1. Floodplain Management and Restoration in Charlotte-Mecklenburg
Dave Canaan
Director – Water & Land Resources

2. Storm Water Management
CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG STORM WATER SERVICES
Mecklenburg County SWS
FEMA streams (> 1 sq. mi. watershed)
County areas (pipes, swales, ditches)
5 of 6 towns (pipes, swales, ditches)
City of Charlotte SWS
Open systems (creeks & swales)
Closed systems (culverts & pipes)

3. Background County Storm Water Major Streams Minor System
FEMA or mapped streams/river
Greater than 1 square mile drainage area
County wide
Minor System
Less than 1 square mile drainage area

4. Background County Storm Water Partnerships ($1.8M) City NPDES Permit
BMP projects
Towns
Investigations, design and construction

5. Background Municipalities ($35M+/-) Minor System Water Quality per CWA
Less than 1 square mile drainage area
Programs vary greatly
Water Quality per CWA

6. County Vision Priorities in Mecklenburg County: A safe community
A healthy community
A livable community
A prosperous community
A well-governed community
Not HOW
Not WHERE
But, WHY

7. Commitment at the Top
"The County Commission herein finds that the public policy of Mecklenburg County is that our surface waters --- creeks, tributaries, ponds and lakes --- are a natural resource to be protected as a source of natural beauty and recreation.
“The Little Sugar Creek watershed is one of the most severely polluted watersheds in North Carolina (NCDWQ Catawba River Basinwide Water Quality Plan pp to 4-27).”
Further, that the use of our creeks, tributaries, ponds and lakes as a stormwater disposal method shall be secondary to the preservation of creeks, tributaries, ponds and lakes.”

8. Multi-objective Floodplain Planning
BOCC Adopted Initiatives;
Floodplain Management Guidance Doc. (Dec 97)
SWIM Initiative (Dec 99)
Greenway Master Plan (1999)
Flood Mitigation Plans (2003)
All Hazards Plan (2005)

9. Charlotte-Mecklenburg
Sugar Creek
Little Sugar Creek
Hidden
Valley

10. Watersheds / Basins 330± miles of FEMA streams 32 watersheds
All water in Mecklenburg County (except Catawba River) originates in Mecklenburg County

11. Mission Floodplain Management strives to build a Livable Community by:
Reducing the potential for the loss of life and property due to flooding.
Enhancing the natural and beneficial functions of the floodplain.
Not HOW
Not WHERE
But, WHY

12. Floodplain Management Goals & Objectives
Mitigation/Restoration (Correction)
PROJECTS
PAST
FUTURE
PRESERVATION (Protection)
ORDINANCES

13. County Storm Water Services Capital Program
Three Components:
Flood Mitigation Program
Water Quality Program
Engineering Program (Stream Restoration/Repairs)

14. Floodplain Management Partners
PARTNERSHIPS

15. Floodplain Management Elements
Creek Maintenance
Rainfall / Stream Gauges
Flood Information and Notification System
Floodplain Remapping
Customer Service Requests
Stream Restoration
Flood Mitigation Planning
Floodplain Buyout Program
Not HOW
Not WHERE
But, WHY

16. Maintenance Storm Water Operations Division Blockage Removal
Encroachments / Notices of Violation
Vegetation Management
Acquired parcel maintenance

17. Floodplain Management Elements
Creek Maintenance
Rainfall / Stream Gauges
Flood Information and Notification System
Floodplain Remapping
Customer Service Requests
Stream Restoration
Flood Mitigation Planning
Floodplain Buyout Program
Not HOW
Not WHERE
But, WHY

18. Rainfall / Stream Gauges
PARTNER
United States Geologic Survey
(USGS)
Not HOW
Not WHERE
But, WHY

19. Floodplain Management Elements
Creek Maintenance
Rainfall / Stream Gauges
Flood Information and Notification System
Floodplain Remapping
Customer Service Requests
Stream Restoration
Flood Mitigation Planning
Floodplain Buyout Program
Not HOW
Not WHERE
But, WHY

20. Early Warning System
Not HOW
Not WHERE
But, WHY

21. Early Warning System
Not HOW
Not WHERE
But, WHY

22. Floodplain Management Elements
Creek Maintenance
Rainfall / Stream Gauges
Flood Information and Notification System
Floodplain Remapping
Customer Service Requests
Stream Restoration
Flood Mitigation Planning
Floodplain Buyout Program
Not HOW
Not WHERE
But, WHY

23. Re-Mapping - 1999 1975: Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM)
Community Rating System (insurance discounts) :

24. Re-Mapping

25. 3,000 - 4,000 structures in the floodplain
Re-Mapping
STUDY RESULTS
Existing Conditions
+2.0 feet
Future Conditions
+4.6 feet
3, ,000 structures in the floodplain

26. Floodplain Management Elements
Creek Maintenance
Rainfall / Stream Gauges
Flood Information and Notification System
Floodplain Remapping
Customer Service Requests
Stream Restoration
Flood Mitigation Planning
Floodplain Buyout Program
Not HOW
Not WHERE
But, WHY

27. Service Requests Flooding Erosion Blockages Property Damage
Irwin Creek at I-77

28. Floodplain Management Elements
Creek Maintenance
Rainfall / Stream Gauges
Flood Information and Notification System
Floodplain Remapping
Customer Service Requests
Stream Restoration
Flood Mitigation Planning
Floodplain Buyout Program
Not HOW
Not WHERE
But, WHY

29. History Overview 1890’s - 1920’s: Catawba River dams
Duke Energy
1910’s ’s: creek dredging, widening
drainage, irrigation, agricultural districts
1950’s: chemical deodorizers
Meck County Dept. of Environmental Protection
1960’s : riprap
engineering department
present: soil bioengineering
Storm Water Services
Perspective
Step back

30. 1890’s - 1920’s Catawba River dams - Duke Energy
Series of 11 dams/reservoirs
drinking water, hydro power, flood control, navigation
created setbacks & buffers from water bodies
swimming, fishing & recreation

31. “Dredge on Briar Creek”
1910’s ’s
US Army Corps of Engineers
Creating navigable waters of the state & U.S.
“Dredge on Briar Creek”

32. Dredge, Widen, Straighten
Agricultural Districts
better field drainage
eliminated “swamps” & “marshes”
no more groundwater recharge
“Drainage Work in Mecklenburg County”
circa 1911

33. Dredge, Widen, Straighten
Sewer Department
centralized collection & treatment, first WWTP, 1923
Old creek alignment for Little Sugar Creek
New & “improved” alignment for Little Sugar Creek

34. Dredge, Widen, Straighten
Federal Funding
North Carolina Emergency Relief Administration, 1936
$16,076.70
“Drainage of McDowell Creek”
$3,877.30
“Clearing Little Sugar Creek & tributaries”
$95,406.47
“Cleaning out Long Creek”
“Clear & ditch Toby Creek”
$2,627.70
“Briar Creek drainage”
$3,447.10

35. 1950’s “Chemical deodorizers should take of it!”
Meck County Dept. of Environmental Protection
County streams had little aquatic life, minimal vegetative cover and strong odors.
Low point in our riparian history
streams have since rebounded with fish, wildlife, vegetation
Blue heron on Briar Creek
wildlife (deer) corridors

36. 1960’s - 1995 Riprap - King of the Queen City!
Worked for just about any engineering “solution”
Fixes the stream horizontally
Environmental consequences of “flush & gush” weren’t understood
Environmental movement was in its infancy
Clean Water Act

37. Bio Engineering
Irwin Creek (1998)

38. Natural Channel Design
Hydraulic response ….. altered dimension
A narrower thalweg forms in Briar Creek TWO months after placing SIX alternating rock vanes (2000).
Briar Creek, August 12, 2000

39. Floodplain Management Elements
Creek Maintenance
Rainfall / Stream Gauges
Flood Information and Notification System
Floodplain Remapping
Customer Service Requests
Stream Restoration
Flood Mitigation Planning
Floodplain Buyout Program
Not HOW
Not WHERE
But, WHY

40. Flood Mitigation Purpose
Community Health and Safety Focus Area
Reduce Injury

41. Flood Mitigation Planning History
1997 Floodplain Management Guidance Document
1999 Adopted original Watershed Plans
2000 Initiate Mitigation (Buyout) Program
2004 Adopted updated Watershed Plans
2004 Expanded Flood Mitigation Capital Program

42. Floodplain Management Elements
Creek Maintenance
Rainfall / Stream Gauges
Flood Information and Notification System
Floodplain Remapping
Customer Service Requests
Stream Restoration
Flood Mitigation Planning
Floodplain Buyout Program
Not HOW
Not WHERE
But, WHY

43. 3,000 - 4,000 structures in the floodplain
Problem Definition
Doral Apartments
Briar Creek July 22-24, 1997
3, ,000 structures in the floodplain

44. Problem Definition
Myers Park Manor
Briar Creek July 22-24, 1997

45. Flood Mitigation Accomplishments
Years
135 buildings removed from the floodplain (90% participate)
80 acres of deeded public open space
Buyout Funding (Awarded)
$14.1M - Federal Funds
$1.7M - State Funds
$8.9M - Local Storm Water Funds
35 additional buildings & 40 acres of open space within the floodplain through efforts with Real Estate Services

46. Buyout Program Issues Voluntary = No Condemnation Fair Market Value
Prioritizing thru Mitigation Plans
Demolition vs. Relocation
Owners vs. Renters
Hazardous Materials
Vacant Land & What to Do With It

47. 1938 1951 1956 Buyout Area Little Sugar Creek Little Sugar Creek
Myers
Park
Manor
Westfield Road
Little Sugar Creek
Little Sugar Creek
Little Sugar Creek
Park
Road
Shopping
Center
Myers
Park
Manor
1951
Future Park
Road Shopping
Center (1956)
Future Myers
Park Manor
(1951)
1956
Future Park
Road Shopping
Center (1956)
Future Woodlawn Road
Brandywine Road

48. Buyout Area
1995
1997
2003

49. Buyout Area
BEFORE - July 97
AFTER
BEFORE
AFTER
High Water

50. Buyout Area Hidden Valley - Step 1 Property Acquisition (1) Fee Title
(2) Deed Restriction
(3) Voluntary
(4) No Condemnation

51. Buyout Area Hidden Valley - Step 2 Structure Demolition (1) Relocation
(2) Habitat for Humanity
(3) Fire Dept. Training
(4) SWAT Police Training

52. Buyout Area Hidden Valley - Step 3 Environmental Restoration
(2) Water-Oriented
(3) Open Space / Re-Forested
(4) Greenway / Recreational

53. Buyout Area Hidden Valley Eco-Restoration Wetland
$1± million acquisition cost
$1.2± million construction cost
$940,000 CWMTF grant
1½ sq. mile watershed
17 homes purchased & razed
greenway planned
additional vacant land purchases
additional funds from Wetlands Restoration Program

54. THANK YOU