H126-01
Synthesizing Stormwater Infrastructure in United States Cities: Are we speaking the same language?

Friday, 11 December 2020: 17:30
Virtual
Benjamin Choat, Colorado State University, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Fort Collins, CO, United States, Amber Pulido, University of California Davis, Center of Watershed Sciences, Davis, United States, Aditi Bhaskar, Colorado State University, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Fort Collins, CO, United States, Chingwen Cheng, Arizona State University, The Design School, Tempe, AZ, United States, Jennifer Cherrier, CUNY Brooklyn College, Earth and Environmental Sciences, Brooklyn, NY, United States, Rebecca L Hale, Idaho State University, Biological Sciences, Pocatello, ID, United States, Kristina Hopkins, U.S. Geological Survey, South Atlantic Water Science Center, Raleigh, NC, United States, Lauren E McPhillips, Arizona State University, Global Institute of Sustainability, Tempe, AZ, United States, Thomas Meixner, University of Arizona, Hydrology and Atmospheric Sciences, Tucson, AZ, United States and Harry Zhang, The Water Research Foundation, Washington, DC, United States
Recorded Presentation
Abstract:
Stormwater infrastructure designed to clean, harvest, infiltrate, detain, or retain storm runoff have been regulated and implemented in United States cities for decades. As more diverse urban stormwater control measures (SCMs) have been utilized, terminology used to describe them has grown tremendously. Federal regulation has largely motivated application of newer types of SCMs, but selection of SCM types is typically made at the local level (e.g., municipal) resulting in isolated efforts and innovation regarding SCMs. Therefore, we sought to overcome this isolated holding of SCM data by synthesizing municipal-reported SCM types implemented in 23 United States cities. We used two SCM taxonomic systems to classify SCM types reported by cities into broad and more specific categories based on common quantity control, pollutant control, biological, and other unit processes as defined by the Water Environment Federation and American Society of Civil Engineers. Statistical analysis was used to understand the terms used by cities to describe their SCMs and to understand the SCM types implemented based on the three taxonomic systems. Nearly 400 different terms were used to describe the reported SCMs in the 23 cities. Cities with combined sewers used basins as a smaller portion of their municipal SCM portfolios compared to cities with separate sewers. When reported, green roofs represent a significantly larger portion of municipal SCM portfolios in areas with smaller 1-year 24-hour duration design storms. Cities located in counties that use larger volumes of groundwater report a significantly larger ratio of infiltration facilities in their SCM portfolios. This work advances the science and practice of stormwater management by establishing a database of municipal-reported SCMs, highlighting relationships between SCM type selection and social and geophysical characteristics of cities, and suggesting a common terminology framework for discussing SCMs.
Previous Abstract | Next Abstract >>