Neil Intro Day1

  • 761 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
761
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
19
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. Low Impact Development and Green Strategies for Regulatory Compliance and Resource Protection Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 2. CHAPTER 26 CFR - WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL SUBCHAPTER I - RESEARCH AND RELATED PROGRAMS •§ 1251. Congressional declaration of goals and policy. (a) Restoration and maintenance of chemical, physical and biological integrity of Nation's waters; national goals for achievement of objective. • Ecosystems Based • Technology-forcing • Comprehensive Research • Total Maximum Daily Load Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 3. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 4. Regulations and Resource Protection Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 5. Environmental Environmental Interests Interests $ $ Development Development Interests Interests $ New Rules! Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 6. Low Impact Development Major Components 1. Conservation (Watershed and Site Level ) 2. Minimization (Site Level) 3. Strategic Timing (Watershed and Site Level) 4. Integrated Management Practices (Site Level) Retain / Detain / Filter / Recharge / Use 5. Pollution Prevention Traditional Approaches Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 7. Key LID Principles “Volume” and Water Balance to Achieve Objectives Unique Watershed Design  Match Initial Abstraction Volume  Mimic Water Balance  Uniform Distribution of Small-scale Controls  Cumulative Impacts of Multiple Systems  filter / detain / retain / use / recharge / evaporate  Decentralized / Disconnection  Multifunctional Multipurpose Landscape & Architecture  Pollution Prevention  Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 8. 1. Conservation Plans / Regulations Local Watershed and Conservation Plans  Forest (Contiguous and Interior Habitat)  Large and Small Scale Streams (Corridors)  Wetlands  Habitats  Step Slopes  Buffers  Critical Areas  Parks  Scenic Areas  Trails  Shorelines  Difficult Soils  Ag Lands  Minerals  Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 9. 2. Minimize Impacts Low Im pact Design Multifunctional Use of Landscape and Infrastructure Minimize clearing  Minimize grading  Save A and B soils  Limit lot disturbance Decentralized  Controls * Soil Amendments  Roofs Parking Lots Alternative Surfaces  Open Drainage Rain Barrels Open Space Reforestation  Turf Educational Disconnect  components Reduce pipes, curb and gutters  Reduce impervious surfaces  Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 10. 3. Maintain Time of Concentration and Watershed Patterns Open Drainage  Use green space  Flatten slopes  Disperse drainage  Lengthen flow paths  Save headwater areas  Vegetative swales  Maintain natural flow paths  Increase distance from streams  Maximize sheet flow  Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 11. 4. Storage, Detention & Filtration “LID IMP’s”  Uniform Distribution at the Source Open drainage swales  Rain Gardens / Bioretention  Smaller pipes and culverts  Small inlets  Depression storage  Infiltration  Rooftop storage  Pipe storage  Street storage  Rain Water Use  Soil Management**  Low Impact Development Center 2007 Emeryville and UCD
  • 12. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 13. 5. Pollution Prevention 30 - 40% Reduction in N&P Kettering Demonstration Project Maintenance  Proper use, handling and disposal  Individuals  Lawn / car / hazardous wastes / reporting / recycling  Industry  Good house keeping / proper disposal / reuse / spills  Business  Alternative products / Product liability  Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 14. LID is Not A land use or zoning control  An either this or that approach  Independent of watershed planning  “The” Answer  LID is A Water Balance Approach to Hydrology  A science and unit process based approach  Decentralized and Integrated  Technology Driven  “The” Answer  Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 15. Stormwater Drinking Water LID is a Holistic Integrated Approach Wastewater Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 16. N2 AIR NH3 Where did it all start? DENITRIFICATION RAINFALL EVAPOTRANSPIRATION ADSORPTION PARTICULATES LID BIOLOGICAL FIXATION PLANT MATERIALS RUNOFF RUNOFF Manual VOLITILIZATION METALS, NUTRIENTS MULCH SANDY SOIL MEDIUM AMMONIFICATION Stormwater NO3 NITROGEN FIXATION Hydrology NH4 Standards DENITRIFICATION NO2 Manual Manual DRAIN INFILTRATION RECHAR GE Landscaping Water DPW Land NITROGEN CYCLE FOR BIORETENTION Conservation Development Manual Manual San Diego LID Manual Village Homes Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 17. High Rate Bio-filtration Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 18. AIR N2 NH3 DENITRIFICATION RAINFALL EVAPOTRANSPIRATION ADSORPTION PARTICULATES BIOLOGICAL FIXATION PLANT MATERIALS RUNOFF RUNOFF VOLITILIZATION METALS, NUTRIENTS MULCH SANDY SOIL MEDIUM AMMONIFICATION NO3 NITROGEN FIXATION NH4 DENITRIFICATION NO2 DRAIN INFILTRATION RECHARGE NITROGEN CYCLE FOR BIORETENTION Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 19. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 20. Bioretention California Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 21. “Traditional” Stormwater Issues Non-Point Runoff Volume Trash & Debris Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 22. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 23. Traditional Urban Sustainable Urban Drainage Drainage Water Quality Capacity Capacity Amenity The Good Old Days! Low Impact Development Center 2007 Stahre, 2006
  • 24. Conventional - 70’s 70’s Flood Control  Approach Single Event Risk based storms (2-  year, 10-year, 100-year) Site Design and  Watershed use same approach (HEC, NRCS) for Common Platform Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 25. Predictable “Simple” Processes β K= 2/3 AR n Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 26. 80’s/90’s 70’s Flood Control Approach  Single event Risk based storms (2-year,  10-year, 100-year) Site Design and Watershed  use same approach (HEC, NRCS) for Common Platform Bring in Efficiency and  P × Pj × × Rv Loadings with %. L= × C × A × 2.72 12 L = Load, P=Precipitation Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 27. Today Moving towards Tributary  Strategies Loadings and Limits (303d)  Site Design Models don’t link  to Watershed Models Rapid Assessments that may  have significant data or science gaps Costs and Predictability  unknown Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 28. THE Difference Q = CIA ∫ C (t )Q(t )dt C= ∫ Q(t )dt Is this state-of-the-art? Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 29. Courtesy Geoanalysis Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 30. Low Impact Development Center 2007 Courtesy Wong, 2001
  • 31. Effective Work Index (W) Range of Geomorphically Significant flows Stream Flow τc τbi Characteristics of Bed and Bank Materials τc 1.5 n ∑ (τ − τ c) ⋅ ∆ t W= bi Normal Dry i= 1 Weather Flow Level Low Impact Development Center 2007 Geosyntec
  • 32. Smart Growth/LID Hydrology Are the Metrics and Protocols Right?  Control Runoff at Microwatershed Level  Consider Hydrologic Process in Microwatershed  Layout Maintain First Order Receiving Streams  Maintain Vegetated Buffer Zones  Control Spatial Pattern of Hydrologic Storage  Control Upland Flow Velocities  Control Temporal Characteristics of Runoff  McQuen, 2004 Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 33. Incorporated into Master Plan Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 34. Metro West Illustrative Plan Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 35. Low Impact Development Center 2007 Emeryville
  • 36. Land Use Change is a better indicator! Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 37. Issues Where is a watershed with less than 10%  imperviousness? Methods  Scale and location in watershed (avoid  headwaters) Cumulative effects  Moglen, 2007 Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 38. Compacted Dysfunctional Soils Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 39. Lawn Soil Compaction Compaction (Mpa) 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 0 10 20 30 Depth (cm) 40 50 60 No Uninhibited Impaired Root Root Root Growth Growth Growth 70 Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 40. Reston Watershed Management Planning Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 41. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 42. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 43. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 44. Buttermilk off North Shore Buttermilk off Ring Road Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 45. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 46. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 47. Stormwater Ponds: Valuable Wildlife Habitat? Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 48. TMDL Goose Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 49. B-IBI w/BMPs B-IBI w/o BMPs 45 40 35 30 B-IBI Score 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Watershed Urbanization (%TIA) Figure 2: Showing the lack of mitigating influence of structural BMPs on biologic conditions in Puget Sound lowland streams (Horner and May, 2000). Note, “w/BMPs” refers to structural facilities only. [Honer / May 2001] Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 50. Figure 1. Comparison of Habitat Condition and Montgomery County, Biological Condition for Sites With and Without SWM MD Habitat Condition vs Biological Condition Both of the datasets Test Sites (With Stormwater Controls) y=20.896*exp( 0.011*x)+eps 100 plot mainly below the 90 T08 line (Figure 1). Almost 80 (As % of Best Possible Score) T01 Biological Condition 70 T06 RE2 all test sites do, and 60 DS3 T05 T07 DS2 T12DS1 RE4 T02 RE1 T04 T15 50 T10 while 6-7 of the T14 T18 T03 T13 40 T16 T17 T09 T19 T11 T20 30 control sites plot 20 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Habitat Condition (as per cent of Best Possible Score) along the line, the remainder plot below Habitat Condition vs Biological Condition Control Sites (Without Stormwater Controls) y=17.126*exp( 0.016*x)+eps the line. 100 90 Stream embedding C04 C01 80 (As % of Best Possible Score) C02 70 Biological Condition Riffle areas C05 C03 C07 60 C13 C06 C09 Flow regime 50 C18 C15 C14 C11 C12 C16 C20 C08 C17 40 C19 30 20 WMI 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Low Impact Development Center 2007 Habitat Condition(as per cent of Best Possible Score)
  • 51. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 52. Where are the watershed functions?Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 53. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 54. The Future of the Urban America Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 55. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 56. Maintenance and Inspection • Safety • Inspection • Access • Special Equipment • Costs Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 57. Maintenance Pond Liabilities Limitations Safety • Safety / Health • Inspection / Maintenance • Inefficient Pollutant Removal • Temp / Sediment / Frequency / Volume Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 58. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 59. Cost/Effectiveness A bioretention pond costs $2,000 to construct for a ½ site. So it costs $4,000 per acre. MC = c IJ + mIJ Q * RJ 2 Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 60. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 61. BMP Removal Efficiency? Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 62. Ecological Integrity New Objectives Protection Species – Fauna / Flora Structure – Spatial / Temp / Distribution Processes – Cycling (Energy / Materials / Nutrients) Ecological Factors • Hydrology / Hydraulics • Habitat Structure • Water Quality • Energy Sources Small Stream and Living • Biotic Interactions Resource Protection Impact Development Center 2007 Low
  • 63. General Assumptions! For the foreseeable future, urbanization will continue  mostly in the same patterns as today. We don’t know exactly how much stress aquatic  ecosystems can sustain before they crash. Where aquatic ecosystems are stressed terrestrial  ecosystems are dysfunctional. Impact reduction strategies will most likely ensure  ongoing degradation of the ecological health due to cumulative impacts. There are no thresholds for acceptable levels of  stressors. Impacts to the ecological integrity occur whenever ecological functions are altered or stressors are added. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 64. General Assumptions! Our environmental technological challenge is  to integrate development into the ecosystem as best we can in a manner that developed areas remain a vital part of the ecosystem instead of apart from it. If growth and development continue  unabated, at best, technology can only delay the onset of negative consequences. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 65. Paradigm Shifts Watersheds to Ecosystems  Flow Centric to Volume Centric  Centralized Control to Decentralized Control  Uni-functional to Multifunctional  Impact Reduction to Functional Restoration  Good Drainage to Functional Drainage  One Size Fits All to Unique Design  Unsustainable to Sustainable  Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 66. Important Concepts Terrestrial / aquatic ecosystem linkages  Ecosystem functions  Using nature to mitigate its own forces  Mimic the water balance  Hydrology as an organizing principle  Multiple systems  Volume / Frequency / Timing  Ecological functions of the built environment  Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 67. Conventional Development Centralized Pipe and Pond Control Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 68. Multiple Systems LID Development Conservation Minimization Soil Amendments Open Drainage Rain Gardens Rain Barrels Pollution Prevention Disconnected Decentralized Distributed Multi-functional Water Use Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 69. Summerset Subdivision Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 70. Monitoring Results Discharge Comparision 0.04 LID Q 0.02 Conv. Q Discharge, cfs/acre 0.00 13:55 14:24 14:52 15:21 15:50 16:19 -0.02 Time, April 6, 2001 Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 71. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 72. Quantifiable Costs and Benefits $4 1.5 $2 1.5 1.5 $0 -0.1 -0.2 -0.4 (in $ millions) Project Cost -$2 -4.6 O&M Savings from Loan -$4 Increase Home Value -8.9 -$6 -$8 -$10 Do Nothing Option 2 & 3 Traditional Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 73. Green Highways Watershed Driven Stormwater  Recyclables and Reuse  Ecosystems and Conservation  Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 74. Context Sensitive Solution? Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 75. Green Highway Network Development Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 76. EMS/Performance Based Approach Protect Environmental Legacy  Save Costs/Reduce Consumption  Ease Regulatory Burden  Improve Review Cycles  Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 77. GHP/Stormwater EMS Roadmap 1. Identify environmental issue(s) and/or opportunity(ies) to be 11. Managers/senior management. Review addressed by EMS. progress, identify adjustments, and confirm 2. Identify desired commitments. environmental and business results and APPROVAL – benefits. 10B. PERIODIC 10A. PROJECT Management REVIEW REVIEW provides Brief management on Assess EMS feedback to 3. Establish objectives, status in meeting project finalize issues, quantifiable measures and objectives and targets. performance. opportunities, targets, and associated and expected milestones. results. 9. Identify EMS-related training needs, responsibilities and 4. Obtain management schedule. Conduct the commitment to EMS, training. characterize EMS resource needs, and identify EMS leaders. 8. Identify personnel (by title) affected by EMS, define responsibilities, and 5. Identify existing communicate initiatives, programs, responsibilities. procedures, processes, and tools relevant to the EMS. 7. Assign responsibility for developing enhanced or 6. Identify improvements to new procedures, achieve EMS objectives processes, and tools. PLAN DO CHECK ACT LEGEND: Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 78. Green Infrastructure rs opportunitiesive are R everywhere to s p to f o LID tools facilitate the development of  o green infrastructure R Transportation corridors provide linking  elements in a green infrastructure network Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 79. It is a system of hubs and links that provides measurable benefits ..The term green infrastructure  emphasizes interconnected systems of natural areas and other open spaces that are protected and managed for the ecological benefits that they provide to the people and the environment.” Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 80. Links and Hubs An organizing form idea for planning green  infrastructure Creates an interdependent network of  green Fits a watershed model of planning  Can be implemented and maintained in  sections Is an opportunity for public-private  partnerships Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 81. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 82. Historic Construct of Stormwater Regulations The majority regulate the peak flow rate of stormwater  discharges. Do not sufficiently address hydrologic modifications  and the impacts on receiving water quality – do not address increased volume of stormwater generated by development. Perpetuate the use of conventional end-of-pipe BMPs –  the use of which have not demonstrated significant water quality improvements. Fail to consider watershed criteria.  Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 83. Examples of robust LID Programs Portland, Oregon Photos courtesy of the Portland Bureau of Environmental Services. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 84. Portland, Oregon (cont.) Photos courtesy of the Portland Bureau of Environmental Services. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 85. Seattle, Washington Photos courtesy of Seattle Public Utilities. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 86. Vancouver, British Columbia Photos courtesy of City of Vancouver Greenways Program. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 87. Vancouver, British Columbia (cont.) Photos courtesy of City of Vancouver Greenways Program. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 88. What Motivated the Use of New Approaches? Portland’s innovative approaches to stormwater  management are necessitated by the need to satisfy a CSO consent decree, SDWA requirements, impending TMDL limitations, and Superfund cleanup measures. Stormwater runoff from Seattle and Vancouver  discharges to receiving waters with salmon populations. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 89. Conclusions Regulatory and environmental drivers create an  incentive for using new stormwater management approaches. When faced with certain and defined performance  criteria, source control and biological treatment of stormwater emerges as a preferred treatment option. How are jurisdictions developing regulations that spur  more wide-spread use of innovative stormwater management? Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 90. How are jurisdictions developing regulations that spur more wide-spread use of innovative stormwater management? Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 91. Anne Arundel County, MD Counties are permitted to establish more stringent  requirements than those required by the Maryland Stormwater Manual. AA County stipulates “The use of nonstructural  stormwater management practices shall be implemented to the maximum extent practicable for satisfying the recharge volume requirement prior to the use of structural stormwater management practices to more closely mimic the predevelopment hydrology and to discourage the reliance on structural BMPs.” Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 92. Effects of AA County Standard Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 93. Maryland Stormwater Management Act of 2007 Passed by the General Assembly in April and  signed into law by the Governor. Requires the implementation of environmental  site design to the maximum extent practicable and review and modification of ordinances to remove impediments to ESD. Developers must demonstrate that ESD has  been optimized on new development sites before using conventional BMPs. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 94. New Jersey Stormwater Regulations Groundwater recharge requirement:  Require that 100% of pre-development average annual  groundwater recharge volume for the site is maintained post- development, OR That the post-development increase in stormwater runoff for  the 2-year storm is infiltrated. Water quality requirement:  80% removal of TSS and reduction of nutrients to the  maximum extent feasible, with an emphasis on non-structural practices. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 95. New Jersey Stormwater Regulations (cont.) Runoff quantity requirement:   Require that post-development runoff hydrographs for the 2, 10, and 100-year storm do not exceed, at any point in time, the predevelopment hydrographs, OR  Demonstrate that there is no increase in peak runoff rates for the 2, 10, and 100-year storm events and that the increased volume and change of timing does not have downstream impacts, OR  Demonstrate that post-development peak runoff rates for the 2, 10, and 100-year storm events are 50, 75, and 80%, respectively, of pre-development runoff rates. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 96. Portland Stormwater Regulations City code requires on-site stormwater management for  new development and redevelopment (i.e., retention and infiltration). For other properties, stormwater must be retained or  infiltrated to the maximum extent practicable before off-site discharge is allowed. Required 70% removal of TSS and treatment for  pollutants with TMDL limitations in receiving stream. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 97. Washington, DC Anacostia River Redevelopment The AWC is responsible for  revitalization of lands along the river and coordinating environmental and programming initiatives that promote river clean up. One-inch, on-site retention  standard and water quality treatment for up to the 2-year storm for new development and re-development. Stated preference for  vegetated controls. Adopted by AWC board June  1st. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 98. Seattle Green Factor Requires 30% of a parcel in the Neighborhood Commercial  Zone to be vegetated or the functional equivalent as determined by the Green Factor. For example, the Green Factor for green roofs is 0.7,  permeable paving is 0.6, and lawn is 0.2. Bonuses provided for rainwater harvesting or planting low water-use vegetation. Encourages the planting of layers of vegetation on the  property and in public right-of-ways adjacent to the property. In effect as of January 2007.  Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 99. Recommendations for Regulations Incorporate volume and hydrologic performance  requirements into regulations. Create regulatory certainty.  Provide incentives for developers that use LID (e.g.,  streamline review process or move stormwater plans to the top of the stack). Maryland offers six different stormwater credits for  green practices. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 100. Incentives for LID Outside of Regulatory Structure Chicago and Portland offer density and building square  footage bonuses, respectively, for buildings with green roofs. Offer discounts for stormwater or other utility fees for  on-site or LID management practices – full-cost pricing is critical. Subsidized downspout disconnection programs.  In January 2006, Chicago provided 20 $5,000 grants for  residential and small-scale commercial green roofs and received 123 applications. Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 101. Coyote Creek Watershed Courtesy E. Takata Low Impact Development Center 2007
  • 102. Coyote Creek Green Infrastructure Principles Start upstream  Connect the Dots  Use Nature as a Guide  All Fronts/No backs  Manage for the Long Term  Multiple Objectives  Low Impact Development Center 2007