
› Do not jeopardize existing or future flood reduction system near study area.
› Non-absolute constraints
› Further loss of existing marshes, tidal flats in the study area and reduction in the quality of existing marshes.
› Negative impact on salinity, tidal fluxes and sediment quality within the study area.
› Negative impacts to native species; reduction of total habitat value.
› Negative impacts to existing infrastructure function within the study area.
› Features that reduce or limit future ability to adapt to increased flood risk doe to changing climatic conditions in excess of those considered during the evaluation period.
ConstraintsPlan Formulation
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE30
› Completeness
› Completeness is a determination whether or not the measure includes all elements necessary to achieve the objectives of the plan. It indicates the inter-dependence of the outputs of the plan upon those of other plans.
› Effectiveness
› Weighs the ability of a given measure to achieve the planning objectives. Those that do not contribute, in an unambiguous manner, to achieving these objectives, will be dropped altogether.
› Efficiency
› Efficiency measures cost effectiveness and is expressed in estimating the net impact to be obtained from the measure. Benefits can be both monetary and non-monetary. Measure with a very high cost and little or no foreseeable benefits will not be retained; measures that provide moderate benefits but outstanding value per dollar spent will be considered.
› Acceptability
› Acceptability is all-encompassing metric that seeks to define whether the measure or plan is sound technically, environmentally, economically and socially. Unpractical or downright unfeasible plans and measures will be dropped altogether.
Planning CriteriaPlan Formulation
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE31
Multiple Lines of Defense PrincipleMeasure selection
Barrier Island
Marsh Restoration
Rock Dike
Augmented Armored Berm
Elevated and Augmented Highway
Earthen Levee, Floodwalls and Flood Gates
Limit realm of potential measures to well-defined and recognized framework
Lopez, J., and M. Davis. Framework for Environmental Assessment of Alternative Flood Control Structures on Chef Menteur and RigoletsPasses Within the Lake Pontchartrain Estuary, Southeast Louisiana. New Orleans, LA: Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation, April 2011.Lopez, J., N. Snider, C. Dufrechou, M. Hester, and P. Keddy. Comprehensive Recommendations Supporting the Use of the Multiple Lines of Defense Strategy to Sustain Coastal Louisiana 2008 Report (Version I). New Orleans, LA: Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation, 2009.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE32
Barrier Island Marsh restoration Shoreline
protection
Elevated highway Levee alignment Full closure
Summarized
net benefit for
flood reduction
Potential for regional-scale
surge reduction.
Promotion of low-energy
climate.
Increases natural
wildlife habitat.
May reduce incoming
wave energy during
storm surge
Limit coastline recess
and provides benefits
for marsh restoration
projects.
Strengthens ELB's
role as flood defense
line by maintaining
current marsh area.
Leverages US90
alignment and
provides direct
protection against
moderate storm
surge with limited
impact on local
system
Physical, high-
crested line of
defense against
moderate to severe
storm surge
Enhanced potency of
flood risk reduction
system with ability to
hydraulically lock LP
Positive
acceptability
factors
● Planning opportunity to
define new protection status
to large areas; enlargement
of natural habitats and
wildlife refuge.
Remote location and low
social impact.
● Provides long-term
benefits with low
disruption to existing
landscape.
● Expands natural
habitat and
promotes favorable
environmental
conditions.
● Opportunity to use
as building block for
replanting and
restoration efforts.
● Inert building
material.
Reduced footprint
Opportunities for
including small-scale
restoration projects
along US 90
alignment.
● Located in mostly uninhabited areas
● Ample opportunities for mitigating
ecological impact during/after construction.
● Earthen levees may be used as support
blocks for replanting/marsh revitalization
efforts.
● Recreational value: structures may be
integrated into state park or recreation
areas with bike/walk paths, beaches, etc.
●● Project brings focus to restoration and
revaluation of nearby natural landscape
Negative
acceptability
factors
● Large-scale disruption of
existing landscape.
● Limited ability to provide
direct, measurable reduction
in storm surge in densely
populated areas.
● May be overwhelmed by
change in sea-level.
●Short-term
environmental
disruption during
marsh nourishment
phase.
● Sediment for
restoration subject
to limited quantity
and availability.
● Non-native
building material
and potential
disruption to natural
habitat.
● Construction may
be conducted in
sensitive areas.
● Elevated structure
would require
upgrades to existing
infra-structures that
would affect local
ecosystem.
● Right-of-way
issues; inhabited
areas may be left
unprotected
● Large-scale project significantly alters
landscape and local ecosystem.
● Heavy pre-construction soil preparation;
construction may incur environmental
impact; mitigating measures should be
enforced.
● Hydrodynamic consequences of repeated
and/or prolonged pass closures
Measuring acceptability
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE33
Objectives Task description Costa
1 Background study Literature/Data collection $10,000
2 Hydrodynamics Grid generation, model setup, model calibration, simulations $40,000
3 Salinity Model setup, calibration and simulations $10,000
4 Flushing time Calculation of Lagrangian currents $5,000
5 Temperature Model setup, simulations $10,000
6 Dissolved oxygen Determination of dominant bio-chemical processes and
corresponding parameters, model setup and simulations$10,000
7 Nutrient supply Determination of dominant bio-chemical processes and
corresponding parameters, model setup and simulations$10,000
SUBTOTAL (estimated) $95,000
8 Geomorphology Determination of bottom sediment properties and sediment
intake, model setup and simulations$10,000
9 Other water quality
parameters
Additional modeling efforts for specific parameters $5k to 10k
TOTAL (estimated) $115,000
a: cost for estimating purposes only; may be subject to revision; cost estimates valid as of July, 2012.
Supplemental Environmental Impact StudyPost-feasibility study: establish performance of gates
Determine the fate of water quality during closures spanning from one week to a month
Estimate the time needed for the local ecosystem to recover from the closure and restore itself to pre-closure conditions after the lake is re-connected to Lake Borgne
Performance of non-traditional/composite gate structures aimed at minimizing hydrologic disruption
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE34
Measure Screening and DiscussionPerformance criteria
Measure Planning objective
addressed
Retained Screening rationale
1 2
Levee ● ● Yes Selected for next screening round
Armored berm ● Yes Selected for next screening round
Augmented
berm
● ● No This measure was eliminated from
further consideration because of
potential cost and acceptability issues.
The measure would necessarily interfere
on existing infrastructure (Alligator
Bend)
Barrier Island ● No This measure does not properly address
storm surge reduction and is incomplete:
the concept spans outside the realm of
authority of the SLFPA-E.
Elevated
highway
● No This measure leaves out a large area of
ELB vulnerable to shoreline erosion and
marshland loss. Alignment does not line
up with interests of stakeholders.
Objective 1 To reduce flood risk at the LPB by placing a physical flood barrier against storm surge.
Objective 2 To preserve the integrity and encourage efforts to expand and strengthen the
shoreline at the ELB.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE35
Discussion and Path Forward
› Armored berm
› Shoreline/foreshore protection alone is limited
› Small-scale protection measures can only limit dame sustained from minor events.
› Very potent flood risk reduction measure
› No direct answer to shoreline stabilization
› Cost and real estate constraints
› Trade-off conceded
› Higher level of flood protection at the expense of a more focused foreshore and shoreline stabilization project (FSSP).
› Trade-off is modulated favorably by the presence of on-going foreshore stabilization (Alligator Bend Marsh Restoration and Shoreline Protection)
› CLEAR assessment strongly indicates that these efforts should have tangible impact on the marshland. Consequently, the armored berm option is given a lower priority.
Plan formulation: conclusion
Priority-level Name Description
1 High-crested levee Feasibility study and conceptual design of high-crested levee
protection at ELB.
2FSSP evaluation and monitoring
program
Track success through quantifiable metrics such as a
regrowth index, organic top-layer measurements; aerial
photo and on-site collection campaign.
3Complement/augment existing
FSSP with ad-hoc measures
wherever required.
Conditioned to efficacy of high-crested levee in limiting storm
surge, augment and/or complement existing FSSP at critical
areas where shoreline stabilization is critical and participates
in improving the efficacy of the flood control system.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE36
East Land Bridge feasibility study
Chapter 6HydrodynamicModeling
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE37
Hydrodynamic Evaluation& General Objectives
ADCIRC/SWAN modeling
Objective A
•To assess the effect of subsidence and marshland within the project area and their impact on hurricane storm surge hazard;
Objective B
•To assess the effects of gates at Chef Menteur and Rigolets passes
Objective C
•To assess the impact of a new structure on the time and spatial redistribution of storm surge near the ELB.
Define case studies
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE38
Configuration Surge
elevation
[ft-NAVD88]
(future
conditions)
RSLR [ft]
(already
included in
estimates)
Wave height
(significant)
[ft]
Approximate
levee crest
height
[ft-NAVD88]
Overtopping barrier-weir considered for testing in the LACPR
(shown for reference; see Section 2.2.6)
12.5
100-YRP level 18 2.6 6 22
400-YRP level 21.5 2.6 8 26
Non-overtopping barrier considered for testing in the LACPR
(shown for reference; see Section 2.2.6)
100-YRP level 25
400-YRP level 32
Levee Design ParametersNumerical investigation: preliminary design parameters to be tested for efficacy
Project alignment for tentative levee concept (orange line). The proposed path follows a simpler alignment than a similar alignment considered in the LACPR Technical Report.
Establishment of crest elevation for levees based on storm surge elevation assessment from LACPR Technical Report. Future conditions for surge elevations are those reported for the Or-leans area, and correspond to Future Case 2, featuring a more conservative SLR projection.
Case studies to integrate a high-crested levee, with a crest elevation of 22 ft-NAVD88
Computational Setup
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE39
ADCIRC/SWAN modeling
› General
› 40 simulations
› 100- and 400-year storm surge, focused on ELB using the coupled ADCIRC and SWAN modeling systems
› All runs include 2.8 ft. RSLR
› Meshes
› Five sets of mesh structures
› 300 x 600 ft. mesh size at ELB
› Less than 300 ft. at channels and openings
› Future Slidell levee implemented
› Runs executed on super computer; no instabilities detected
› Modular value: may be tuned to support detailed environmental studies
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE40
ADCIRC/SWAN modelingStorm SelectionADCIRC/SWAN modeling
› Storms
› Select storms from recently completed FEMA FIS and LACPR studies
› Each show distinct features, including max wind speed, forward speed and minimum pressure
› Selected based on ability to replicate statistical surge level within the ELB area
› Not necessarily valid outside of that area
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE41
› BASE CASE
› FWOA-ELB-intact
› Future without Action (FWOA) scenario
› ELB remains intact and vegetated.
› Basis for comparison with most scenarios
› SCENARIO 1
› FWOA-ELB-degraded
› where the ELB has been allowed to erode and disappear.
› Estimate the role of the ELB topography and vegetation in suppressing storm surge in Lake Pontchartrain.
› SCENARIO 2
› Levee-Gate-Closed-ELB-intact
› Proposed levee across the ELB with no openings at the Chef Menteur and Rigolets passes.
› Hydraulically isolates Lake Pontchartrain from Lake Borne and the Gulf of Mexico.
› Approximate the redistribution of storm surge at nearby locations
› SCENARIO 3
› Levee-Gate-Open-ELB-intact aka "Open-pass-intact"
› Openings at the Chef Menteur and Rigolets passes.
› Estimate the change in surge response within Pontchartrain and at nearby locations including the Mississippi coast.
› SCENARIO 4
› Levee-Gate-Open-ELB-degraded aka "Open-pass-degraded"
› Open gates and anticipates a degraded ELB
› Measure the impact of coastline degradation on the storm surge time/space distribution in Lake Pontchartrain and vicinity.
Test CasesADCIRC/SWAN modeling
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE42
Degradation ScenarioSCENARIO 1 vs. BASE CASE
Coastline recess rate
Adopt “road maintained” scenario so that the highways are assumed to be maintained at current elevation (through mitigating measures)
Anticipated profile evaluation
Evaluate impact of degradation on efficacy of ELB as line of defense, with and without flood control system
Smart shift of ELB terrain along delineated area: focused assessment
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE43
ELB Degradation and Storm Surge
SCENARIO 1 vs. BASE CASE
› Test case measures impact of fate of ELB on storm surge distribution
› New water depth approx. 2.5 ft.
› Use degradation approximation as described earlier
› Results show that, regionally, the influence of the land bridge is small but measurable
› However, numerical simulations do underscore significant negative consequences for New Orleans metro area if ELB is degraded
› +2-3 ft. increase in surge for the 400-year case
› Highlight the very intertwined and interdependent nature of the system of flood protection in that area
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE44
Efficacy of gates at passes
SCENARIO 2 vs. BASE CASE
› Dramatic reduction in surge levels at Lake Pontchartrain: up to 3-5ft for 100 and 400-year level
› Hydraulic cost:
› 3-4 ft. increase in surge at IHNC
› 1-2 ft. over large expanses extending well over MS and Caernarvon
› Note: for the areas away from ELB, the responses tend to be storm dependent and do not represent 100 and 400-year surge elevations well
› Results show trade off between large reduction in flood risk for LP and hydraulic burden for LB areas, and beyond.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE45
Open-pass Flood Protection System
SCENARIO 3 vs. BASE CASE
› Limited efficacy in reducing storm surge levels, when compared to closed-gate counterpart
› 1-2 ft. reduction in storm surge elevation in Lake Pontchartrain
› Cost for adjacent areas
› 0-2 ft. increase near GIWW/IHNC floodwall complex
› Narrow foot print
› 100-year storm: No influence on the Mississippi coast
› 400-year storm: Minor to no influence on MS coast
› Best protection system with minimal impacts on the Mississippi coast
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE46
Degradation and flood protection system efficacy
SCENARIO 4 vs. SCENARIO 3
› Open gate only
› Test case shows difference between Open-gate intact and open-gate degraded
› Increase of hydraulic connectivity thus reduced surge level in front of defense line: 0.5 ft.
› Conversely increased surge level at Lake Pontchartrain: 0.5 ft.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE47
Impact of RSLRADCIRC/SWAN modeling
› Not formally evaluated but results can be inferred
› Increased storm surge level
› Reduce bottom roughness, varies bottom geometry
› For larger values, RSLR:
› Influences storm flux, rather than storm parameters
› Would contribute to more expansive flooding area
› Reduce influence of ELB as line of defense
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE48
Wave ClimateADCIRC/SWAN modeling
› Refined analysis focused on ELB
› Use SCENARIO 3 as base case for wave climate
› In general:
› Levee has minimal impact on wave climate outside of Lake Pontchartrain
› Reduces wave penetration in the lake
› Fetch-limited conditions
› Significant wave heights in front of levee
› 100-year conditions: 6 ft. on average
› 400-year conditions: 8 ft. on average
› Relatively unchanged design conditions
› Large waves present; potentially larger if ELB is further degraded
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE49
Open-pass &Current Velocities
ADCIRC/SWAN modeling
› Potentially very large currents developing due to strong hydrostatic gradient
› Recorded velocities up to 30-40 ft/s in some instances
› Will require robust scour control measures
› However
› Results to be interpreted cautiously due to inherent limitations of model (2D)
› Refined study needed
› Trade-off
› Reduced foot print
› More transparent design implies higher flux and larger current in constricted area
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE50
East Land Bridge feasibility study
Chapter 7Recommendations
Path Forward
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE51
Recommendations
› Step 1: High-crested levee without gates*
› Adaptive design for a high-crested levee at the ELB
› ELB as another line of defense and integral component of a multi-layered complex
› Provides supplemental surge reduction for already existing projects, such as PCCP
› Step 2: FSSP monitoring program.
› Track success through quantifiable metrics such as a regrowth index, organic top-layer measurements; aerial photo and on-site collection campaign.
› Focus on the on-going Alligator Bend restoration project.
› Step 3: Complement/augment existing FSSP with ad-hoc measures wherever required.
› Additional efforts conditioned to efficacy of high-crested levee in limiting storm surge
› Augment and/or complement existing FSSP at critical areas where shoreline stabilization is critical and participates in improving the efficacy of the flood control system.
› * Discussed thereafter
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE52
High-crested Levee &100-Year Level of Protection: an Adaptive Approach
STEP 1
Timeline for adaptive construction sequence, starting with the construction of a base design.
Base design
Bring protection to the 100-year level within a 20-year horizon.
A final upgrade, scheduled to be completed 30 to 50 years from present day, is aimed at bringing the level of protection to the 400-year level by means of a hard structure (I, L or T-wall or batter-pile).
100-YRP levee
400-YRP levee
Detailed assessment of settlement needed
2-3 ft. settlement over 50 years anticipated for rock wall by Geoengineering
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE53
Special Provisions for Current Velocity at Pass Openings
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE54
STEP 1
› The hydrodynamic study reveals that current velocities of on the order of 30-40 ft/s may develop at deepest sections of passes during 100- and 400-year storms
› Design basis
› Hydraulic Design Criteria HandbookUSACE. 1987. Hydraulic Design Criteria. US Army Corps of Engineers.
› USACE. 2009. Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration (LACPR) Final Technical Report. New Orleans, LA: US Army Corps of Engineers. New Orleans District Mississippi Valley Division.
› Temple, W.H. Louisiana Standard Specifications for Roads and Bridges. State of Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (LADOTD), 2006.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE55
ACU or heavy riprap
Heavy overtopping and complete submergence
Conservative design, robust structure capable of withstanding the most critical situations
› Preliminary cost estimates reveal that
› Bulk of the cost incurred from material hauling
› 100-YRP levee and 50-YRP levee similar in cost
› $1Bn approximately
› May not be able to achieve full base width of 50-YRP levee in one step
› Multiple steps necessary
› Crest heightening
› Base widening
› Power of a flexible, adaptive design
› Gate options not included in cost estimate
› Too many variables
› Must involve USACE to determine best route forward
› Environmental mitigation necessary, pending refined assessment
› Flap gates
› Adaptive crest height
› Semi-transparent structures (Jarlan-type, slits, etc.)
Cost Estimates
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE56
Recommendations
› FSSP monitoring program.
› Primary objectives
› Track the efficacy of all on-going FSSPs near the ELB through quantifiable metrics
› Special attention should be given to Alligator Bend restoration project, which covers a large expanse of the ELB shoreline and may serve as a bellwether for future FSSP implementations near the ELB.
› Learn and optimize the efficacy of tentative future projects.
› Implementation
› On-site monitoring programs
› Other agencies and institutions to collect, organize and analyze data.
FSSP Monitoring Program
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE57
STEP 2
Supplemental FSSP
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE58
› Locally mitigate shoreline retreat due to environmental pressure from storm surge and waves action
› Be capable of withstanding complete submergence, without incurring significant damage
› Mostly near passes and on Lake Borgne side
› Area near Lake St. Catherine sheltered from most damaging effects
› Additional efforts, beyond the scope of this work, may be performed to determine the value of such FSSB on factors that extend past the strict realm of flood protection
STEP 3
Concept berm
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE59
› Schematic of armored berm concept featuring a quarry run rock core, toe on both sides and a launch apron, intended to provide adaptability in the face of an evolving flood side shoreline.
› A 2.05 ft RSLR estimate was calculated from the "mid-range" scenario, as explained in Section 3.5.6, to which the design subsidence value of 0.5 ft, was added
› Expect 2-3 ft. settlement for type of structure (see Geoengineering rock wall)
STEP 3
Summary
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE60
› The ELB as a critical component of a multi-tiered flood protection system
› Comprehensive assessment of existing assets, projects and anticipated changes
› Serious platform for high-grade levee system
› Promising restoration projects are anticipated to deliver
› Impact of high-crested system exists but is manageable
› Several ways to mitigate
› Recommended immediate action
› No-gate levee, adaptive steps leading to 100-YRP level of protection within 20-30 years
› FSSP monitoring program
Conclusion
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE61
OpeningsConclusion
› Examine a combination of floodgate/flood-barrier
› Cost efficient
› Compliant design: bottom-hinged gate leaves could be designed to be overtopped as a variable crest height gate in order to limit the effect of increasing storm surge
› Minimize disruption of the existing tidal prism passing through the Rigolets.
› Evaluate usefulness of gate at Chef Menteur
› If warranted by navigational and environmental needs.
› Rigolets are #1-priority pass
› Refine the design of the recommended earthen levee
› Interface with the possible new surge gates/barriers across The Rigolets and Chef Menteur.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2012
EAST LAND BRIDGE62
Recommended