Environmental Review Toolkit
Accelerating Project Delivery

Eco-Logical Webinar
Green Infrastructure and Transportation Planning to Improve Environmental Outcomes

Tuesday, July 24, 2012
1:30 - 3:00 PM Eastern

Moderator:

  • Mike Ruth, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Office of Project Development and Environmental Review

Presenters:

  • Jesse Elam, Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning
  • Linda Giltz, Land-of-Sky Regional Council - Western North Carolina
  • Ralph Spagnolo, Environmental Protection Agency

PDF Version [4.42 MB]


Table of Contents

FHWA Introduction of Green Infrastructure in Transportation Projects and Its Relationship to Eco-Logical

Chicago Wilderness Green Infrastructure Vision

Land-of-Sky Regional Councils Green Infrastructure Framework

Maryland Watershed Resources Registry (WRR)

Questions

Exciting Changes Ahead for the Eco-Logical Webinar Series!


FHWA Introduction of Green Infrastructure in Transportation Projects and Its Relationship to Eco-Logical

Slide 1: Green Infrastructure and Transportation Planning to Improve Environmental Outcomes

July 24, 2012
1:30 - 3:00 PM Eastern

Presenters:

  • Jesse Elam, Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning
  • Linda Giltz, Land-of-Sky Regional Council - Western North Carolina
  • Ralph Spagnolo, Environmental Protection Agency

Moderated by Mike Ruth, FHWA Office of Project Development and Environmental Review

Volpe The National Transportation Systems Center
Advancing transportation innovation for the public good

U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration

U.S. Department of Transportation
Research and Innovative Technology Administration
John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

Image:
Photograph of a road winding around a bend of a steep, lush cliff. Photograph is from the cover of the 2010 Eco-Logical Grant Program Annual Report.

Slide 2: Green Infrastructure

Green infrastructure (GI) is a strategic approach to planning and managing networks of land that conserve natural ecosystems for long-range transportation planning.

  • Considers the benefits of both wildlife and human populations
  • Exists at the statewide, regional, community, neighborhood, and site-based scale
  • Requires collaboration among many agencies and organizations

Slide 3: GI Focus

  • GI focuses on several elements:
    • Preserving habitat
    • Maintaining the connectivity of ecosystems
    • Minimizing the impacts of infrastructure on the ecosystem
  • Identifies high-priority land areas and opportunities for ecosystem connectivity
  • Incorporates GIS information, tools, and methodologies to collect information that will be helpful for future planners
Image:
Photograph of a fish swimming in a clear stream under a large culvert

Back to Top


Chicago Wilderness Green Infrastructure Vision

Many of the slides in this presentation include the Chicago Metropolitan Agency (CMAP) for Planning logo.

Slide 4: Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning

Regional Green Infrastructure in the Chicago Area
Jesse A. Elam, AICP
July 24, 2012

Slide 5: Who we are

  • Established in 2005 by state legislation with support from the region's mayors.
  • Central purpose is to better integrate planning for land use and transportation.
  • Merged the Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission (NIPC) and Chicago Area Transportation Study (CATS).
Image:
Map showing the areas covered by CMAP and each area's respective CMAP Board member(s)

Slide 6: GO TO 2040

Image:
Cover image from CMAP's GO TO 2040 document

Slide 7: GO TO 2040: Key Recommendations

Livable Communities

  1. Land Use and Housing
  2. Water and Energy Conservation
  3. Parks and Open Space
  4. Local Food

Human Capital

  1. Education and Workforce Development
  2. Economic Innovation

Efficient Governance

  1. Tax Policy
  2. Access to Information
  3. Coordinated Investments

Regional Mobility

  1. Transportation Investments — major capital projects
  2. Public Transit
  3. Freight

Slide 8: Chicago Wilderness Green Infrastructure Vision

Image:
Map of Chicago showing Metro Rail paths, Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) Rail paths, Interstate Highways, non-interstate expressways, green infrastructure boundaries, and Chicago Wilderness boundaries

Slide 9: Chicago Wilderness

  • Consortium of organizations interested in conservation, currently 262 members
  • Organized to understand and help protect unique natural communities (biodiversity) around southern Lake Michigan
    • Biodiversity Recovery Plan
  • Very diverse membership, from federal agencies to neighborhood groups

Slide 10: Chicago Wilderness Green Infrastructure Vision

Image:
Map of Chicago showing Metro Rail paths, CTA Rail paths, Interstate Highways, non-interstate expressways, green infrastructure boundaries, and Chicago Wilderness boundaries

Slide 11: Example Resource Protection Area

From the Final Report:

  • Conservation value: Large woodlands; high quality fens; high quality, cold-water stream with silt intolerant fish. Large restorable wetlands on hydric soils.
  • Target: 800 ac fee simple and easements. Protect and restore headwater streams. Identify and protect ground water recharge zones for fen wetlands.
  • Development Strategies: Limit industrial development; Focus on mall scale, low-intensity conservation residential. Etc.
Image:
Close-up map of the Boone Street Complex, which includes 10,745 acres

Slide 12: Why refine the GIV?

  • Update with new information
  • Provide more detail
  • Strengthen analytical basis
  • Promote consistency between sub-areas
  • Concentrate on extending and improving existing planning work - make part of ongoing work program rather than ad hoc study
  • Make sure GIV reflects a “common game plan” for conservation efforts by many organizations

Slide 13: Hub and corridor design

Core Areas:

  • Contain fully functional natural ecosystems
  • Provide high-quality habitat for native plants and animals

Hubs:

  • Slightly fragmented aggregations of core areas, plus contiguous natural cover

Corridors:

  • Link core areas together
  • Allow animal movement and seed and pollen transfer between core areas
Image:
Drawing of green infrastructure network components: three core areas are surrounded by hub areas, which are connected to each other via corridors and to other hubs by links. Source: The Conservation Fund

Slide 14: Chicago Wilderness Green Infrastructure Vision, v.2.0

Image:
Map of the greater Chicago area with the seven counties outlined in red. Land is colored white and wetlands are colored green. Source: The Conservation Fund

Slide 15: Potential applications

  1. Guide conservation investments
  2. Shape growth patterns
  • Land conservation
  • Municipal comprehensive plans
  • Transportation project development

Slide 16: Potential applications

  • Land conservation
    • Open space protection is undertaken by many entities with different funding and different priorities.
  • Recommendation:
    • Encourage those involved in land protection to use the GI data to guide land conservation
      • Land trusts
      • DNR (direct and grant funded)
      • Local conservation agencies

Slide 17: Potential applications

  • Municipal comprehensive plans
    • Municipalities are now undertaking GI mapping projects; often become mired in questions about data availability, definitions, etc.
  • Recommendation:
    • Treat the green infrastructure data as a minimum network of green infrastructure, supplement with local information
    • Comprehensive plans undertaken with CMAP assistance should use the GIV data.

Slide 18: Potential applications

  • Transportation project development
    • Transportation projects can work against the preservation of the green infrastructure network
  • Recommendation:
    • Consider effects on the green infrastructure network as part of normal environmental review.
    • Use to help indicate priority areas for compensatory mitigation

Slide 19: Example: Spring Creek Greenway and I-355 S extension

  • 160 acre site owned by Tollway & Forest Preserve
  • Forest Preserve, Tollway and O'Hare funds
  • 6 miles of multi-use trail incorporated
  • 40 acres of mitigation credit
Image:
Satellite photo of a winding stream that connects the Hadley Valley Forest Preserve and the Lower Spring Creek County Forest Preserve in the area near where Route 6 intersects Interstate 355

Slide 20: Example: Fox River bridges, Kane County DOT

  • 7 miles of multi-use trails built
  • 216 acres of open space protected
  • >100 acres of restoration
  • Conveyance to forest preserve
Image:
Satellite photo showing two bridges over the Fox River in Kane County

Slide 21: Questions?

Jesse Elam
jelam@cmap.illinois.gov
316.386.8688

Back to Top


Land-of-Sky Regional Councils Green Infrastructure Framework

Slide 22: Linking Lands and Communities in the Land-of-Sky Region

Eco-Logical Webinar —
“Green Infrastructure and Transportation Planning to Improve Environmental Outcomes”
July 24, 2012

www.linkinglands.org

Linda Giltz, AICP, Senior Planner
828-251-6622 lindag@landofsky.org

Image:
Land-of-Sky Region Council logo

Slide 23: Land-of-Sky Region | Western North Carolina

Image:
Photograph of a hillside in the Blue Ridge Mountains with lush greenery and shrubs with pink flowers
Image:
Photograph of a green field, dotted with large hay bales, at the edge of a thick green forest
Image:
Photograph of a pair of pedestrians in a small town, walking across a street flanked by two-story buildings
Image:
Small map of the US, with North Carolina colored in red
Image:
Small county map of North Carolina, with the seacoast bordered by the Outer Banks colored in blue and the four counties of the Land-of-Sky Region (Region B) colored in red
Image:
Large map of the Land-of-Sky Region, color-coded to show county and municipal boundaries, State Parks, National Forests, National Parks, County Parks, rivers, Interstate Highways, US Highways, NC Highways, the Blue Ridge Parkway, and the Appalachian Trail

Slide 24: Challenges Related to Growth/Development

  • Fragmentation of large parcels and habitat – affecting farms, forests, business/industrial sites
  • Loss of scenic quality
  • Sedimentation; water quality issues
Image:
Vertical bar chart displaying Land-of-Sky population growth since 1960 and projected growth through 2020: 200,000 in 1960; 220,000 in 1970; 255,000 in 1980; 285,000 in 1990; 345,000 in 2000; 395,000 in 2010; and 445,000 in 2020
Image:
Photograph of a forested hillside with a handful of houses. Most of the trees have no foilage and appear to be dead or dying.
Image:
Photograph looking down at a small pipe that is dumping salmon-colored water into a river, causing a large swath of discoloration downriver

Slide 25: Linking Lands and Communities — Project Goals

  • Bring together a diverse group of people to explore common values and identify opportunities to work together to maintain our valued resources;
  • Identify where the most valuable natural resources are located and how they might be interconnected;
  • Produce a set of tools and resources for a variety of users, to make more informed land use and development decisions.
Image:
Photograph of a large grassy field with forested hills in the background
Image:
Photograph of four people looking at Linking Lands and Communities posters on easels

Slide 26: Project Partners

Appalachian Sustainable Agriculture Project (ASAP)
Appalachian Trail Conservancy
Friends of DuPont State Forest
NC Wildlife Federation
Open Space Institute
RiverLink
Southern Appalachian Forest Coalition
Southern Environmental Law Center
Sustainable Big Ivy
WNC Green Building Council
Western North Carolina Alliance

Asheville Convention and Visitors Bureau
The Biltmore Estate
Mountain Council for Accountable Development
Self Help Credit Union/Self Help Ventures Fund
Sustainability Strategies, LLC

NC Cooperative Extension - County Offices
NC Department of Agriculture
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
NC Division of Community Assistance
NC Division of Forest Resources
NC Farm Bureau
NCSU Mountain Horticultural Crops Research & Ext Center
NC Wildlife Resources Commission

Buncombe County
Buncombe County Greenways and Trails Commission
Buncombe County Soil & Water Conservation District
City of Asheville
City of Hendersonville
Transylvania County

Blue Ridge Forever
Carolina Mountain Land Conservancy
Southern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy

Blue Ridge National Heritage Area
Blue Ridge Parkway
Natural Resources Conservation Service
U.S.D.A. Forest Service Southern Research Station
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Mars Hill College
RENCI @ UNC Asheville
UNC Asheville
Warren Wilson College

Slide 27: Funding Partners

The Community Foundation of Western North Carolina
Blue Ridge National Heritage Area
Federal Highway Administration
RENCI at UNC Asheville
Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation
Lyndhurst Foundation
Wildlife Conservation Society
National Association of Regional Councils (NARC)

Image:
Photograph of an orange sun setting behind the most distant in a series of Blue Ridge Mountain ridges. The valleys between the ridges are filled with light purple-colored fog.
Image:
Graphic of eleven US dollar bills of various denominations cascading down

Slide 28: Green Infrastructure Planning Approach

  • Nationally recognized collaborative method for land use planning
  • Community- and science-based approach
  • Focus on systems and networks
  • Need for planning, design, investment, maintenance, management
Image:
Photograph of forested mountain ridges interspersed with grassy fields
Image:
Aerial photograph of a highway cloverleaf with lush green vegetation within the cloverleaf, along exit and entrance ramps, and beyond

Slide 29: Our Economy needs Healthy Natural Systems

  • Sustain lands for forestry & agriculture
  • Provide scenic views, trails, parks, and cultural areas that attract residents and visitors
  • Offer natural and restored green settings for growth and development
  • Attract and retain businesses and jobs, provide entrepreneurial opportunities
Image:
Photograph of a hiker atop a hillside overlooking a valley with a mountain ridge in the distance
Image:
Photograph of a family (husband, wife, and baby son) standing astride signs to their farm that are advertising fresh meats
Image:
Photograph looking through woods towards a park services information center
Image:
Photograph of a bicycle shop interior with bikes displayed on the shop floor, on a counter, and hanging from the ceiling

Slide 30: What are the most important natural and land-based resources in the region?

  • Water and water quality
  • Farming and forestry
  • Cultural heritage
  • Scenic views
  • Recreation
  • Wildlife habitat and biodiversity
Image:
Photograph of a grassy hillside with a taller forested hill behind it
Image:
Photograph of a bear in the woods, looking directly at the camera
Image:
Close-up photograph of a baby in a high chair sipping from a green plastic cup
Image:
Photograph of a family (husband, wife, and baby son) standing astride signs to their farm that are advertising fresh meats
Image:
Photograph of a man and a dog walking along a hillside, silhouetted against a backdrop of mountain ridges

Slide 31: Resource Assessments

Purpose: To identify lands in the Land-of-Sky (LOS) region valued for their contribution to:

  • Water quality
  • Agriculture
  • Wildlife habitat & biodiversity

Developed by: Working groups of partners from around the region and facilitated by LOS staff.

  • Raster based modeling (30-meter pixels)
  • Most current data available
  • Region-wide data
Image:
Graphic of a Value for Farming and Forestry map legend whose ten color codes are divided into three categories: Low (1-dark red, 2-light red, and 3-dark orange); Medium (4-light orange, 5-yellow, and 6-greenish-yellow); and High (7-very light green, 8-light green, 9-emerald green, and 10-dark green)

Slide 32: Linking Lands and Communities in the Land-of-Sky Region

High Value Indicators:

  • Land Cover - Vegetation Type
  • Most productive soils
  • Presence of an existing farm/forest operation

Highest ranking lands (10) have productive soils AND forest or cropland vegetation

Image:
Photograph of a farmhouse and pasture nestled in a valley amid forested hills
Image:
Map of the Land-of-Sky region, color-coded to show which lands are valuable for farming and forestry. The map legend is described in Slide 31.

Slide 33: Linking Lands and Communities in the Land-of-Sky Region

The region was divided into 3,525 subwatersheds; each assessed on:

  • Land use/land cover
  • Stream quality
  • Elevation
  • Level of protection
Image:
Photograph of a stream flowing through moss-covered rocks in a green forest
Image:
Map of the Land-of-Sky region, color-coded to show which lands are valuable for producing clean water. The map legend is described in Slide 31.

Slide 34: Linking Lands and Communities in the Land-of-Sky Region

Wildlife habitat patches

  • Large core area; compact and tightly clustered patches

Priority habitat types:

  • > 4,000 feet
  • Floodplain Forests, Riverine and Aquatic Communities

Biodiversity Sites:

  • Significant Natural Heritage Areas (aquatic and terrestrial)
  • Native Brook Trout streams; Outstanding Resource Waters
  • Streams with Excellent bioclass ratings
Image:
Map of the Land-of-Sky region, color-coded to show which lands are valuable for maintaining biodiversity and habitat. The map legend is described in Slide 31.

Slide 35: Developing the Regional Green Infrastructure Network

  • Identifying the hubs – highest valued lands from each assessment
  • Combining the assessments
  • Identifying the corridors – connect ecosystems and habitats to enable plants, animals, and ecological processes to move between hubs
Image:
Drawing of green infrastructure network components: three core areas are surrounded by hub areas, which are connected to each other via corridors and to other hubs by links

Slide 36: Final Green Infrastructure Network

Combined Resource Hubs + Wildlife Habitat & Biodiversity Corridors

Image:
Map of the Land-of-Sky region, color-coded to show green infrastructure network (combined resource hubs). The map legend key displays different colors for modeled resource hubs with 1, 2, and 3 resources and modeled corridors (corridors, public or protected land, and county boundaries).

Slide 37: Outcomes from the Linking Lands Project

  • Maps that identify lands that most contribute to important ecosystem services
  • A new set of tools and resources that can inform land use planning at multiple scales
  • Relationships amongst a diverse group of regional leaders
  • Increased awareness of the link between healthy communities and healthy ecosystems
Image:
Graphic of a woman holding a square edge and three rolled-up plans

Slide 38: Project website: www.linkinglands.org

On-line, easy-to-use tool - http://gis.buncombecounty.org/LinkingLands/

Image:
Screenshot of the Project Overview page of the Linking Lands and Communities in the Land-of-Sky Region website. Three arrows point from words on the left side of the slide to items in the left navigational column of the web site: "Assessments" to "Ecological Assesssments," "Maps" to "Data and Maps," and "Documentation" to "Project Documentation."

Slide 39: Many Uses for Many People

  • Land Owners and Developers
    • Site planning and design
    • Land stewardship
  • Land Trusts and other Non-profits
    • Prioritizing conservation projects
    • Farmland Preservation
  • Students
    • Place-based learning
    • Hands-on projects
Image:
Photograph of a grassy field with large patches of white Queen Anne's Lace wildflowers
Image:
Photograph of a family (husband, wife, and baby son) standing astride signs to their farm that are advertising fresh meats
Image:
Graphic of two women sitting at a table with an open book and notes
Image:
Graphic of three people standing around a table covered with architectural models of buildings, trees, etc.

Slide 40: Governmental Uses of Tools

  • Local Governments
    • Development review and site design
    • Enhance/support city/county planning
    • Identify opportunities for parks, greenways
  • State and Federal Agencies
    • Transportation planning and mitigation
    • Justify funding for conservation or management
    • Identifying areas for conservation and assisting with community planning along the Blue Ridge Parkway
    • Connecting state and national parks to other lands with valuable natural resources
Image:
Color-coded map showing the community planning areas for the Henderson County 2020 Comprehensive Plan
Image:
Photograph of people walking on a pedestrian/bike trail

Slide 41: Priority Transportation Projects with Green Infrastructure Network - for Land-of-Sky RPO

Image:
Map of the Land-of-Sky region, color-coded to show green infrastructure network (combined resource hubs). The map legend key displays different colors for modeled resource hubs with 1, 2, and 3 resources and modeled corridors (corridors, public or protected land, and county boundaries).
Image:
Close-up section of the map showing five highlighted project areas

Slide 42: Development Review & Site/Project Design

Green Infrastructure corridors around Weaverville

Image:
Close-up topographical map showing the green infrastructure corridors around Weaverville

Slide 43: Other Uses and Future Plans

  • Data and maps being used in current project that is looking at and planning for growth and development – GroWNC (www.gro-wnc.org)
  • Sharing methodology with adjacent regions to hopefully expand GI network
  • Continue to share information and benefits – locally, regionally and nationally – APA, NADO-sponsored webinar, NARC conference
Image:
GROWNC: Together We Create Our Future logo

Slide 44: Linking Lands and Communities in the Land-of-Sky Region

Project website: www.linkinglands.org
Online map tool: gis.buncombecounty.org/LinkingLands/
Land-of-Sky website: www.landofsky.org

Image:
Photograph of an orange sun setting behind the most distant in a series of Blue Ridge Mountain ridges. The valleys between the ridges are filled with light purple-colored fog.

Back to Top


Maryland Watershed Resources Registry (WRR)

Slide 45: The Watershed Resources Registry (WRR)

A National Pilot To Integrate Land-use Planning, Regulatory, and Non-regulatory Decision Making Using the Watershed Approach

Images:
Logos of the following: US Army Corps of Engineers, Green Highways Partnership, US Environmental Protection Agency, US Department of Transportation, State Highway Administration, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Maryland Environmental Service, and Maryland Department of the Environment

Slide 46: History

A pilot Registry grew out of the Green Highways Partnership and the Maryland State Highway. The initial Project Coordination Meeting took place in March 2009 and was attended by the partner agencies.

A follow-up Managers Meeting was held at the Engineers Club of Baltimore in October 2009.

Images:
Logos of the Green Highways Partnership and the State Highway Administration

Slide 47: What is the WRR?

It is a comprehensive replicable framework and GIS-based targeting tool that:

  • Integrates and streamlines regulatory programs
  • Guides resource planners
  • Saves time and $, and increases program efficiencies
  • Screens for preferred actions and maximizes watershed benefits
  • Is transparent, predictable and reliable
  • Facilitates multiagency input and coordination

Slide 48: Why is the WRR unique?

Unlike many mapping and targeting tool…
There is agency collaboration and program integration between:

  • CWA 319, 401,402,404, 303(d)
    • Watershed planning, permit review, mitigation assessments
    • TMDL and WIP applications
    • Stormwater management
  • Resource conservation/environmental resource planning
  • Green Print and Rural Legacy priorities
  • Section 7 (Threatened and Endangered Species)
  • Transportation and land use planning
  • NEPA review

…and more!

Slide 49: The Formation Process

  • A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was formed, consisting of stakeholders from local, state and federal agencies, to ensure that the end-products would have comprehensive programmatic coverage and integration.
  • The TAC assembled a wide variety of information and geospatial data sets, and identified and addressed data gaps, to meet the needs of programs and watersheds.
  • Datasets and factors were agreed upon in a systematic process in order to develop eight Suitability Analysis (SA).

Slide 50: The Suitability Analyses (SA)

  • Upland Preservation
  • Upland Restoration
  • Wetland Preservation
  • Wetland Restoration
  • Riparian Zone Preservation
  • Riparian Zone Restoration
  • Preserving Natural Hydrology for Stormwater
  • Restoring Natural Hydrology for Stormwater

Slide 51: The Factors: An Example

Restore Wetlands
Map and score areas that are not currently wetlands but which have site conditions that would support wetland creation. Restore the site to a healthy wetland.

Required factors

The area cannot be:

  • a wetland
  • forested (land cover)

The area must be:

  • On a poorly drained soil (somewhat, poorly or very poorly)

Enhancing factors*

  1. Is near (200 feet) but not in a stream or waterbody (1 pt)
  2. Is in a 100-year (1 pt) or 500-year (½ pt) floodplain
  3. Is within a 303-D listed stream watershed (1pt)
  4. Is within 200 feet (1pt) or 600 feet (½ pt) of an area that drains to a Stream Classification Use II, III or IV
  5. Is in a Biological Restoration Initiative watershed (1 pt)
  6. Is in a Blue Infrastructure priority watershed (1 pt)
  7. Is in a Stronghold Watershed, “1” (1 pt) or “2” (½ pt)
  8. Is in a Tier II “watershed” (1 pt)
  9. Is within a High Priority (1 pt) or Medium Priority (½) Trust Fund Watershed
  10. Is in Chesapeake Bay Commission Critical Area (LDA or RCA only) (1 pt)
  11. Is in or near (200 feet) a Green Infrastructure hub or corridor (1 pt)
  12. Is in a Green Infrastructure gap (1 pt)
  13. Is near (200 feet) but not in a Sensitive Species Project Review Area (1 pt)
  14. Is near (200 feet) but not in a Wetland of Special State Concern (1 pt)
  15. Is near (200 feet) but not in protected lands (including any GreenPrint Targeted Ecologic Areas) (1 pt)
  16. Is near or in (200 feet) a Targeted Ecologic Area (GreenPrint) (whether protected or not) (1 pt)

*A combination of scientific indicators and socio-political factors.

Slide 52: Current and Ongoing Initiatives

  • Capital Program
  • Roadway Maintenance
  • Bay TMDL

SHA's Mission Statement:
“Efficiently provide mobility for our customers through a safe, well-maintained and attractive highway system that enhances Maryland's communities, economy and environment.”

Slide 53: Capital Program

  Costs Time Cost Savings w/WRR Time Savings w/WRR
Site Search $50,000 4 months $37,500 3 months
Design $210,000 18 months $70,000 6 months
Agency Coordination/MDE
Consultant Review
$10,000 12 months $2,500 3 months
Total $365,000 2.5 years $110,000 1 year

Slide 54: SHA Treatment Strategy - Land Use Changes

Image:
Photograph of a field of tree plantings. Each tree is staked twice, on opposite sides. The photograph is captioned: Tree Plantings (Grass to Forest).
Image:
Photograph of a ... The photograph is captioned: Impervious to Grass/Meadow.

Slide 55: SHA Treatment Strategy - Stream Bank & Channel Stabilization

Images:
Three photographs of a man-made concrete stream bed on a hillside which has been eroded along one side
Image:
Screenshot from a computer showing project folders and a photograph of the rebuilt stream bed, constructed with large rocks in a staircase-like structure. A steady stream of water is flowing.

Slide 56: SHA Treatment Strategy - Stream Bank & Channel Stabilization

Image:
Photograph of a man standing at the bottom of an eroded stream bank holding a tall measuring pole
Image:
Screenshot from a PDF displaying the Sullivan Branch Stream Restoration: Erosion Control Employed on Maryland Highway Project. Included are photographs of the eroded stream bed and the restored stream bed.

Slide 57: Using the Watershed Resource Registry (WRR) to Evaluate Proposed Wetland and Waterway Impacts and Mitigation

Images:
The State seal of Maryland and the Maryland Department of the Environment logo
Image:
The slide has a background photograph of a stream in a lush green wetland.

Slide 58: The WRR can be used by regulatory agencies and applicants to evaluate mitigation…

  • Assist in finding a mitigation site
  • Evaluate ecological benefits of a proposed mitigation site (permittee, bank, or ILF)
  • Compare different proposed mitigation sites

Slide 59: Mitigation Example

  • Linear project with large impacts
  • Large portion of impacts (76 acres) within Mattawoman wetland
  • Tier II watershed
  • Difficult to find enough wetland mitigation

Slide 60: Search for…Tier II watersheds within Mattawoman watershed

Image:
Screenshot from the Watershed Resources Authority showing a basemap of watershed characteristics and one watershed circled in red

Slide 61: Largest potential wetland restoration in this Tier II watershed

Image:
Screenshot from the Watershed Resources Authority showing a basemap of watershed resource improvements

Slide 62: Location Details shows important surrounding resources

Image:
Screenshot from the previous slide with additional details: a listing of the watershed characteristics and the location (longitude and latitude)

Slide 63: Identifying WRR Opportunities on Private Land

Maryland's Forest Conservation Act

  • Requires forest restoration and retention for development projects
  • Counties administer program
  • WRR could assist in identification, review and approval of FCA mitigation sites and banks
Image:
Photograph looking up a tall, healthy tree trunk to a bright blue sky

Slide 64: Identifying WRR Opportunities on Private Land

Maryland's Critical Area Program

  • Regulates development in MD's critical area
    • all land within 1,000 feet of Maryland's tidal waters and tidal wetlands.
  • Requires mitigation for
    • forest loss,
    • FIDS habitat loss,
    • forest buffer loss and
    • stormwater impacts
  • Counties administer programs with State oversight
  • WRR could assist in identification, review and approval of CAC mitigation sites and banks
Image:
Map of a wetland marked with a 100-foot buffer and a 1000-foot boundary
Image:
Photograph of a large wetland

Slide 65: Manager's Meeting

On June 12, 2012, the interagency WRR TAC briefed managers from the US Fish and Wildlife Service, MD Department of Natural Resources, MD State Highway Administration, MD Department of the Environment, US Army Corps of Engineers, and the Federal Highway Administration on:

  • the current status of the WRR, relative to the needs and goals identified and established during the previous interagency Managers' Meeting in October 2009

Slide 66: Next Steps

  • Release website
  • Agency testing
  • Training and outreach - workshops, webinars, & handbooks
  • Establish a user feedback loop regarding sites and data
  • Develop a registration process for sites used
  • Monitor registry projects
  • Data lifecycle - update data on an agreed upon schedule

Slide 67: WRR Application

GIS Application:

Outreach Website (Work Ongoing):

Image:
Screenshot from the Watershed Resources Registry website showing a map of Maryland
Image:
Screenshot of a “Sustain” page from the Watershed Resources Registry website

Slide 68: Thank You

Ralph Spagnolo
(215) 814-2718
Spagnolo.Ralph@epa.gov

Back to Top


Questions

Slide 69: Questions?

Image:
Photograph of a covered bridge over a river

Back to Top


Exciting Changes Ahead for the Eco-Logical Webinar Series!

Slide 70: Exciting Changes Ahead for the Eco-Logical Webinar Series!

  • Special focus on each step in the Eco-Logical framework
  • Streamlined hour-long format
  • Featured partners providing multiple perspectives on joint projects
  • More Q&A opportunities

Eco-Logical Webinar Series:
http://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/ecological/eco_webinar_series.asp

Back to Top


For questions or feedback on this subject, please contact Mike Ruth at 202-366-9509.

HEP Home Planning Environment Real Estate

Federal Highway Administration | 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE | Washington, DC 20590 | 202-366-4000