STORM WATER SOLUTIONS FOR EXISTING URBAN AREAS: IDENTIFYING SITES TO MAXIMIZE RESULTS Jared Bartley, Cuyahoga SWCD September 8, 2011

Acknowledgements Identifying Sites to Maximize Results

Overview  Overview of the NFWF funded project  Review of the process used to develop a storm water retrofit inventory  Lessons Learned Identifying Sites to Maximize Results

Targeting Storm Water Retrofits to Improve Urban Streams Identifying Sites to Maximize Results  Grant awarded through National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) Sustain Our Great Lakes grant program in May Specifically, the funding for the program is from USEPA and ArcelorMittal.  Targets four watersheds in Cuyahoga County – Abram and Baldwin Creek in the Rocky River Basin and the East and West Branches of Euclid Creek.  CSWCD contracted with Biohabitats to provide project oversight and guidance and concept development.  Provides funding to:  conduct a storm water retrofit inventory and prioritization,  develop conceptual designs for high priority sites.

Storm Water Retrofit Process Identifying Sites to Maximize Results  Retrofit Scoping  Desktop Analysis  Field Investigation  Retrofit Inventory Compilation  Evaluation and Ranking  Conceptual Design  Retrofit Delivery

Retrofit Scoping Identifying Sites to Maximize Results  Understand watershed conditions and restoration objectives  Identify targeted land use for treatment  Identify typical locations where retrofitting may be most successful

Retrofit Scoping Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Rocky River Watershed Drainage Area = 294 square miles 660 Stream Miles Tributary to Lake Erie Population of ~ 250,000 Land Cover:  42% Wooded  40% Agriculture  14% Urban 26% Imperviousness Impacted by channel/habitat alteration, siltation/ embedded substrate, and nutrient loading (especially N). Understand watershed conditions and restoration objectives

Retrofit Scoping Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Euclid Creek Watershed Drainage Area = 23 square miles 43 Stream Miles Tributary to Lake Erie Population of ~ 60,000 Land Cover:  48% Urban  31% Wooded  19% Open 33% Imperviousness Impacted by nutrient loading, habitat alteration, streambank erosion/scour, CSO’s and illicit discharges. Understand watershed conditions and restoration objectives

Retrofit Scoping Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Identify targeted land use for treatment Focused on institutional, commercial, and industrial land

Retrofit Scoping Identifying Sites to Maximize Results  Existing Storm Water Ponds  Upstream of Roadway Crossings  Downstream of Outfalls  Within the Existing Conveyance System  Within Transportation Rights-of-Way  Large Parking Lots  Hotspot Operations Identify typical locations where retrofitting may be most successful

Desktop Analysis Identifying Sites to Maximize Results  Compile mapping/layers  Aerial photos, sewers, sewersheds, outfalls, parcels, hydrology, contours  Conduct a desktop search for potential retrofit sites

Desktop Analysis Identifying Sites to Maximize Results  Parcel based process  Reduced number of potential site through several GIS queries  Visual inspection of aerial photos

Field Investigation Identifying Sites to Maximize Results  Characterize drainage patterns and retrofit potential at each parcel

Field Investigation Identifying Sites to Maximize Results  Site Description  Drainage Area to Site  Existing Site Conditions  Potential Retrofit Opportunity  Site Constraints Characterize drainage patterns and retrofit potential at each parcel

Field Investigation Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Site Description Characterize drainage patterns and retrofit potential at each parcel

Field Investigation Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Drainage Area to Site Characterize drainage patterns and retrofit potential at each parcel

Field Investigation Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Existing Site Conditions Characterize drainage patterns and retrofit potential at each parcel

Field Investigation Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Potential Retrofit Opportunity Identify typical locations where retrofitting may be most successful

Field Investigation Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Site Constraints Identify typical locations where retrofitting may be most successful

Field Investigation Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Characterize drainage patterns and retrofit potential at each parcel

Field Investigation Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Characterize drainage patterns and retrofit potential at each parcel

Field Investigation Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Characterize drainage patterns and retrofit potential at each parcel

Retrofit Inventory Compilation Identifying Sites to Maximize Results  Provide quality assurance of field forms  Update parcel-based database with field data

Evaluation and Ranking Identifying Sites to Maximize Results  Choose ranking factors  Assign weights to ranking factors  Develop system to assign scores to individual sites  Create a prioritized list

Evaluation and Ranking Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Potential for Treatment  Drainage area treated  Impervious area treated  Potential percentage of watershed water quality volume that may be treated  Potential percentage of watershed channel protection volume that may be treated  Land use treated Secondary Benefits  Potential education / demonstration project  Treatment of area(s) of concern  Potential to support other watershed restoration projects  Potential to address known problem areas Site Constraints  Access  Conflicts with existing utilities  Potential ecological conflicts  Adjacent land use  Identified as project for further consideration during QA/QC Characterize drainage patterns and retrofit potential at each parcel

Evaluation and Ranking Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Potential for Treatment  Drainage area treated  Impervious area treated  Potential percentage of watershed water quality volume that may be treated  Potential percentage of watershed channel protection volume that may be treated  Land use treated Secondary Benefits  Potential education / demonstration project  Treatment of area(s) of concern  Potential to support other watershed restoration projects  Potential to address known problem areas Site Constraints  Access  Conflicts with existing utilities  Potential ecological conflicts  Adjacent land use  Identified as project for further consideration during QA/QC Characterize drainage patterns and retrofit potential at each parcel

Evaluation and Ranking Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Potential for Treatment  Drainage area treated  Impervious area treated  Potential percentage of watershed water quality volume that may be treated  Potential percentage of watershed channel protection volume that may be treated  Land use treated Secondary Benefits  Potential education / demonstration project  Treatment of area(s) of concern  Potential to support other watershed restoration projects  Potential to address known problem areas Site Constraints  Access  Conflicts with existing utilities  Potential ecological conflicts  Adjacent land use  Identified as project for further consideration during QA/QC Assign weights to ranking factors

Evaluation and Ranking Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Assign weights to ranking factors

Evaluation and Ranking Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Develop system to assign scores to individual sites Potential for Treatment  Based on percentage of the largest areas under consideration  Land use based on event mean concentration for drainage area land use Potential for Ecological/Community Benefits  Points assigned as yes/no/maybe Site Constraints  Points assigned as yes/no/maybe

Evaluation and Ranking Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Create a prioritized list

Evaluation and Ranking Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Overview: Narrowing down potential sites  Retrofit Scoping  4 subwatersheds  Institutional, commercial, and industrial parcels  Typical locations that may be successful for retrofitting  Desktop Analysis  258 institutional, commercial and industrial parcels  Field Investigation  67 parcels investigated  Retrofit Inventory Compilation  52 parcels appropriate for stormwater retrofitting  Evaluation and Ranking  20 priority retrofit locations  Conceptual Design  4 locations proceeding to conceptual design

Conceptual Design Identifying Sites to Maximize Results Secondary Screening  Property ownership and landowner cooperation  Support of an interested community partner  Potential cost of design and construction  Opportunity to support protection of a rare, threatened or endangered species  Potential to obtain an easement for the location  Potential to serve as a demonstration project related to the NEORSD storm water fee  Community cooperation  Specific, local priorities for storm water management (e.g., runoff reduction to reduce CSOs)

Conceptual Design Identifying Sites to Maximize Results

Lessons Learned Identifying Sites to Maximize Results  Retrofit Scoping  Involve stakeholders in identifying potential or desirable retrofit locations  Desktop Analysis  Identify a tracking mechanism and create a tracking database based on this (e.g., parcel identification numbers)  Field Investigation  Focus initial investigation on characterization of site drainage patterns, existing infrastructure, and potential constraints  Retrofit Inventory Compilation  Download photos and organize field data daily  Have an experienced stormwater professional perform QA/QC review  Build on the database created during the desktop analysis  Evaluation and Ranking  Use a two-step ranking and screening approach  Conceptual Design  Produce graphics and narratives that can convey the proposed retrofit concept to potential funders and stakeholders

QUESTIONS? Jared Bartley, Cuyahoga SWCD September 8, x