Redesigning the American Neighborhood Developing an Ecological

1
Redesigning the American Neighborhood
Developing an Ecological Socioeconomic
Framework for Effective Stormwater Management
School of Natural Resources - UVM

• School of Natural Resources
• Gund Institute of Ecological Economics
• Alan McIntosh, Breck Bowden, Alexey Voinov, John
  Todd Alex Hackman, and Tim White

2
The US at Night (1993 vs 2001)
The National Geographic Society (2001)
3
Urban Sprawl in New England

• growth
• fragmentation
• corridors

The National Geographic Society (2001)
4
Urban Sprawl
Sprawl is dispersed, automobile-dependent
development outside of compact urban and village
centers along highways and in rural countryside.
5
Sprawl ImperviousCover
Center for Watershed Protection 2003
6
Flow as a pollutant

• Higher highs/lower lows
• Intensification/flashiness

Center for Watershed Protection (2003)
7
Runoff as a function of Imperviousness
Center for Watershed Protection (2003) after
Schueler (1987)
8
Northern Virginia Streams
Fairfax County (2001) in CWP (2003)
9
Variation among subwatersheds
Horner and May (1999) in CWP (2003)
10
TypicalPollutantConcentrationRanges
State of Maine (1995)
11
Are sediments the only concern?

• Comparison to selected VT Water Quality Standards
• No TSS causing impairment
• 0.010 0.054 mg/L total phosphorus
• 2 and 5 mg/l nitrate for Class A and B waters
• 10 ug/L acute, 8 ug/L chronic
• 23 ug/L acute, lt1 ug/L chronic
• 57 ug/L acute, 52 ug/L chronic
• ltlt1 mg/L as pesticides and PCBs
• No oil or grease causing impairment

VT Water Quality Standards
VT Stormwater Manual, Vol 2
12
Impacts ofImperviousArea
Center for Watershed Protection (2003) as noted.
13
Sprawl, impervious area, impairment
Center for Watershed Protection 2003
14
Impaired Rivers
Burton and Pitt (2002) Stormwater Effects Handbook
15
Impaired Lakes
Burton and Pitt (2002) Stormwater Effects Handbook
16
Redesigning the American Neighborhood Developing
an Ecological Socioeconomic Framework for
Effective Stormwater Management

• Purpose To develop tools that will allow
  stakeholders, regulators, and researchers to
  visualize alternative future environmental states
  that they imagine collectively and then to
  optimize the mix of interventions at various
  scales, that will best balance environmental and
  social, as well as economic, criteria.

Supported by US/EPA
17
Why focus on scale?
18
Why focus on scale?
Clearly, a mix of interventions is desirable.
But what mix? For what
purpose? Located where?
19
Primary Goal

• Quantify the balances among environmental,
  economic, and social costs and benefits for storm
  water management at whole-watershed,
  neighborhood, and individual house scales in a
  typical New England landscape and climate.

20
Key Objectives

• Assessment What are the opportunities for
  intervention?
• Evaluation What are the comparative
  cost/benefits of these interventions?
• Participation How can we better involve
  community stakeholders to devise successful
  solutions?
• Implementation Can we demonstrate the these
  approaches work?

21
Project Focus Area
22
ButlerFarmSubdivision
23
Key Collaborations

• US-EPA/SNR-UVM (McIntosh, Bowden, Todd, Voinov)
• Partnership with South Burlington (JB Hoover)
• Collaboration with key consultants (PEC, J
  Nelson)
• Advice from key stakeholders (Project Working
  Groups)
• EPA Demonstration grant (JB Hoover)
• NRCD implementation grant (A. Willard, B. Gabos)

24
Stormwater management matters
25
Fortuitous Timing

• Vermont ANR Watershed Improvement Permits
• Vermont Water Resources Board Investigative
  Docket What is the technical basis for
  stormwater management in Vermont?

26
Key Questions in the WRB Investigation

• Is it feasible to use source control as a
  primary option?
• Can improvements be achieved in 5 years?
• Can we separate and deal with natural vs man-made
  sources of pollutants?
• Is a TMDL approach the best way to address clean
  up streams impaired by stormwater?
• Are stormwater offsets a reasonable approach to
  stormwater management?
• Can we predict how indicators of impairment
  will respond to stormwater treatment strategies?
• What is the best way to evaluate progress toward
  desired goals?
• What are the best targets to judge when we have
  attained desirable goals?
• If we cant attain the standards we want, what
  should we do?

27
What can science do tohelp solve complex
problems?

• The perspectives of science basic - applied

• The limits of science unpredictability -
  precaution

• The fallibility of science reductionist -
  wholistic

What are the indicators of good RST?
28
Opportunities

• Vermont (and Potash Brook) have become ground
  zero for stormwater issues regionally as well as
  nationally
• Several partners have come together to form the
  RAN collaboration.
• The RAN collaboration is in a position to
  contribute significantly to this debate.

29
Thank you!
30
National Event Mean Concentrations
Center for Watershed Protection (2003)
31
Impacts of Deposited Sediments
Center for Watershed Protection (2003)
32
Impacts of Suspended Sediments
Center for Watershed Protection (2003)
33
Potential pollutants other than sediments
A measure of variance in the data.
National EMC background
Burton and Pitt (2002) Stormwater Effects Handbook
34
University Mall
35
Williston Road/Burlington Airport
36
I-189/Shelburne Road
37
Some immediate responses to the October 2003 SNR
Board Meeting

• Seminar in Urban Watershed Management (Bowden)
• Panel Discussion on Urban Sprawl (Bowden)
• Seminar in Stormwater Modeling (Bowden)
• Seminar in EcoVillage Design (Costanza et al.)
• Ecological Design Living Technologies (Todd)
• Urban planning and policy development (Troy)
• Ecological Economics (Erikson)