200127 Commission Retreat Jacobs FINAL ocrndBlue-Green Infrastructure,
Road Elevation Strategy and
Neighborhood Project Prioritization
January 27, 2020
Commission Resilience Workshop
BI0909191410MIA
Agenda
•Task 1: Blue-Green Stormwater Infrastructure (BGSI)Concept Plan
•Task 2: Road Elevation Strategy
•Task 3: Neighborhood Project Prioritization
•Public Meeting: Community Comments / Feedback
•Questions & Discussion
2
BI0909191410MIA
Project Leadership
3
Matt Alvarez
Project Manager
years
25
Juan F. Aceituno
Deputy Project Manager/
Implementation Task Lead
years
23
Laurens van der Tak
Climate Adaptation
Advisory Panel
years
30
Jason Bird
Planning Task Lead
years
20
Joe Rozza
Blue-Green & Sustainability
years
25
Monica Diaz
Public Outreach
years
15
Task 1
Blue-Green Concept Plan
BI0909191410MIA
WHAT IS BGSI?
•Green stormwater infrastructure typically
uses vegetation and/or soils to treat and
reduce stormwater flows
•Blue stormwater infrastructure
temporarily stores and treats stormwater
•BGSI is typically designed and sized to
capture more frequent storm events
•Different from coastal strategies, such as
living shorelines, dunes, mangrove
plantings, and oyster or artificial reefs Rain Garden
5
BI0909191410MIA
WHY SHOULD WE USE BGSI?
•Stormwater benefits
–Water quality (WQ)
–Groundwater recharge
–Some detention/flood mitigation
•Community benefits
–Urban heat island mitigation
–Air quality
–Climate resiliency
–Ecosystem health/biodiversity Frost Museum of
Science
6
BI0909191410MIA
BY RECHARGING THE FRESHWATER LENS,
BGSI CAN HELP KEEP SALT WATER AT BAY
TO PROTECT OUR TREES
Source: ULI Advisory Services
Panel Report on Miami Beach,
2018 (adapted)
Freshwater
Lens
7
BI0909191410MIA
HOW WILL BGSI FIT INTO THE CITY’S FLOOD
MITIGATION STRATEGIES?
•Complements “grey” infrastructure
•Provides some detention/flood
mitigation, but alone will provide little
or no benefit for:
–“sunny day” flooding
–flooding from major rainfall
–storm surge
•Designed for storms 2 inches or less,
which is about 25% of the much larger
storms typically used for flood control
Flooding on May 16, 2019
8
BI0909191410MIA
COMMUNITY (CO-BENEFITS) OF BGSI
Source: Potential Environmental, Social, Economic, and Public Health Benefits of Green Infrastructure by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2017)
9
BI0909191410MIA
WHAT BGSI PRACTICES ARE MOST
APPLICABLE TO MIAMI BEACH?
•Permeable Pavement
•Rainwater Harvesting (Cisterns,
Rain Barrels)
•Stormwater Planters
•Subsurface Infiltration/Storage
•Tree Canopy
•Wet Ponds
•Bioretention/Bioswales/Rain Gardens
•Blue and Green Roofs
•Constructed Wetlands/Floating
Wetland Islands
•Detention Basins/Surface Storage
•Enhanced Tree Pits/Trenches
•Low Volume Injection Wells (Pumped)
Note: The City is developing an Urban Forestry Master Plan.
10
BI0909191410MIA
WHAT DOES BGSI LOOK LIKE?
•Takes many different forms, from
landscaping elements to permeable
pavements to ponds to green roofs
•Can vary greatly in appearance, from
high-profile features to those that
blend in
•Vegetation requires time to get
established
Bioretention
11
BI0909191410MIA
Examples of BGSI Applications
•Pervious concrete parking lot
•Green roofs
•Blue-Green Roof Plaza
•Permeable Paver Driveway
12
BI0909191410MIA
WHERE CAN BGSI BE USED?
•In a variety of locations:
–Roads
–Parks and other open spaces
–Schools/public facilities
–On rooftops
–Residential and commercial properties
•Miami Beach is approximately 40%
impervious area
•Goal is to preserve and increase pervious
(“green”) area
Roads
13
BI0909191410MIA
Parks
14
RENDERING OF NEIGHBORHOOD
BI0909191410MIA
Note: all concepts are preliminary and subject to change during budgeting, design, permitting, etc.
RENDERING OF PAR 3 COMMUNITY PARK
POND
15
BI0909191410MIA
COLLINS CANAL
16
BI0909191410MIA
COMMERCIAL STREET
17
BI0909191410MIA
RESIDENTIAL STREET
18
BI0909191410MIA
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
19
BI0909191410MIA
Concept Plan & Fact Sheets
Task 2
Road Elevation Strategy
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
INDIAN
CREEK
BISCAYNE
BAY
»Tidal flooding can occur
on sunny days:
─Through storm drains
─Through groundwater
─Exacerbated with SLR
Flooding in Miami Beach, like all coastal cities, can come
from 3 different sources, separately or together.
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
INDIAN
CREEK
BISCAYNE
BAY
»Tidal flooding:
─Through storm drains
─Through groundwater
─Exacerbated with SLR
»Rainfall flooding
Flooding in Miami Beach, like all coastal cities, can
come from 3 different sources, separately or together.
24
ATLANTIC
OCEANINDIAN
CREEKBISCAYNE
BAY
»Tidal flooding:
─Through storm drains
─Through groundwater
─Exacerbated with SLR
»Rainfall flooding
»Storm surge from
tropical storms
(driven by wind/
barometric pressure)
Flooding in Miami Beach, like all coastal cities, can
come from 3 different sources, separately or together.
BI0909191410MIA
ATLANTIC
OCEANINDIAN
CREEK
BISCAYNE
BAY
Raising roads is an important strategy to address sunny day
tidal flooding in public right-of-way
•Through storm drains
•Through groundwater
•Through overtopping of coastal barriers (e.g., seawalls)
•Exacerbated by Sea Level Rise (SLR)
BI0909191410MIA
Backflow
Seepage
Tidal flooding is problematic in low-lying areas
BI0909191410MIA
Drainage
Tidal Flooding increased with Rainfall
BI0909191410MIA
Long Term Strategy includes Elevated Roads, Sea Walls and Pumps
BI0909191410MIA
Road Raising Strategy Addresses
Tidal Flooding Only
29
Complete Property Flooding
(12+ inches)
Partial Property Flooding
(6−12 inches)
Street Flooding
(0−6 inches)
High tide with 3 ft of sea level rise
City Policy: Road storm drainage systems are designed
for storm capacity of up to 10-year 24-hour storm: 8.25”
storm. Storms with higher volume and intensity may
cause flooding of both roads and adjacent property,
regardless of whether road is raised.
30
31
BI0909191410MIA
Guiding Principles of New Road Raising Strategy
•Support keeping road surfaces above the king tide elevation to avoid
sunny day tidal flooding
•Establish new minimum elevations for City roads based on updated tidal
records and SLR projections
•Address increasing groundwater elevations and concern for poor pavement
performance, including premature pavement failure related to saturated
road base
•Address concern for private property harmonization
•Standardize application so policy is unbiased, objective, and transparent
•Consider cost implications
32
BI0909191410MIA
Summary of Key Factors that Determine Minimum Road
Elevation Criteria
•Evaluates elevations at edge of road (EOR), not crown, and at bottom of
road base (BORB), and picks the most protective standard
•Assumes 30-year road service life
•Updated Sea Level Rise projections
•Target frequency of flooding (applies at end of road service life):
•Local Roads: 50% chance per year (includes roads classified by City as “Local”,
mostly residential roads)
•Major Roads: 20% chance per year (includes roads such as Washington Ave.
classified as “Minor Arterial” and “Minor Collector”)
•Emergency Roads: 10% chance per year (includes roads such as Alton Rd.
classified as “Evacuation Route and access to First Responders)
33
BI0909191410MIA
Updated decision process calculates minimum road
elevations at two points on road section
34
BI0909191410MIA
Calculation Method 1 –
Step 1: Select Level of Service (% chance of flooding by road type)
35
Measured Tides (1994-2019) at Virginia Key (ft NAVD)
Ti
d
e
a
n
d
S
e
a
L
e
v
e
l
(
f
t
NA
V
D
)
Long-Term Water Surface Elevation Data at Virginia Key (25
years of hourly data) is used to estimate probability of water
elevations being exceeded.
BI0909191410MIA
Calculation Method 1 –
Step 2: Determine Water Elevations for Selected Level of Service
36
Water Surface Elevation at Virginia Key (ft NAVD)
Wa
t
e
r
S
u
r
f
a
c
e
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
(
f
t
NA
V
D
)
Annual Exceedance Probability
2.34 ft water elevation has 20% chance
of being exceeded in any year
(on average, once every 5 years).
BI0909191410MIA
Calculation Method 1 –
Step 3: Determine Sea Level Rise for Each Type of Road
37
Relative Sea Level Rise for Miami Beach (NOAA*, 2017)
RS
L
R
(f
t
NA
V
D
)
30-yr service
life of road
SLR of 1.3 ft or 1.8 ft 30 years out from 2020,
for NOAA Int-High or High Curves
*NOAA = National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
BI0909191410MIA 38
Recommended SLR projections are consistent with SE FL Climate
Compact (3rd Regionally Unified Sea Level Rise Projection 2019):
•NOAA Intermediate High for Major and Local Roads
•NOAA High for Emergency Roads
Calculation Method 1 –
Step 3: Determine Sea Level Rise for Each Type of Road
BI0909191410MIA
Calculation Method 1: Goal of Limited Flooding at Edge of Road
(EOR) results in EOR Minimum Elevation of 3.0 ft to 4.8 ft NAVD
39
BI0909191410MIA
Calculation Method 2: Limited Groundwater Wetting at Road
Base during High Tide (MHHW) Results in Bottom of Road Base
(BORB) Minimum Elevation of 2.9 ft NAVD
40
NOAA Published MHHW of 0.2 ft NAVD
for 1983-2001 epoch was updated to
0.6 ft NAVD based on recent tidal data.
BI0909191410MIA
Higher of two calculation methods is selected for EOR or BORB
41
BI0909191410MIA
All Roads ̶Minimum Elevation of Bottom of Road Base
(Method 2): 2.9 ft, so Edge of Road is 3.9 ft assuming
1-ft road thickness
42
Method 2 is used
to set Minimum
Elevation of
Bottom of Road
Base: 2.9 ft NAVD
for projects built in
2020.
BI0909191410MIA
Major and Local Roads ̶Method 1 is lower (3.6 ft and 3.0 ft
NAVD), so Method 2 is Preferred:
Bottom of Road Base, > 2.9 ft and EOR > 3.9 ft NAVD
43
For Local Roads, Method 2 results in higher Minimum Elevation at Edge of
Road, assuming projects with 1-ft road thickness and built in 2020.
Method 1:
Limited Flooding at EOR
Method 2:
Limited Groundwater/Tidal
Wetting at BORB
BI0909191410MIA
Emergency Roads ̶Minimum Elevation at Edge of Road
(Method 1): 4.8 ft NAVD
44
For Emergency
Roads, Method 1
results in higher
Minimum Elevation
at Edge of Road for
projects built in
2020.
BI0909191410MIA
Project Start Date 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Emergency Roads
(Method 1)4.8 5.2 5.7 6.2 6.7
Arterial and Local Roads
(Method 2) *3.9 4.2 4.5 4.9 5.3
* Method 2 assumes 1 ft road thickness above bottom of
road base.
45
Relative Sea Level Rise for Miami Beach (NOAA, 2017)
RS
L
R
(f
t
(
NA
V
D
)
SLR of 2.7 ft or 1.9 ft
30 years out from 2030
30-yr from 2030
30-yr from 2040
30-yr from 2020
SLR of 3.7 ft or 2.7 ft
30 years out from 2040
SLR of 1.8 ft or 1.3 ft
30 years out from 2020
Road raising strategy for future projects increases
in recognition of accelerating Sea Level Rise projections
BI0909191410MIA
Road raising projects can be
prioritized based on current risk of
tidal flooding
Road Miles by Type and
Current Probability of Tidal Flooding
Road Lengths by Classification and Elevation
50% chance of
flooding today
20% chance of
flooding today
10% chance of
flooding today > 10% chanceCurrent Chance of Tidal Flooding
Today →
Principal Arterial ("Emergency")0.5 1.4 4.1 19.5
Minor Arterial ("Major Road")1 4 4.1 4.5
Major Collector ("Emergency")0.5 2.5 6.3 12.8
Minor Collector ("Major Road")0.2 2.2 3.3 2.7
Local ("Local Road")6 22 31 55
Total 8.2 32.1 48.8 94.5
46
BI0909191410MIA
After receiving public input this road
raising policy was applied which shows
areas with various road raising needs
Applying this policy can be used to
define new road raising projects and
sequencing for neighborhoods to
increase resiliency
47
These results will be used to
establish project groupings and
priorities
Example
BI0909191410MIA
Harmonization with Adjacent Property
•If constraints are identified by the City Engineer, as a result of the
minimum road elevation, then harmonization exception criteria supersede,
at the discretion of the City Engineer.
•Example exception criteria may include:
•Inadequate horizontal space to construct road
improvements and tie back to existing grade
•Driveway grades and grade break cannot meet City
standards at new elevation, posing access concerns
•Adverse stormwater management conditions created
48
BI0909191410MIA
Harmonization with Adjacent Commercial Property
•Existing issue (saturated
base causing road
system failures)
•Proposed road elevation
creates conflicts with
buildings
•Harmonization solution
includes use of edge
treatment to mitigate
49
BI0909191410MIA
Harmonization with Adjacent Residential Property
•Proposed road
elevation may create
driveway access issues.
•Shift sidewalks to
decrease angle of
slope.
•Raising sidewalk and
roadway less to
decrease angle of
slope.
50
BI0909191410MIA
Proposed Criteria for Harmonization
•Driveway slopes within FDOT standards to avoid
adverse conditions.
•Recommended maximum driveway slopes
•Residential:12.5%(1V:8H)
•Commercial: 10.0%(1V:10H)
•Recommended max. sidewalk cross-slope = 1.5%
51
Adverse Driveway Conditions
BI0909191410MIA
Proposed Criteria for Harmonization
What do driveway slopes mean for road raising?
•Recommended maximum driveway slopes
•Residential:12.5%(1L:8H)
•For example, if you have a 20 ft long driveway, the
road can’t be raised more than 2.5 ft without some harmonization.
52
Illustrative example L = Driveway Length
If driveway length L
= 20 ft, then road
raising can’t be
more than H =
20/8 = 2.5 ft
(12.5% slope)
BI0909191410MIA
Proposed Criteria for Harmonization
If driveway slope changes more than 14.0% at a crest or sag, a vertical transition will be provided.
53
•Rounded
vertical
transitions
•Straight
vertical
transitions
Adverse Driveway Conditions Rounded Vertical Transitions Straight Vertical Transitions
BI0909191410MIA
Proposed Harmonization Solutions (Examples)
•Alternative road treatments (retaining walls, steps, ADA ramps, etc.)
•Temporary construction easement to reduce slope of driveways.
•Lower sidewalk at driveway to improve driveway grades.
•Collect stormwater from behind sidewalk, into storm drainage system.
•Don’t raise roadway as high as minimum standard.
(solutions vary between residential and commercial property)
54
Task 3
Neighborhood Project Prioritization
BI0909191410MIA
Neighborhood Project Group
Prioritization Objectives
•Strategically guide prioritization
of City Neighborhood Projects
•Maximize benefits, minimize
impacts
•Objective, transparent, and
repeatable methodology
NEIGHBORHOOD PROJECT:
A project involving multiple
City Services; for example:
•Road improvements
•Water/sewer maintenance
•Stormwater upgrades
City Planning
Processes
Individual
Capital
Projects
Group into
Prioritized
Neighborhood
Projects
Prioritization
Methodology
Overall Process for Neighborhood Project Prioritization
Today’s Focus
BI0909191410MIA
Guiding Principles
•Public safety is top priority
•Water and wastewater service delivery and environmental protection
support multiple objectives
•Public health, local economy, regulatory compliance
•Economic development is supported by City services
•Service delivery/capacity, risk management
•Routine maintenance supports long-term service supply reliability
•Aesthetics not a stand-alone objective (but important)
57
BI0909191410MIA
Neighborhood Project Prioritization
•Development of Methodology
•11 project component categories; each with 5 criteria corresponding to level of
importance
•Developed weight factors for each category
•Notes About Methodology
•Project components can have attributes that span multiple categories
•Project components with multiple benefits produce higher scores
58
BI0909191410MIA
Prioritization: Eleven Categories of Project Components
59
Project Component Categories
Objectives and Benefits of City Projects Brief Description
Aesthetics Landscaping, historical integrity, green streets
Coastal Flood Risk Management Exposure and sensitivity to king tides, sea level rise, storm surge, extreme weather
Economic Development Support Tourism, Historic Preservation
Emergency (Critical) Facilities and Roads Emergency response effectiveness
Environmental Benefits (Ecological)Protect the Bay, Heat Island, Habitat, Adaptation
Pedestrian and Bicycle Mobility Infrastructure that enables more and safer pedestrian and bicycle movement
Potable Water/Fire Suppression System Public safety, public health, and infrastructure condition
Rain Driven Storm Water Management Flood management, environmental protection, and regulatory compliance
Road Classification Type and capacity of road
Sanitary Sewer Service Delivery Provision of service, capacity and condition of system
Transportation –Road Condition/Remaining Service Life Condition and service life of road
BI0909191410MIA
Neighborhood Prioritization
Rating Project Components Across Multiple Categories of Objectives and Benefits
60
BI0909191410MIA
Neighborhood Prioritization
Rating Project Components Across Multiple Categories of Objectives and Benefits
61
Rank Project Category Project Category Weight Factor (%)
1 Coastal Flood Risk Management 100
2 Potable Water Distribution / Fire Suppression System 100
3 Emergency (Critical) Facilities & Roads 90
4 Sanitary Sewer Service Delivery 85
5 Rain Driven Storm Water Management 85
6 Environmental Benefits 70
7 Economic Development 60
8 Pedestrian and Bicycle Mobility 50
9 Road Classification 40
10 Road Condition Maintenance 40
11 Aesthetics 35
BI0909191410MIA
Neighborhood Project Group 1 (Example)
62
BI0909191410MIA
Neighborhood Project Group 2 (Example)
63
BI0909191410MIA
Neighborhood Project Group 3 (Example)
64
BI0909191410MIA
Example: Ranking and Prioritizing Neighborhood Projects Groups
65
Highest
Priority
Project
BI0909191410MIA
After Receiving Public Input Project
Component Criteria Were Applied
•Reviewed and scored project components from
City planning documents;
•Water & Sewer Utility Master Plan
•Stormwater Master Plan
•Active Capital Improvement Program
•GO Bond
•Transportation Master Plan
•Highly driven by the number, benefit and type of
project components currently in the planning
pipeline
•Road Raising Projects using the new policy will be
added to prioritization after development
66
First
Draft
BI0909191410MIA 67
First Draft
Public Meeting: Community
Comments / Feedback
BI0909191410MIA
Tasks 1 : Public Meeting Comments / Questions
•Residents Major Themes:
•Neighborhood Outreach
•Policy for Private Property Implementation (incentives)
•Heat Island Effect / Tree Canopy
•Who will maintain BGSI?
•Resiliency (Saltwater Intrusion, Storm Surge, SLR, Cloudburst Events)
69
BI0909191410MIA
Tasks 1 : Public Meeting Comments / Questions
•Residents Major Themes:
•How will BGSI function with high groundwater, as sea level rises?
•Integration with Road Raising and Flood Protection
•Educational Opportunities
•Implementation Cost
•Aesthetics
70
BI0909191410MIA
Tasks 2 & 3: Public Meeting Comments / Questions
•Residents Major Themes:
•Fear of raising roads resulting in property flooding
•Evaluate ranking priorities based on neighborhood risks
•Prioritize flood protection of properties over streets
•Sea level rise projections
•Consideration of seawall
•Impact of road raising policy to ongoing / on-hold projects
•Consider a higher priority to aesthetics
•Water quality /environmental impacts
•Community outreach by neighborhood
•Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Handout
71
BI0909191410MIA
Comments After the Task 2 & 3 Meeting
•Comment period was open through January 24, 2020
•Received 12 emails with comments
•Major themes:
•Creating flooding where none exists
•Keeping streets dry at the detriment of private property
•Wet homes with dry streets
•Aging underground infrastructure
72
BI0909191410MIA
Tasks 2 & 3: Public Meeting Comments / Questions
“I fully support their efforts to follow the science and
address that significant issues that we as a community
will face if actions are not taken…”. –Lakeview
Resident
“We feel that Jacobs should be applauded for
recognizing that certain roads can flood more, some
less often, for safety reasons rather than use a one-
size-fits-all approach. Candidly though, we do need
more focus on filtration of storm water prior to being
discharged into Biscayne Bay, and a more robust
discussion of necessary upgrades to our water, sewer
and storm water infrastructure.” –Lakeview
Resident
73
“I have lived in Sunset Harbour for 20 years and thank
the City every day for having raised our streets. Since the
streets were raised, we have not had flooding, our
buildings garages have not flooded and our streets are
passable when it rains, when the tides are high and
during the several hurricanes that we have had.” –
Sunset Harbour Resident
“I commend you all for being proactive. And I commend
you for putting the time, energy and brainpower in to
figuring out how to do this right -and please understand
that those of us questioning the existing strategy are not
climate change deniers, nor are we resistant to change.”
–South Beach Resident
Questions
& Discussion