Stormwater Retrofitting Demystified! A training for local governments to cost effectively implement retrofits to meet MS-4 permit and Chesapeake Bay TMDL.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
creating a sustainable world The Chesapeake Bay TMDL A Policy Model for Nutrient Pollution Reductions James Noonan October.
Advertisements

Pennsylvania Nonpoint Source BMP Effectiveness, Cost-Effectiveness and Potential for Reducing Loads Jeff Sweeney University of Maryland PA Chesapeake Bay.
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Reduction Presenter: Keith Noble, Saginaw Bay District Office.
The strength of our commitment to the health of the land and to each other is written in the quality of water we send downstream. Luna Leopold.
Water Pollution. Definitions Impaired Waters Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires states to develop lists of impaired waters, those that do.
RTI International RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute. Economic Study of Nutrient Credit Trading for the Chesapeake.
Howard County, MD Phase II Watershed Implementation Plan October 6, 2011 Howard Saltzman Howard County Department of Public Works.
Storm Drain Medallion Mini-Grant Program. Storm Drains Storm drains are the entrance to the drain system that transports excess water from streets, parking.
MS4 Stormwater Permit Program and Great Bay. Brief Overview – EPA’s Stormwater Management Program Clean Water Act – NPDES Stormwater amendments.
NPDES Phase II Storm Water Regulations: WHAT MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS NEED TO KNOW.
Stormwater Management For Developing Municipalities What Residents Can Do What Towns Can Do.
Christopher Brosch University of Maryland Modeling Subcommittee Meeting January 11, 2012.
Current Planning for 2017 Mid-Point Assessment Gary Shenk COG 10/4/2012 presentation credit to Katherine Antos and the WQGIT ad hoc planning team.
SLIDE 1 Sustainable Stormwater Management May 6, 2015 Blue Highways: Transportation and Stormwater Management in Virginia Ginny Snead, PE Richmond Office.
Center for Watershed Protection Illicit Sewage Discharges in the Chesapeake Bay 2012 Chesapeake Bay Stormwater Retreat Lori Lilly Watershed Ecologist/Planner.
Mark Dubin Agricultural Technical Coordinator University of Maryland Extension-College Park Modeling Quarterly Review Meeting April 17, 2012.
LCRA Highland Lakes Watershed Ordinance
Update on the District of Columbia’s Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) for the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) November 18, 2010.
Chesapeake Bay Program Incorporation of Lag Times into the Decision Process Gary Shenk 10/16/12 1.
Virginia Nutrient Credit Trading: Nonpoint Source Offset Options Kurt Stephenson Dept of Ag & Applied Economics Virginia Tech
Nutrient Management in the Urban Landscape Rebecca Kluckhohn, P.E. Watershed Engineer West Metro Water Alliance Forum, May 18 th 2011 W W e n c k Engineers.
Center for Watershed Protection USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Area, State and Private Forestry How to estimate future forest cover in a watershed.
Agua Hedionda Watershed Management Plan Watershed Planning Group Meeting June 5, 2008 Carlsbad, CA.
Tom Schueler Update on Proposed Virginia Stormwater Regulations and Adapting them for the Ridge and Valley Winchester VA October 28, 2008.
Steve Harrison, Environmental Manager Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control -Mosquito Control Section.
Background and Overview Stormwater NPDES Compliance For New Developments.
New Stormwater Regulations “C.3” Provisions in effect Feb. 15, 2005.
Progress Update: Evaluation of Federal Facilities in WIPs and Milestones CBPO Management Board March 6, Jim Edward, EPA Greg Allen, EPA.
Stormwater 101 Ohio Lake Erie Commission Best Local Land Use Practices Kirby Date, AICP.
1 “ Understanding the Local Role of Improving Water Quality” Virginia Association of Counties November 14, 2011 Virginia Association of Counties November.
Best Management Practices and the Chesapeake Bay Program Watershed Model Jeff Sweeney University of Maryland Chesapeake Bay Program Office
DC Draft Phase II Watershed Implementation Plan Stakeholder Meeting March 1, 2012 Metropolitan Washington Council Of Governments Hamid Karimi Deputy Director.
The Watershed Treatment Model Chesapeake Bay Science and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC) Annapolis, MD June 7, 2011 Deb Caraco Center for Watershed.
Developing Final Phase II WIPs and Milestones Jim Edward EPA Deputy Director Chesapeake Bay Program Office DDOE Meeting with Federal Partners February.
Stormwater Retrofitting: The Art of Opportunity Prepared by the Center for Watershed Protection.
Urban BMP Incentive Study (HJR 107) And Other Interesting Legislative Items Delegate David Bulova August 10, 2007.
1 Questions Addressed What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Pollutant Reduction Opportunities.
Why are we here today? To discuss the challenges we face in meeting NPDES Phase II minimum requirements for stormwater control. The NPDES program requires.
Suzanne Trevena EPA Water Protection Division Chair Milestone Workgroup December 4,
Stormwater Water Quality Treatment Options Alvin Shoblom, P.E. Hydraulics Engineer.
Status Report on Chesapeake Bay Clean Up Plan Wastewater Sector June 2, 2010.
Redwood River TMDL Critique David De Paz, Alana Bartolai, Lydia Karlheim.
Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Stormwater Management and Elements of Low Impact Development Protecting Our Water Resources – An Ecological Approach to Land.
Patapsco and Back River HSPF Watershed Model Part II – Water Quality Maryland Department of the Environment.
Low Impact Development (LID)
Effective Post-Construction Stormwater Management Mike Novotney, P.E. (MD) Center for Watershed Protection Ronald Feldner, P.E. Ecological Solutions, Inc.
2004 Tributary Strategies: Assessment of Implementation Options Steve Bieber Water Resources Program Presented at: COG Chesapeake Bay Policy Committee.
Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Basinwide BMP Verification Framework: Building Confidence in Delivering on Pollution Reductions to Local Waters Maryland.
Clifton Bell, P.E., P.G. Chesapeake Bay Modeling Perspectives for the Regulated Community.
URBAN STORMWATER: A PERFECT STORM FOR CHANGE Jon M. Capacasa Director, Water Protection Division EPA Region III.
Stormwater and GIS Eastern Panhandle WV GIS User Group Meeting September 2, 2015 Jennifer Klages - Sebastian Donner -
Low Impact Development Training: Planning Exercise Presented by: The Low Impact Development Center, Inc. A non-profit water resources and sustainable design.
Caroline County Pilot Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) Katheleen Freeman, AICP, Director Caroline County Department of Planning & Codes Leslie Grunden,
JULIE MAWHORTER MID-ATLANTIC URBAN & COMMUNITY FORESTRY COORDINATOR CHESAPEAKE TREE CANOPY STRATEGY & WORKPLAN UPDATE CITIZEN’S ADVISORY.
What is Stormwater? Direct result of rainfall Recharges groundwater by infiltration Produces “runoff” (excess rainfall after infiltration) May be concentrated.
Northern Virginia Regional Commission MS4 Workgroup March 17, 2011.
Low Impact Development Practices. What is Low Impact Development (LID)? LID is an approach to land development (or re- development) that works with nature.
Williamsburg’s Local Strategies to meet the ChesBay TMDL March 2012 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Virginia Maryland Pennsylvania New York Delaware West Virginia.
Milestones, Progress and the Mid-point Assessment APPROACHING 2017 James Davis-Martin Chesapeake Bay Program Manager Department of Environmental Quality.
New York’s Chesapeake Bay WIP
MACo Winter Conference
Total Maximum Daily Load Program
WIP Regional Meetings Jason Keppler
Building a Phase III WIP for Wastewater, Stormwater & Septic Systems
Understanding the State’s Accounting for Growth Policy
Anne Arundel County Maryland
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Maryland’s Phase III WIP Planning for 2025 and beyond
Chesapeake Bay TMDL Milestones, Progress, Mid-point Assessment
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Presentation transcript:

Stormwater Retrofitting Demystified! A training for local governments to cost effectively implement retrofits to meet MS-4 permit and Chesapeake Bay TMDL requirements.

Workshop Agenda 9:30 – 9:40Welcome and Learning Objectives for the Day 9:40 – 10:00State Perspectives on Stormwater Retrofitting 10:00 – 10:45Session 1. Basics of Stormwater Retrofitting 10:45 – 11:15BREAK 11:15 – 12:30Session 2. Strategies to Consider Prior to Retrofits 12:30 – 1:30LUNCH 1:30 – 2:30Session 3. The Retrofit Discovery Process 2:30 – 3:45Session 4. Retrofit Costs, Delivery and Maintenance 3:45 – 4:00Concluding Remarks 4:00Evaluations!

To learn how you can have access to: Discounted Webcasts Free One-day design workshops Intensive master stormwater design seminars Direct On-site technical assistance Self guided web-based learning modules Visit: Chesapeake Bay Stormwater Training Partnership

Session 1 Basics of Stormwater Retrofitting

1.Where do Nutrients and Sediment Come From? 2.Retrofit Categories 3.Envisioning Retrofits Session 1 Agenda

Where do Nutrients and Sediment Come From?

There are many sources of N and P in the urban environment

The main sources of nutrients to the Bay Watershed are: Runoff from Forests Wastewater Atmospheric Deposition to Open Water Urban and Suburban Runoff Agricultural Runoff Septic Systems (N only)

Relationship of Atmospheric Deposition to Urban Runoff Quality Nutrient Atmospheric Deposition 1 Stormwater Runoff Load 2 Pounds per impervious acre per year Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen13 to measured rates during Washington NURP Study (MWCOG, 1983) 2 Simple Method annual stormwater runoff loads for one acre of impervious cover (Schueler, 1987) 3 About 40% of nitrogen deposition occurs through wetfall, which would presumably be quickly converted into runoff. 60% of nitrogen deposition occurs via dryfall, which is available for washoff in future storms, or may be blown over to pervious areas Much of the nitrogen in urban runoff is derived from atmospheric deposition, either in the form of dryfall or wetfall

Other sources of nitrogen in urban runoff include: Washoff of fertilizers Nitrogen attached to eroded soils and streambanks Organic matter and pet wastes on IC

Nitrogen EMCs for different urban land covers Urban Land CoverTotal N (mg/l) Lawns 9.70 Highway 2.95 Streets (Variable) 1.40 Parking Lots 1.94 Rooftops 1.50 Source; CWP, 2003 Runoff sampling shows that lawn runoff is very high in nitrogen. Also, rooftop runoff concentration shows effect of atmospheric deposition

Total Nitrogen Loads By Sector in the Maryland Portion of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Sector 2009 Load Target Load% Reduction Needed to Meet Target Million pounds per year Forest Atm. Deposition Wastewater % Urban and Suburban Runoff5.88 (12%)4.4225% Agricultural % Septics % TOTAL % Source: US EPA Chesapeake Bay Program, 2010

Many sources of TP in urban runoff Blow in of organic matter onto impervious surfaces (leaves, pollen, clippings, flowers, etc.) Phosphorus attached to eroded soils and streambanks Fertilizer washoff Atmospheric deposition

Phosphorus EMCs for different urban land covers Urban Land CoverTotal P (mg/l) Lawns 1.90 Highway 0.60 Streets (Variable) 0.50 Parking Lots 0.16 Rooftops 0.12 Source; CWP, 2003 The sources of phosphorus are more complex. While lawn runoff is high in nitrogen, atmospheric deposition is less important as a source of TP

Phosphorus EMCs for different urban land uses Urban Land UseTotal P (mg/l) Residential 0.30 Commercial 0.22 Industrial 0.26 Freeway 0.25 Source: Pitt et al 2004 Residential runoff is slightly higher in TP concentration, which reflects the effect of vegetation and fertilization

Total Phosphorus Loads By Sector in Maryland Portion of Bay Watershed Sector 2009 Load Target Load% Reduction Needed to Meet Target Million pounds per year Forest Atm. Deposition Wastewater Urban and Suburban0.68 (22%)0.3943% Agricultural % Septics-0- 0 TOTAL % Source: US EPA Chesapeake Bay Program, 2010

Sources of Urban Sediment Urban stream channel erosion Wash-off from impervious areas Erosion from pervious areas Construction sites

Edge of Stream Unit Loading Rates for MD Using CBWM v Pounds/acre/year Total NTotal PTSS IMPERVPERVIMPERVPERVIMPERVPERV Urban Forest Source: CBPO, 1/4/2012

Discussion

1964 My Early Retrofitting Years Wiggle-tail

Why Retrofit ? Local Watershed restoration Meet IC Treatment Targets in MD Comply with Bay-wide TMDLs (and local ones too) Improve local stream habitat and diversity Fix old mistakes/drainage problems Improve performance of existing stormwater infrastructure

Why Retrofits Are Different Urban Retrofit PracticesNew Stormwater Practices Construction costs are 1.5 to 4 times greater Designers seek least costly options Assessment and design costs are higher Focus on low cost design and construction Sized to meet watershed restoration objectives Sized to meet local stormwater design standards Typically installed on public land Installed at new development projects Urban soils often cannot support infiltration Soils may support infiltration Fingerprinted around existing development More flexibility on where to locate practices

Why Retrofits Are Different Urban Retrofit PracticesNew Stormwater Practices Must be acceptable to adjacent neighbors Aesthetics are not always a major design factor Most are publicly maintainedMost require private maintenance Not all candidate sites are feasible Nearly all sites are made to work Tied into existing conveyance system Usually creates new conveyance system Integrated with other restoration practices Stand-alone practice Public investment in watershed infrastructure Private investment in stormwater infrastructure

Caution: The “rules” are in flux MDE 2011 Guidance CSN Technical Bulletin 9 Roll out of New MS4 Permits 6 New Urban BMP Expert Panels New BMP Verification Protocols Updated editions of MAST Bad news: the numbers will change Good news: the numbers will improve Advice: use them for general planning and evaluation of alternatives Stormwater Regs: Final ESD regulations issued in May 2009 with local implementation to start in May of MS4 Permits: Phase 1 and Phase 2 backlog

Dual BMP Reporting in MD For MS4 Permits: Report BMPs implemented ** Report “Treated Acres” of Existing Impervious Cover * For Bay TMDL/Local WIPs: Report BMPs implemented ** Report TSS, TN, and TP reductions ** both are done using Appendix A of MS4 BMP Reporting * ESD to MEP for existing IC defined as minimum site WQv Stormwater Regs: Final ESD regulations issued in May 2009 with local implementation to start in May of MS4 Permits: Phase 1 and Phase 2 backlog

Best Opportunities for Retrofitting in the Urban Landscape

Retrofit Categories

NEW RETROFITS Near Existing Stormwater Outfalls Source: CWP

NEW RETROFITS Within the Existing Conveyance System Source: CWP

Wet Pond Bioretention NEW RETROFITS Adjacent to Large Parking Lots Source: CWP

NEW RETROFITS Green Street Retrofits

NEW RETROFITS On-Site LID Retrofits

Retrofit Categories

EXISTING RETROFITS BMP CONVERSION DRY POND CONSTRUCTED WETLAND

BMP CONVERSIONS Rehabilitating Failed Infiltration Practices

BMP CONVERSIONS Adding Bioretention/Filtering to Ponds

EXISTING RETROFITS BMP ENHANCEMENT INCREASE IN HYDRAULIC RETENTION TIME

EXISTING RETROFITS BMP RESTORATION DREDGING AN UNDERPERFORMING POND TO RESTORE FULL PERFORMANCE

Discussion

Retrofitting requires: Sleuthing skills to determine what can work at highly constrained sites Simultaneously envisioning restoration possibilities and anticipating potential problems

Activity: Envisioning Restoration

Activity

Activity – Part 1

Questions?