Back to Construction Updates

Articles

Important Information

by P&N Environmental Engineer Barbara Marczak, PE

I hear this question often. What is an environmental engineer? What does one do? What does a typical day look like?

Environmental engineering focuses on cleaning water and air, and protecting habitat and ecosystems. At Prein&Newhof, our environmental engineers design water and wastewater treatment systems, wells and intakes that supply drinking water, pumping and transmission systems to move water from one place to another, and groundwater clean-up. They study watersheds and use computerized modeling to study and improve water flow and drainage; and investigate soils and water for contamination. See some examples.

Typical Environmental Engineer Projects

Typical projects include drinking water treatment plant and clean water plant design; upgrades to drinking water, sanitary sewer or storm sewer transmission lines; landfill design and closure (how to seal off a landfill and what to do with the land afterwards); underground storage tank removals (think gas stations), and testing for regulatory compliance and State permits.

Environmental engineers do Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs), to determine if an area is contaminated. Prospective property buyers request ESAs to avoid acquiring unexpected responsibility for pollution problems with huge clean-up fees.

Typical Environmental Engineer Clients

Your clients may include state and local governments, attorneys, developers, lending institutions, and realtors.  A typical day involves fieldwork, report writing, meetings with clients or your team, drawing plans, and research. You will need excellent communication skills. Your expertise in solving problems can be difficult to explain to clients. Sometimes your client will have considerable stress over the issue you they hired you to resolve, as often they stand to lose a lot of money or opportunity.

Is the work rewarding? Definitely. Improving the environment helps everybody by protecting our natural resources.

By James Hegarty, PE

I’m encouraged by Michigan’s state-wide movement toward adopting asset management as a financial planning tool for key infrastructure systems. This article supported my belief that to enjoy the current level of service from our infrastructure into the future, it’s going to cost more money.

It’s easy to see the results of neglecting to maintain and invest in roads. Potholes are more than an annoyance and failed streets are more expensive to fix than failing streets. Voters will decide on a road-funding tax proposal this Spring.

It’s less obvious to users to see what’s happening with buried infrastructure like sewer, water and storm sewer pipes. As more communities develop asset management plans for buried pipes, I’m sure we’ll need more money to keep them operating in line with our future needs.

You can contact Brian Vilmont or me to learn more about developing an asset management plan and a rate structure to support it.

This article summarizes an inspiring talk given by our traffic engineer, Ariana Jeske, PE, at the 2013 Institute of Transportation Engineers conference.

Preventative traffic engineering refers to an approach to traffic engineering and planning that prevents, rather than reacts to, dangerous situations and accidents.  The key is keeping walkability in mind. The term “walkability” has surfaced recently due to increased concern over accessibility, and because walkability can increase public health, decrease vehicle traffic, and drive economic development.

Traffic engineers use complex models to justify the traffic infrastructure that guides our behavior. The “stereotypical” traffic engineer tends to focus on:

  • Antiquated suburban development patterns (built for cars, not pedestrians)
  • Inflexible road design standards
  • An unchanging, unadaptable system

As the model of mobility changes, traffic engineers can lead the way to a safer world, rather than being “in the way.”

“It didn’t meet the warrants.”

Warrant, to a traffic engineer, means justification. To justify a traffic signal installation, a traffic engineer completes a signal warrant study using a set of guidelines outlined in the Michigan Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD)–the manual that forms the legal basis for all the State’s signs, traffic signals, and pavement markings. Conventional warrants tend to treat pedestrians as vehicles. Rarely can traffic signals be justified solely for facilitating pedestrian movements, since signal warrants are not based on the intersection’s performance, but on detailed research from the 1970s.

So what about new projects and approaches? When a non-motorized path needs to cross a busy four-lane road, how will we know how many pedestrians will be crossing it? Pedestrian forecasting is not as developed as vehicular traffic forecasting.  Often, a wait-and-see approach is taken to see if a problem develops. Isn’t there a better way?

Don’t respond, prevent.

Traffic engineers need to enter pedestrians into the equation. Pedestrians need 39% more time to cross a two-lane road than a car does, and pedestrians are ten times more likely to be fatally injured in an intersection crash than a vehicle driver.

Preventative traffic engineering, then, is the meaningful evaluation of a multi-modal mobility network to identify areas of increased risk and mitigating those risks. Traffic engineers need to recognize that pedestrians are legitimate users of public mobility systems – whether or not we design for them – and have an inherent vulnerability.

How to lead the way

  • Every detail matters: Consider curb radii, pedestrian data, road width, signage, cycle lengths, parking zones, pavement markings, lighting, and bicycle facilities.
  • Standards can be flexible: Use context-sensitive design. Make standards fit your projects, not the other way around.
  • Use multiple sources: Use all the books on your shelf, and even look internationally for case studies and examples.
  • Use your engineering judgment: Safety isn’t rocket science. Trust your instincts and prove them right.
  • Be proactive and holistic: Projects should not just be a road widening, or a pavement reconstruction, or any one single facet.  Evaluate safety problems, find the data out there, and integrate walkability and pedestrian safety into the planning of your transportation projects. Especially when you have funding. (In fact, adding a walkability component can sometimes get you more funding.)

Case study

It seems likely that putting a non-motorized trail crossing at a busy four-lane roadway might result in some safety issues. Here is a case study that took a more proactive approach to ensure safety.

Grand Valley Rail Trail: a major community project for Ionia and Saranac, the GVRT is an AASHTO-compliant non-motorized trail that repurposes an abandoned rail bed, including seven trestles over various water bodies.

The trail also crosses M-66 (Dexter Street) in Ionia, which averages about 15,499 vehicles per day.  To determine if the estimated 100,000 yearly users of the trail would have enough time to cross the street, we conducted a pedestrian gap study, which determined how long of a window (16 seconds) a pedestrian would need to cross the street. From traffic data we found that there weren’t enough time gaps during the day for the expected volume of pedestrians to cross M-66 safely.  The study helped secure funding  for a pedestrian bridge across M-66/Dexter Street, which will be built next summer.

While it is typical to have someone who objects to a proposed trail, in most cases we see an about-face once the trail opens for public use. One property owner actually called me a couple months after the trail opened and apologized for being difficult during construction. She discovered how much she loved the trail! She said that all of the neighbors now meet on the trail where their children are able to safely ride their bikes.

The best way to handle trail opposition is to have a conversation and find the why. Getting to the heart of the matter allows for clarification and, if needed, compromise.

It can be hard for some people to visualize how a trail will benefit them until they have one nearby, but most people eventually come around. And, in the process you meet some interesting people. Here are a few of my favorites:

  • A couple who owned a bed and breakfast along a proposed trail’s route voiced their vehement complaints about anything involving the trail during the design process. They would not allow the contractor to set foot on their property, not even to build a retaining wall at the edge of the right-of-way. After the trail opened, I checked their website, and not only was the trail listed as one of their key attractions, they stocked bicycles for their guests to use!
  • One woman became so upset when the contractor cleared sod from her lawn that she began weeping. As the bulldozer approached, she lay down in its path and wouldn’t get up. Finally, we convinced her that we would replace her precious petunias as soon as the contractor paved the trail.
  • Another time, an anti-government/militia-type person who was opposed to a trail began making vague threats to me. To him, this project represented the government abusing its power. Ironically, he then threatened to call the police and have me put in jail!
  • I once met with an angry man whose body shook as if he was freezing as we talked. Our trail project planned to take out several scrub trees within the right-of-way, which he considered his front yard. This triggered his paranoia, because he felt the trees were the last barrier between him and those out to ‘get’ him. Looking me in the eye he said “I better go inside now. I’m afraid I’ll do something I’ll regret if I don’t.”
  • We try to design our trails to serve as many people as we can. One trail connected a new development with a park, and passed in front of several houses on a busy road. One of those homeowners objected to the trail. His rationale—he was afraid with the trail traffic by his house that someone would steal the tires off his cars.
  • An elderly man was so upset about a trail that he was afraid he would have a heart attack during its construction. His parting words to me were “If I die during this project, you’re to blame, and that’s something you’ll have to live with for the rest of your life.”
  • While a trail was under construction an elderly man emerged from his house carrying his oxygen tank in one arm and waving a shotgun in the other while chasing the contractor away from his yard. This was his not-so-subtle way of voicing his displeasure with a new trail.
  • When a utility line is accidentally cut, I always hope that it is a “non-essential” service like electricity or telephone; homeowners are more understanding of these mishaps than when it’s their cable TV line that’s cut!!

Scott Post is a board member at the West Michigan Trails and Greenways Coalition. He has designed nearly 150 miles of non-motorized trails in Michigan.

When I started designing non-motorized trails in the Holland area about 16 years ago, trail development was still in its infancy. Since then, I have designed or managed construction of about 150 miles of trails. As your community’s trail system develops, maintenance becomes a real concern. Here are 13 of my favorite maintenance-minimizing trail design tips:

Paving

  • For a paved trail, use two courses of asphalt. The second course minimizes cracking and provides a much smoother surface for minimal extra up front cost. Contractors may ask if they can pave the same thickness in one course, because it saves them a little money. Do NOT allow it!
  • Extend your gravel sub-base at least one foot beyond the paved trail edge. Any less and the edges can crack and eventually fail.
  • Test the gravel gradation and compaction during construction. The wrong mix or sloppy compaction will cause early cracks in the pavement.

Vegetation

  • If it is necessary to clear vegetation to build your trail, be careful to remove all roots – especially willow trees and yucca plants. They will grow back right through the pavement!
  • Remove all dead and dying trees within 10 feet each side of the trail. Falling branches can be dangerous and the debris clutters trails.
  • Keep your trail away from trees if possible. Roots and debris are two of a trail’s most common maintenance headaches.
    If you cannot dodge trees and you are worried about roots wrecking the trail surface, consider installing a product similar to bio-barrier. Products like this do not injure the trees, but when installed correctly, they prevent the roots from growing under the trail.
  • If your trail parallels a road, as often as possible, maintain a grass strip between the pavement edges. This protects both the trail and the road shoulder. It also minimizes road gravel washing all over your trail after it rains.

Layout and Structure

  • If fill to build your trail, make sure the downhill side-slope is no steeper than 1 ft. of rise over 3 ft. width. If it is too steep, the slope often settles and takes the pavement edge with it.
  • If your trail includes a bridge or boardwalks, include concrete approach ramps. This minimizes the inevitable settlement and “bump” at the transition point.
  • If your trail goes downhill for longer than 300 ft., find a way to drain water off the trail surface into a swale, ditch, gutter or catch basin. Otherwise, the edge of the path, shoulders or the grass along the trail could wash out.
  • If you are building a trail above native clay soil, consider placing a filter fabric between the clay and the sand/aggregate sub-grade. It will help produce a uniform stress on the clay and prevent uneven settlement and pavement cracks.
  • In wet areas, make sure drainage goes under the trail, not over it. Build the trail higher if necessary. Use a culvert to convey flow or equalize ponding on both sides of the trail. Otherwise the trail becomes frequently wet and potentially dangerously slippery.

Scott Post is a board member at the West Michigan Trails and Greenways Coalition. He has designed nearly 150 miles of non-motorized trails in Michigan.

By Scott Post, PE

In my last post, I talked about where to find money for a non-motorized trail project. Here are nine ways you can help your project compete for grants:

  1. Have a written recreation plan, and designate non-motorized trails as your #1 priority.
  2. Commit as high a matching fund percentage as possible. Put a matching funds line item in your annual budget, so you can stockpile cash and react to an opportunity. Better yet, propose a millage for trails or parks. Many communities have discovered their constituents easily pass these millages.
  3. Provide connections to existing trails and trail networks, locally and especially regionally.
  4. Connect existing parks and schools together and with commercial and residential areas.
  5. Provide handicapped accessibility.
  6. Provide fishing or wildlife viewing opportunities.
  7. Have preliminary design completed and ready to go when funds become available. Your project doesn’t need to be “shovel ready”, but if preliminary design is complete it can easily be finished to the particular requirements of any grant program. If not, at least have a good cost estimate ready so you do not request too little grant funding.
  8. Develop your operations and maintenance plan and budget before building your trail or applying for grants. This shows funders your commitment to being a good steward of their money.
  9. Develop a “Friends of the Trail” group. This shows community support, commitment, and organization. “Friends” groups are typically official non-profit entities. This way private donations to your trail project are tax deductible!

Scott Post is a board member at the West Michigan Trails and Greenways Coalition. He has designed nearly 150 miles of non-motorized trails in Michigan.

By Scott Post, PE

Whenever I meet with a new non-motorized trails group or client, one of the first questions I am asked is, “Where can we get grants to pay for our trail?” If your group or community is planning a non-motorized trail, check out my seven favorite trail funding sources:

  1. Michigan’s Natural Resources Trust Fund (For example, Cannon trail)
    Grants a maximum of $300,000 per project. Applications are due April 1 each year.
  2. MDOT’s Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) (For example, Fred Meijer CIS Trail between Ionia and Owosso)
    Emphasizes regional trail connectivity.
  3. MDOT’s Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program (For example, Blue Star Trail)
    Can be used if your community is in a non-attainment zone for air quality. Trails can be constructed to provide access for alternative modes of transportation.
  4. Recreation or trails millages (For example, Spring Lake Township)
    Many communities have successfully passed trail millages to use for the development and maintenance of trail projects.
  5. Benefactors and Foundations (For example, Greenville Trail)
    Often local corporations in your community may see this as an opportunity to give back.
  6. Fund Drives (For examples, Big Rapids’ Access for All for the Riverwalk)
    Many local organizations will assist with fundraising for community projects that they support.
  7. MDOT’s Safe Routes to School program (For example, Allegan’s Monroe Street)
    Safe Routes to School funding will require a community non-motorized plan and the adoption of a Complete Streets ordinance.

 

Scott Post is a board member at the West Michigan Trails and Greenways Coalition. He has designed nearly 150 miles of non-motorized trails in Michigan.

By Jim Hegarty, P.E.

Unlike many Grand Rapidians, I missed the worst of Grand Rapids’ Great Flood of 2013. I was in Clearwater, Florida, reading the national news about our flood from the safety of my beach chair. Being in a relaxed and contemplative state, I began to ruminate about “our” flood in terms as only a civil engineer could.

To whit: The Grand River at downtown Grand Rapids saw its highest water level in over 100 years, but it wasn’t a 100-year flood.

What?

A 100-year flood is one whose flow has a 1% (1 in 100) chance of occurring in a given year. Statisticians study historical flood records to determine mathematically the magnitude of a 100-year flood.  Prior to 2013, Grand Rapids’ weather statisticians figured that the flood with a 1% chance of occurring in a given year is larger than the one that caused the highest water levels we’ve seen downtown in over 100 years!  In reality, the flow we saw in the great Grand Rapids flood equated to only a 16-year flood according to Mark Walton from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Weather Service.

Why, then, was the river so high? One word: floodwalls.

The floodwalls channeling the Grand River through downtown Grand Rapids haven’t been there for 100 years, and they raise the water level as the Grand River races between them to a more natural setting downstream. The walls “pinch” the river’s otherwise wide floodplain in this heavily-developed area, increasing both the river’s surface level and its velocity between them. Mayor Heartwell credited the floodwalls with saving the city from a massive flood.

The “100-year flood plain” is the ground elevation contour reached by the theoretical 100-year flood. People living within the 100-year flood plain are eligible for government-backed flood insurance, but only if Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) engineers have calculated and mapped the 100-year flood elevation for a given watershed.

Currently in draft form, FEMA’s updated Grand River floodplain maps show the Great Flood of 2013 remained within the 100-year floodplain because, as explained in the previous paragraphs, it was less than an “official” 100-year flood.

One of the reasons FEMA’s report remains in draft form is that it cannot “certify” that Grand Rapids’ floodwalls will contain the 100-year flood. FEMA’s current “draft” flood model shows that while the 100-year flood in Grand Rapids will not overtop the existing floodwalls, it will come within one foot of overtopping them. By FEMA’s definition a “certified” floodwall must have at least three feet of “freeboard” remaining between the 100-year water level and the top of the floodwall. Because the existing floodwalls are not “certified”, FEMA hydrologists revised their flood model to treat the current floodwalls as if they do not exist. The result, and a cause for great angst among Grand Rapids officials, is that much of the West Side is deemed to be within the 100-year floodplain!

Another irony is that there were no recorded 100-year storms directly preceding the Great Flood of 2013. A 100-year storm is one which has a 1% probability of occurring in a given year. The “storm” is usually rainfall, and in Grand Rapids it takes 6.15 inches of rainfall in a 24-hour period, or 2.8 inches in one-hour, to qualify as a 100-year storm.

Even 100-year storms do not guarantee 100-year floods. Why?

Besides rainfall, a river’s flood level depends on the beginning river depth before the storm and the extent of existing ground saturation. Also, an intense rain may only occur over a small portion of the overall watershed. It’s possible to have a 100-year storm in a dry watershed and not create a 100-year flood. And, as in Grand Rapids’ case, it’s possible to have less than a 16-year storm create a 16-year flood with already-saturated ground and high river levels.

 

 

By James R. Hegarty, P.E., Barbara Marczak, P.E., and Brian Vilmont, P.E.

Our infrastructure provides the foundation on which our communities are built: the roads that enable our transportation, the watermains that provide our drinking water, the sewers and treatment plants that put clean water back into our environment, and the buildings upon which our communities depend for services and support. All the assets that make up our infrastructure systems must be managed in order to maintain their value to our communities. Without asset management, our limited funds will continue to be depleted with reactionary repairs instead of leveraged to maximize the value of each dollar spent.

Asset management is not a new concept. The old Aesop fable of the grasshopper, who sings during summer instead of preparing for winter, and the ant, who stores up food for winter during the summer, ended with this lesson: “It is best to prepare for the days of necessity.”  We know that our assets will not last forever, but we can get the most value from them if we invest in their management and maintenance. Like the ant, it is important that we do our work now and not wait for the proverbial winter for our assets to fail. To be able to choose from the many tools available for asset management, it is important to understand the fundamentals first.

How asset management works

The goal of asset management is to provide the desired level of service from our assets at the lowest, long–term costs. Proactive asset management can reduce short–term reactionary expenditures and make the most out of the available funding. To accomplish this, we need to follow these basic steps:

1. Appraisal

  • Identify Assets
  • Document System History & Concerns
  • Determine Existing & Proposed Level of Service
  • Select Desired Management System
  • Develop Work Plan *
    *Required to apply for SAW Grant Funding

2. Inventory

  • Mapping
  • Criticality Review

3. Assessment

  • Condition: Physical  & Capacity
  • Risk
  • Cost: Maintenance & Rehabilitation/Replacement

4. Asset Management Plan

  • Maintenance Strategies
  • Capital Improvement Plan
  • Funding Alternatives & Strategies

5. Implementation

  • Public Education
  • Culture: Staff & Community Investment
  • Funding: Internal & External Sources
  • Tracking & Reporting: Community Dashboard

Grants Available

The State of Michigan is moving forward with funding of asset management plan development for municipalities through  the Stormwater, Asset Management, and Wastewater (SAW) Grants. Later this summer, MDEQ will accept grant applications for this program, providing up to $2,000,000 in grant funding per municipality. SAW Grants will be awarded on a first–come, first–served basis. For more information about Asset Management Plans and MDEQ SAW Grants, contact Jim Hegarty, P.E.,  Brian Vilmont, P.E. at (616) 364–8491, or Barbara Marczack, P.E. at (231) 798-0101.

Not everyone is aware of downtown development authorities (DDA), or why they are important. Many cities have one, and Michigan has 35 of them. Prein&Newhof often works with DDAs on projects related to streetscapes and downtown infrastructure.

Downtown is considered the heart of the city. It is an expanse of a few streets that are pedestrian-oriented and often show the historical aspect of the community.  It is an important driver for commerce, a stage for public events, and a representation of the city’s identity.

Many cities’ development has focused on suburbs and subdivisions in the last 60 years. This pattern stems from the invention of cars and streetcars.  Streetcar suburbs are now often the main thoroughfares of major cities, since we build where transportation is available. Although downtown living has been abandoned in the past century, the resurgence in the last ten years has been significant. We still value our downtowns and direct special funds and efforts to keep them vibrant.

DDAs use incremental property taxes from downtown property owners to make public improvements, which encourage private investment. DDAs are formed by the municipal government after public hearing and approval, and are given boundaries as a district.

Place-based economic development has become a popular issue in response to the economic recession of the last few years. Michigan cities have seen that local identity can drive local commerce, which stabilizes local economies.

Prein&Newhof was happy to be involved with the design of Greenville’s streetscape for M-91, which built the character and identity of Greenville’s downtown and was partially funded by Greenville’s DDA.

Do you think downtowns are worth our investment?