Rebuilding in the Floodplain: Revolutionizing engineering education through municipal infrastructure projects

Tara Kulkarni Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Norwich University

Aging municipal infrastructure and limited resources to fix these growing problems pose a considerable challenge to engineering graduates. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), and the US Army Corps of Engineers are among premier organizations that are recognizing the role of Public Private Partnerships as one possible solution to this challenge. To truly revolutionize engineering education and ensure that our graduating engineers are ready to take on these challenges, it is imperative that engineering students are able to experience real life projects, and interact with municipal contacts as well as private industry and consultants to supplement their classroom education. One way to provide this experience is by integrating service-learning and community-based projects into engineering curricula. This paper reports on six projects undertaken in fall 2015 by junior and senior year students in the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department to help with the redevelopment of the Dog River Park area. The projects were part of the laboratory portion of an introductory “Environmental Engineering” course and set up as a service-learning project. The projects ranged from developing a pathway through the park area, based on Best Management Practices and Green Stormwater Infrastructure practices, a sustainable, educational treehouse, assessing soil health on the site, planting a vegetative buffer made of mature trees, and a parking lot. The projects were developed over a five week period during which students were expected to develop ideas for potential projects with sustainability and green-infrastructure related goals, investigate the requirements of building in floodplains, present ideas, including design drawings, to the community partners, and develop materials for use by the local community on various topics associated with water resources management. A video was submitted to the Association of Environmental Engineering and Science Professors (AEESP) video competition showcasing an aspect of their project. Through this project, students had an opportunity to work on a real-life project, and use their skills to help the community. They were also able to enhance their own understanding of classroom content, and skills by participating in community problems, collaborating with community partners in research and implementation of ideas. They also worked on developing communication skills through written and oral communication as well as videos. Students were also expected to make use of mapping skills learnt in earlier Geographical Information System (GIS) lab and Auto CAD learnt in previous semesters. Moreover, the environmental engineering suite of six projects was a part of a larger multi-disciplinary service-learning project, including the disciplines of architecture, geology, and physical education.

Corresponding Author: tkulkarn@norwich.edu

Introduction/Background Rebuilding and retrofitting municipal infrastructure

in the context of emerging crises such as the lead poisoning in Flint, MI (USEPA, 2014) as well as climate change related events (Eames et. al., 2013) are bound to be the biggest challenges for new engineering graduates. In August 2016, the Northeast United States approaches the fifth year anniversary of Hurricane Irene, which made landfall in North Carolina, as a

strong Category I hurricane on August 27, 2011 (Weather.gov, 2011).

Irene, considered the sixth most expensive storm on record in the United States (Freedman, 2012) with $15.8 billion in damages, also cost 40 people their lives, and displaced countless families and businesses, and ripped apart the basic infrastructure in multiple communities, including roads, rail, highways, bridges, water and wastewater systems. Rebuilding communities destroyed in the wake of Irene has since been at the forefront of all affected municipal agendas.

In Vermont, even though the hurricane was downgraded to a Tropical Storm as it made landfall, there was severe damage of municipal infrastructure. The VT American Society of Civil Engineers (VT ASCE) reported that the storm “destroyed 500 bridges, 1000 culverts, washed away 500 miles of roads, damaged over 200 miles of rail, ruined numerous drinking and wastewater systems and outflanked several dams.”

The Town of Northfield, VT, located in central Vermont (Figure 1), experienced devastating flooding, resulting the deterioration of multiple properties and damage to its iconic covered bridges. The Dog River than runs through the town reached a record discharge

of over 20,000 cubic feet per second at its Northfield Falls gage (USGS, 2011) and flooded large sections of the town. As part of the response, the Town of Northfield hired local consulting engineers to

perform hydrogeological

investigations to begin rebuilding the community. They used

funds from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to purchase properties in the 100-year flood plain along the Dog River on Water Street. A committee of local stakeholders envisioned a flood resilient community park for this currently open tract of almost 5-acre piece of land. A graphic based on work done in this regard by the Vermont Downtown Action Team (VDAT) is shown in Figure 2.

Even as the town and its

partners continued its efforts, a team of faculty from

Norwich University

decided to take on the challenge of coming up with a vision for the proposed park as part of a service-learning course, across four different classes in as

many disciplines. These included, ‘Art and

Architecture’, ‘Civil and Environmental engineering’, ‘Geology’, and ‘Physical Sciences’. This paper highlights the work done in the environmental engineering course and presents the project as an example of two important ways that S-L can help revolutionize engineering education:

1. Providing a real life, hands on project activity, where students work with community partners to build on their classroom lessons, to add and improve skills in using diverse technical tools, communication, collaborative teamwork, creative critical thinking and problem solving.

2. Serving as a first step in educating students in the value of Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) that are currently being touted by major professional associations such as ASCE as one of the best ways to promote sustainable engineering in funding starved municipalities.

Methodology Eighteen students (juniors and seniors) from the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, enrolled in the CE 421 Environmental Engineering course worked on six projects for improving flood resiliency and enhancing community awareness in the Dog River area, designated to be repurposed as a flood resilient community park (Dog River Park). These project details are provided below. In addition, each team worked on developing a video, some of which were submitted to the 2015-2016 American Society of Environmental Science and Engineering Professors (ASEEP) Student Video Competition. The videos highlighted either some of their project work or supported the competition theme “Environmental engineers protect public and ecological health”. The projects were expected to be completed over a five-week timeframe, during each week’s three-hour lab session. Students were expected to attend a “kickoff” event launching the joint project with other groups on camps, make a brief 2-3 minute presentation during a mid-point check in for the community, a more detailed 5-8 minute presentation on their research and design work and videos, and submit a brief report summarizing their findings. The community partners were primarily the Town of Northfield, and the Friends of the Winooski River. A short description of each project is provided below: Project 1: Flood resilient pathway Goals: This team designed a standard park walkway through the area. By working closely with a Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (VT DEC) scientist, the team was able to develop a walkway

Figure 1. Northfield, VT

Figure 2. Rendering of the proposed Dog River Park area, VDAT, 2014

through the entire future park that will not need a permit. This was accomplished using Best Management Practices (BMPs). These included infiltration steps, route planning, rain gardens, and benching. The team made use of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and AutoCAD to produce their deliverables. The team had originally assumed that the park area had a wetland and were planning on developing an application to seek funds from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for wetlands restoration, but upon determination that the low lying area was not a wetland, they shifted gears and came up with the plan to develop the pathway instead. Project 2: Treehouse

Goals: This team designed an educational tree house for the park (Figure 3). The proposed tree house, placed centrally in the park, was designed to wrap all the way around the tree and provide panoramic views of the park. The floor of the tree house is hexagon shaped, with a display on each

side. The topics for the displays include runoff (discussing nitrates and phosphates), construction of the tree house, what a flood plain is and why it is important, green building techniques, and two displays for the scavenger hunt that were created throughout the park. The team had to research FEMA guidelines to make sure that the treehouse could be built in the floodplain. They also researched structures built in areas similar to our park. Project 3: Dirt and Water: Soil around the Dog River Goals: This team group researched the soils around the Dog River, their permeability, and their role as a filter for floodplain waters. Their project sought to answer the following questions:

1. “How do soils help with flood control and improve water quality?

2. “What forms of soils, native to Vermont will work to provide those functions for the Dog River?

Their main source of information was the Agency of Natural Resources Atlas. Soil science concepts,

including hydraulic conductivity and susceptibility to erosion were addressed.

Project 4: We speak for the trees: A tale of the Modern Day Lorax Goals: In this project, the team designed a barrier to help prevent erosion of the soil in the park. By researching trees and shrubs native to the area, the team proposed a row of 10 white pine trees 20 feet apart stretching over a 200 foot span, set back 30 feet from the south bank of the river. Each White Pine will cost approximately $900 to purchase a 16-foot tree. These trees are of the stage in their life where the root system will grow fast and is large enough to anchor the tree and retain the soil surrounding the tree. Project 5: WAAF Parking Lot Goals: The team “We are against flooding (WAAF) designed a parking lot for this park. The group decided to use a pervious surface to create a permeable parking lot to help improve drainage. The team used the Vermont Agency of Transportation guidelines and requirements for parking lots. They also consulted the Northfield zoning ordinance and maps. Project 6: Consultants Goals: This group served as the liaison across the various project groups in this course, as well as the project groups from the other majors. They developed templates for the various educational pieces that will be presented at the park. For example, a word search activity is shown in Figure 4 as part of a packet that was put together to be provided to the town library for use by the kids in the community. They also researched the use of recycled solid waste to make benches throughout the park. Finally, they also looked at mapping the green stormwater infrastructure practices in the central Vermont area.

Analysis The specific categories

that were used to help students use this course as an educational opportunity that went beyond traditional classroom education were as follows:

1. 1. Tools used: Students got an opportunity to use multiple tools to further their research and analysis related to their projects. Some of these

Figure 3. Treehouse

Figure 4. Word search

included GIS, AutoCAD, MS Excel, Vermont Atlas, soil maps, geologic formation maps, hydrological databases, local ordinances, zoning maps, floodplain regulations, etc. 2. Communication: This took on several forms

including written, oral and media. • Students were expected to communicate with

teams across campus from the other departments engaged in this project, and across other teams within this course and provide constant feedback to help each other improve their efforts and deliverables. This was mainly accomplished through emails, online discussion forums, and face-to-face meetings and in-lab discussions.

• Students were also expected to make contacts within the community and reach out to professionals involved in the technical aspects of their proposed projects to supplement classroom learning and faculty advisor expertise.

• Students were expected to submit a brief written report, documenting various project related activities.

• Students were also expected to develop a video for the AEESP competition (AEESP, 2015).

3. Collaboration: Each team comprised three

students, requiring teamwork and a proportional distribution of work and efforts. Collaboration was also expected across teams, as they were engaged in in-lab and online discussion activities where they were expected to provide feedback on each teams’ progress to date and offer any contacts, resources, etc. that could benefit the teams’ activities. For example, the team that designed the overall pathway for the proposed park consulted with a local Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (VT DEC) professional to determine the best placement and types of BMPs along the pathway. The “Consultants” group had to reach out to the coordinators of the Vermont Green Infrastructure Roundtable, a think tank of stakeholders interested in the green stormwater management of Vermont.

4. Engineering: As the projects spanned a variety of civil engineering disciplines, students were expected to use the environmental engineering course and this project as the basis to embrace the true nature of civil engineering. i.e. students involved in designing the tree house had to consider the environmental aspects and rules related to building in the floodplain, but also the structural components of wood construction. Moreover, a student on this team who had interned with a local engineering firm in their structural engineering division also reached out

to her contacts there for additional assistance. Students involved in the parking lot design gave due consideration to stormwater management on impervious surfaces, but also relied on their understanding of site development, and transportation courses that involved the study of building roads and parking lots, including gradients, materials used in road and parking lot construction including their strength, etc.).

5. Research: The open-ended nature of the project forced students to think creatively and critically about the possibilities of this space. They had to research the requirements and restrictions of building in a floodplain. They had to familiarize themselves with literature related to resilient building techniques, and look up case studies, where communities had successfully built in floodplains and done so in an ecologically friendly manner, keeping the tenets of sustainability (environmental, society, and economics at the core). Students also had to research various soil, plant, and other ecological features of this site and landscape, that wouldn’t ordinarily be covered in an introductory environmental engineering course, other than in a brief introductory manner.

6. Action: The motivation to help a community in need, being involved with real people, asking for this help, and appreciating their efforts, helped students stay focus on the big picture in this project. They were concerned about how many of their ideas and designs would actually be implemented. However, the tools that the teams created will be made available to local schools and libraries and will therefore have practical uses, beyond just being an educational lab exercise. For example, the team “consultants” has developed a template to display various educational materials at signage at the proposed park, which may not be in place until after the park is completed. However, they also developed trifold pamphlets that were provided to the local library to distribute to the community. These pamphlets describe the project, its need and ties to Irene and provide tips on water conservation and quality, among others. This group also developed a map of existing green infrastructure practices in central Vermont to complement some of the maps currently existing for the Burlington, VT area. For example, Figure 5 shows the map of GSI projects in Montpelier, VT.

The multiple interactions with community partners such as the Town of Northfield’s zoning administrator, the Director of the local nonprofit group – Friends of the

Winooski River, members of the Northfield Conservation Commission, etc. provided students an opportunity to learn about municipal and community issues first hand, and ask questions. During one of the lab sessions, students also participated in a training workshop developed and presented by the Central Vermont Regional Planning Commission that included a field trip to look at implemented Green Infrastructure practices in Northfield. While these were built on town and grant funds, possibilities of public private partnerships in the design, installation, and maintenance of green infrastructure practices were also discussed.

Conclusions

Each team presented their research and design at multiple events. Community partners had an opportunity to hear the students’ presentations and provide feedback. One community member remarked, “They [the students] are creative in their work, committed to the process, and poised presenters. I was so excited to hear these options and to know that there are more, as well, from your other students and the other departments. Wonderful!”      Student reactions and reflection on the project were mixed. A formal survey to gather student feedback was not undertaken at the end of the project period. The goal is to have students reflect on their experiences and provide feedback at the end of the spring semester, a semester after their projects were completed, to allow for a deeper reflection, without concern regarding their grades. Anecdotal and conversation feedback revealed that some students believed that a semester long timeframe may have been more beneficial than the 5 weeks allowed. Most students worked hard with hopes of making a real difference in the community. They were also excited at the prospect that some of their ideas may

actually be implemented as the project moves forward. Their major concerns included time management, and the fear that the community partners will ignore their work products, when professional consultants begin working on the project. As these participating students are primarily juniors, they will have additional opportunities to engage with the partners through the next academic year, providing a chance for the community to allay such fears. All in all, the course promoted environmental stewardship more strongly through this project. The multiple projects allowed students to use different parts of the course and lab to build their research and come up with their designs and solutions. They were able to reach across content from other relevant courses to deepen their understanding and experience of the assigned project. Multiple opportunities of presenting their work, allowed for the iterative engineering process of re-design and refinement. It allowed them to hone their presentation and communication skills as well. The goal is to continue with this multi-disciplinary theme. Our community partners have received additional funding to continue on this project and we have committed our support to ongoing work as well.

References 1. DelToral M, “High lead and three residences in

Flint, MI”, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2015, available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-11/documents/transmittal_of_final_redacted_report_to_mdeq.pdf

2. Eames M, Dixon T, May T, and M. Hunt, “City futures: exploring urban retrofit and sustainable transitions”, Building Research and Information, 41, no. 5, (2013), 504-516.

3. National Weather Service, Event Overview, Hurricane Irene August 26-27, 2011, available at http://www.weather.gov/mhx/Aug272011EventReview .

4. Freedman A, Hurricane Irene ranked most costly category I storm, Climate Central, 2012, available at http://www.climatecentral.org/news/hurricane-irene-ranked-most-costly-category-1-storm .

5. Vermont Downtown Action Team (2014), “Northfield, VT”, Vermont Department of Housing and Commuity Development, pp.17., Available at https://outside.vermont.gov/agency/ACCD/byl

Figure 5. Map of GSI in Montpelier, VT

aws/NDRC/V-DAT/Northfield_VDAT_Report.pdf

Acknowledgements Funding received under the Vermont Campus Compact grant entitled “Campuses for Environmental Sustainability” as well from Norwich University’s Center for Civic Engagement, in helping students participate in these activities is gratefully acknowledged.