Transcript Leon County Surface Water Management Activities Theresa B. Heiker, P.E. Stormwater Management Coordinator Leon County Public Works Dept.

Leon County Surface Water
Management Activities
Theresa B. Heiker, P.E.
Stormwater Management Coordinator
Leon County Public Works Dept.
County activities involve many
agencies
 Tallahassee/Leon County Planning
Department
 Leon County Growth and Environmental
Management
 Leon County Public Works Department





Parks and Recreation
Roadway Operations
Mosquito Control and Stormwater Maintenance
Solid Waste
Engineering Services
Joint City/County Planning
 Comprehensive Plan guides land use and
infrastructure
 Sector studies of the community to
determine site specific management goals
 Land use designation and management,
such as site-specific zoning and delineating
the Urban Services Area
 Greenway and sensitive land acquisition to
protect natural habitat and other features
County Growth and
Environmental Management
 Environmental permitting of development
activity to comply with local standards
 Develop ordinances for resource protection
county-wide (eg., volume control)
 Studies to establish basin-specific
stormwater treatment and habitat
protection standards (eg., Bradfordville)
 Lakes monitoring to document conditions
and identify trends
 Map environmentally sensitive features
 Enforcement of environmental ordinances
County Public Works
 Parks and
Recreation
Department
 Resource
management
 education
 Roadway Operations
 Shoulder maintenance
 Linear detention maintenance
 Vegetation control
 Mosquito Control and
Stormwater Maintenance



Stormwater facility
maintenance
Natural drainage way
monitoring and
maintenance
Licensed operators
 Engineering Services




Stormwater Program
Infrastructure design
Construction management
Development review and coordination
Stormwater Program






Utility management
NPDES compliance
TMDL coordination
Capital program development
Operations support
Emergency response and planning
Improve data supporting
modeling and analysis
 Improved watershed mapping detail with
LIDAR (LIght Detection And Ranging)
 Real-time rainfall and stream level gauge
reporting through CAFWN (Capital Area
Flood Warning Network)
 Countywide water quality and biological
sampling program
Water Quality and Habitat Sampling
for NPDES Compliance
 Monitor inflow and discharge quality for
existing treatment facilities to determine
efficiency by facility type
 Perform Stream Condition Index for three
areas in the Lake Munson system
 Quarterly trend monitoring in 12 tributaries
 Coliform characterization at 5 locations
Program enhancements
 Improve GIS and base map data
 Increase knowledge of flowway
function and rainfall distribution
 Document groundwater response to
surface flows
USGS Quadrangle - Hydrography
Leon County GIS Hydrography
Capital Area Flood Warning Network
Ú
Ê
Ú
Ê
Ú
Ê
Ú
Ê
Ú
Ê
Ú
Ê
Ú
Ê
Ú
Ê
Ú
Ê
Ú
Ê
Ú
ÚÊ
Ê
Ú
Ê
Ú
Ê
Ú
Ê
Capital Projects for
Surface Water Management
 Gum Swamp Restoration
 Public health required mosquito control
ditching of wetland
 Drained swamp was timbered and
developed
 1980’s plan evolved to “restore” Gum
Swamp, at least what remained
 Rehydration has caused tree loss
Lake Henrietta
 Baseflow up to 2-year storm (1-inch) will
be captured and treated
 High flows are directed through AND
around the treatment pond
 Natural wetlands along slough are
rehydrated to provide nutrient uptake
and peak flow storage
Lake Henrietta Restoration
Lake Henrietta and
Munson Slough North
N
W
0.5
0
0.5
E
1 Miles
S
Date
10/30/2004
6/30/2004
2/29/2004
10/30/2003
6/30/2003
2/28/2003
10/30/2002
6/30/2002
2/28/2002
10/30/2001
6/30/2001
2/28/2001
10/30/2000
6/30/2000
2/29/2000
10/30/1999
6/30/1999
2/28/1999
10/30/1998
6/30/1998
mg/L
Lake Munson Response
In Lake Total Nitrogen mg/L
4.50
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
hypereutrophic
Lake Munson Response
Total Phosphorus
1.200
1.000
In Lake Total Phosphorus mg/L
0.600
Inflow Total Phosphorus mg/L
0.400
Outflow Total Phosphorus mg/L
0.200
Date
9/4/04
9/4/03
9/4/02
9/4/01
9/4/00
9/4/99
9/4/98
9/4/97
9/4/96
9/4/95
9/4/94
9/4/93
9/4/92
0.000
9/4/91
mg/L
0.800
Habitat has value to be considered
in the cost/benefit analysis
 Large regional ponds sacrifice creeks
and wetlands
 Designing based on relative
alternative costs rather than net
improvement to habitat due to
intangible value of system
 Altered hydroperiod of streams and
receiving waters affect habitat