Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health

1,326

Published on

Assessing Implementation of Management Practices and Their Relation to Water Quality. Presentation by Dianna Hogan, Taylor Jarnagin, Keith VanNess, Jennifer St.John, and Rachel Gauza, March 25, 2009

Assessing Implementation of Management Practices and Their Relation to Water Quality. Presentation by Dianna Hogan, Taylor Jarnagin, Keith VanNess, Jennifer St.John, and Rachel Gauza, March 25, 2009

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,326
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
30
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  1. Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health Assessing Implementation of Management Practices and Their Relation to Water Quality Dianna Hogan1, Taylor Jarnagin2, Keith VanNess3, Jennifer St.John3, and Rachel Gauza3 1USGSEastern Geographic Science Center 2EPA Landscape Ecology Branch, Environmental Sciences Division 3Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection March 25, 2009
  2. Clarksburg Special Protection Area (CSPA) Presentation Overview  Definition (BMP)  Partnership and goals  Study site description Detention pond and sand filter  Selected methods and preliminary findings  Local level BMP database that maps development, BMP type and placement, and landscape stormwater flow direction  Four Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR) overflights  Monitoring of physical and biological parameters
  3. Which Best Management Practices (BMPs)?  Suburban land management actions  above/below ground retention or infiltration, wet or dry ponds, sand/gravel filters, constructed wetlands, vegetated buffer strips, etc.  Designed to lessen impacts of suburban land use by treating and/or retaining or detaining stormwater runoff filtration Splitter with vent recharge trench detention basin
  4. Clarksburg Special Protection Area (CSPA) Partnership  Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection (DEP)  Montgomery County Department of Permitting Services (DPS)  Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission  University of Maryland College Park (UMDCP)  Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University  USEPA Landscape Ecology Branch, Ecosystems Research Division, and Office of Water  US Geological Survey (USGS) Eastern Geographic Science Center (EGSC) and Water Resources Discipline (WRD)
  5. Clarksburg Special Protection Area (CSPA) Partnership Goals  Study the impacts of land use change  Agriculture / forest to suburban  Document how the changes in topography and imperviousness affect the hydrology, biology, chemistry, and geomorphology of receiving streams  Assess the effectiveness of local level BMP mitigation protocols Goal: Better understand the potential pollutant retention of specific BMP mitigation designs and promote the application of this information across the Chesapeake Bay region
  6. Clarksburg Special Protection Area (CSPA) Study Site Description  Developing under SPA guidelines  Designed to protect high quality streams in developing areas  Advanced sediment and erosion controls, stormwater BMPs in series, interception of water further upstream  Before-after control study  5 subwatersheds (0.9 – 3.4 km2)  Undeveloped positive control on parkland  Developed negative control in Germantown (completely built out; pre-2000 criteria)  Three test areas  5 USGS stream gages (red dots)  Water quality (blue dots)  2 precipitation gages (near Sopers and Cabin Branch)
  7. Clarksburg Special Protection Area (CSPA) Methods and Preliminary Findings: BMP Database  Local level BMP database (GIS)  Pre- and post-development  Building footprints, roads  Stormwater management infrastructure and conveyance (pipes, swales, treatment trains)  BMP type, placement, DA, IC  Stormwater flow direction  Integrate land use and BMP information with chemical, biologic, and physical stream data  Study local level BMP protocols for water quality mitigation  Effect of BMP type, location, use in series or as individuals, and development patterns
  8. Clarksburg Special Protection Area (CSPA) Methods and Preliminary Findings: BMP Database Inclusive  retention or infiltration areas, wet ponds, extended detention ponds, sand filters, etc.  private BMPs - dry wells along the back side of houses by streams Temporal  Sediment and erosion control during construction (settling for large volumes of sediment-laden runoff)  Stormwater management post-construction (quantity and quality control of stormwater runoff) Dry well Clarksburg, MD 9/05 Dry well schematic Adjacent sediment trap prior Sand filter to conversion to a detention Clarksburg, MD 5/06 basin Clarksburg, MD 5/06
  9. Clarksburg Special Protection Area (CSPA) Methods and Preliminary Findings: BMP Database
  10. Clarksburg Special Protection Area (CSPA) Methods and Preliminary Findings: LiDAR  Four Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR) overflights  2002, 2004, 2007, 2008  Optical remote sensing  Measures properties of scattered light to determine distance by measuring time delay between transmission and detection of the After, Flood, 1997 reflected signal  Map temporal changes in the landscape, stream morphology, watershed hydrology, infiltration conditions, and used for hydrological modeling Z Y X
  11. Clarksburg Maryland Special Protection Area: Tributary 104 site 2002 USGS Stream Gauge Site Jarnagin 2008 EPA LEB
  12. Clarksburg Maryland Special Protection Area: Tributary 104 site 2002 USGS Stream Gauge Site Jarnagin 2008 EPA LEB
  13. Clarksburg Maryland Special Protection Area: Tributary 104 site 2004 USGS Stream Gauge Site Jarnagin 2008 EPA LEB
  14. Clarksburg Maryland Special Protection Area: Tributary 104 site 2004 USGS Stream Gauge Site Jarnagin 2008 EPA LEB
  15. Clarksburg Maryland Special Protection Area: Tributary 104 site 2006 USGS Stream Gauge Site Jarnagin 2008 EPA LEB
  16. Clarksburg Maryland Special Protection Area: Tributary 104 site 2005 post constr. BMP 2006 USGS Stream Gauge Site Jarnagin 2008 EPA LEB
  17. Clarksburg Maryland Special Protection Area: Tributary 104 site 2007 USGS Stream Gauge Site Jarnagin 2008 EPA LEB
  18. Clarksburg Maryland Special Protection Area: Tributary 104 site 2008 USGS Stream Gauge Site Jarnagin 2009 EPA LEB
  19. Clarksburg Maryland Special Protection Area: Tributary 104 site 2008 USGS Stream Gauge Site Jarnagin 2009 EPA LEB
  20. Clarksburg Special Protection Area (CSPA) Methods and Preliminary Findings: Monitoring  Monitoring of physical and biological parameters  Stream flow (USGS flow gages at each subwatershed)  Stream monitoring focusing on rapid habitat assessment, geomorphology, water temperature, sediment, and benthic macroinvertebrates  Precipitation gages (2)  Selected BMP monitoring  Integration of monitoring data with the BMP database  Preliminary findings in developing areas:  Stream conditions have declined  Flashier storm response  Altered stream geomorphology (bed aggradation during development then channel erosion postdevelopment)  Sinuosity ratio indicates channel straightening
  21. Clarksburg Special Protection Area (CSPA) Methods and Preliminary Findings: Monitoring Average Stream Conditions (combined benthic macroinvertebrate and fish scores)
  22. Clarksburg Special Protection Area (CSPA) Summary  Few studies have followed comparable small watersheds from pre-construction through build-out to evaluate various combinations of stormwater management mitigation  Development in the CSPA is ongoing - need to be further in the development process for trend analysis and determine if there will be recovery  Increasing targeted monitoring efforts – USGS postdoc and discussing sediment collection  We will continue to evaluate the effectiveness of different BMPs and water quality protection measures Correlate changes in stream flow, biological and chemical parameters, and geomorphology with development patterns and the BMPs used to mitigate the impacts of development 1998 2008
  23. THANK YOU ! Dianna Hogan dhogan@usgs.gov Taylor Jarnagin Jarnagin.Taylor@epamail.epa.gov Keith VanNess Keith.VanNess@montgomerycountymd.gov Jennifer St.John Jennifer.St.John@montgomerycountymd.gov Rachel Gauza Rachel.Gauza@montgomerycountymd.gov Hogan, D., Jarnagin, T., VanNess, K., St.John, J., Gauza, R., 2009, Suburban Land Use, Stormwater Best Management Practices, and Receiving Stream Health [abs.]: Ecosystem Based Management - The Chesapeake and Other Systems, p. D-45.

×