A National and International Review of Stormwater Management Programs Innovative & Integrated Stormwater Management

2/16/2019

Pinar Balci, Ph.D. and Kristin Ricigliano Bureau of Environmental Planning and Analysis, NYC DEP Sandeep Mehrotra, Steve Sands, and Liza Faber, Hazen

Introduction

DEP examined national and international stormwater programs to: • enhance understanding of innovative and integrated stormwater solutions • refine the approach to the city-wide stormwater program • move forward with proven solutions that are both integrated and innovative

1 2/16/2019

34 Participating Communities

Acknowledgements

• Department of Environmental Services, Arlington of Los Angeles, California County, Virginia • Department of Public Works, City of Milwaukee, • Department of Watershed Management, City of Atlanta, Wisconsin Georgia • Public Works Department, City of Minneapolis, • Aurora Water, City of Aurora, Colorado Minnesota • Department of Environmental Protection and • Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson Sustainability, Baltimore County, Maryland County, Tennessee • Department of Public Works, City of Baltimore, Maryland • Metro Water Services, City of Nashville and Davidson • Boston Water and Sewer Commission, Massachusetts County, Tennessee • Department of Water Management, City of Chicago, • Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District, Ohio Illinois • Planning Commission, City of New Orleans, Louisiana • Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater • Sewerage and Water Board of New Orleans, Chicago, Illinois Environmental Affairs Department, Louisiana • Stormwater Management Utility, City of Cincinnati, Ohio • Department of Water Environment Protection, Onondaga • Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati, Ohio County, New York • Department of Public Works and Environmental • Philadelphia Water Department, Pennsylvania Services, Stormwater Management Division, Fairfax • Bureau of Environmental Services, City of Portland, County, Virginia Oregon • Department of Public Works and Environmental • Department of Public Utilities, City of Richmond, Virginia Services, Wastewater Management Division, Fairfax • San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, California County, Virginia • Port of San Francisco, California • Department of Public Works, Sustainability Division, City • Sanitation District No. 1 of Northern Kentucky of Fort Lauderdale, Florida • Seattle Public Utilities, Washington • Department of Public Works and Engineering, City of • Department of Energy and Environment, Washington Houston, Texas D.C. • Department of Public Works, City of Indianapolis, Illinois • City Development, City of Copenhagen, Denmark • King County, Department of Natural Resources and • Halifax Water, Halifax Regional Municipality, Nova Parks, Wastewater Treatment Division, Washington Scotia, Canada • Public Works and Utilities Department, City of Lincoln, • Melbourne Water, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Nebraska • Toronto Water, City of Toronto, Ontario, Canada • Department of Public Works, Bureau of Sanitation, City 4

2 2/16/2019

Key Elements

Industrial and Commercial Introduction 1 7 Stormwater Management Programs

Innovative Stormwater Planning, Floatables and Street Litter 2 Policy, and Regulations 8 Reduction Programs

3 Public Involvement and 9 Structural Stormwater Education Programs Controls

Illicit Discharge Detection Stormwater Monitoring 4 and Elimination Programs 10

Construction and Post-Construction Funding Sources and 5 Stormwater Management Programs 11 Financial Incentive Programs

Municipal Facilities Pollution 6 Prevention Programs

Integrated Management

Integrated Management 38% of respondent communities use an integrated management approach

Regulatory Requirements

38% 18% 27% 55% Implement Respond to Respond to No integrated Consent water quality regulatory management Decree impairment drivers requirements requirements

3 2/16/2019

Integrated Management

56% of integrated management communities include stormwater and wastewater

22% Include stormwater and drinking water 73% Follow community- 56% specific Include stormwater Integrated and wastewater management and 22% planning approach Include stormwater, 27% wastewater, Follow EPA guideline and drinking water approach

Seattle Case Study

Integrated Plan: • Catch Basin Inspection: Inspected annually and fixed within six months • Drivers: Regulatory driven if they do not pass inspection. • Use customized plan Seattle has 22,000 catch basins in the MS4 areas. • Defines structural stormwater control projects that provide significant benefits beyond approved CSO projects alone • Some of the Integrated Plan stormwater projects include:

• Capitol Hill Water Quality Project: Four blocks of biofiltration swales

• Venema Natural Drainage System: Five blocks of roadway to include natural drainage systems

• South Park Water Quality Project: Regional stormwater quality facility

• Street Sweeping: 560 lane miles per year

4 2/16/2019

Green Infrastructure

Integrated Management 97% of respondent communities implementing some green infrastructure 47% have comprehensive green infrastructure programs

47% 81% 19% Explicit regulatory- Self-initiated water Comprehensive driven goals quality improvement goals program

50% 65% 35% Explicit regulatory- Self-initiated water Pilot program driven goals quality improvement goals

Green Infrastructure

SuccessIntegrated Measure Distribution Management Stormwater runoff volume treated 69% Impervious area retrofitted 56% Stream impairment 31% improved

5 2/16/2019

Green Infrastructure Case Studies

IntegratedPortland, OR ManagementNew York, NY Philadelphia, PA

Green Street Policy: Encourages Area-wide Approach: Implements Neighborhood Area Opportunity implementation of GI, such as green GI in Combined Sewer Overflow Analysis: Assesses GI opportunities streets, in the right-of-way. priority watersheds to meet Consent by an area wide approach with targeted design and implementation The Building Code prioritizes the use Decree milestones. NYC has throughout combined sewer of GI for stormwater management on standardized right-of-way GI for neighborhoods. PWD uses a private property and in the right-of- streamlined siting and design. NYC decentralized and creative approach way. is also implementing customized green infrastructure on many public to planning and design of right-of-way properties. and parcel GI.

TMDL Compliance

Integrated Management 59% of respondent communities have active TMDLs

73% of respondent communities implement local monitoring to better the watershed plan effectiveness

6 2/16/2019

Nashville Case Study

Goal: Remove all streams from the 303(d) list by 2050.

Tools: Measure Success: • Green infrastructure • Monitor local streams to better assess the health of its 303(d) • Robust Urban Forestry Program listed streams • Preserved Open Spaces

Erosion and Sediment Control

Integrated Management 73% of respondent communities are more protective than federal requirements of 1-acre of disturbed area

73% 0% Have a threshold of < ¼ Have a threshold of ¼ acre acre to < ½ acre 28% of respondent communities 0% 27% implement enhanced erosion and Have a threshold of ½ Have a threshold of ≥ 1 sediment control such as watershed acre ≤ 1 acres acres specific requirements or receiving stream assessments

7 2/16/2019

Climate Change

Integrated Management Main drivers are: 71% of respondent communities are implementing • Drought climate change resiliency programs • Sea Level Rise • Heavy Precipitation Events

71% Implement 38% 38% 12% 12% resiliency Implement Implement two Implement Implement programs all three common tools one alternative common common tools tools tools

Common tools: • Design standard revisions • Scenario planning • Vulnerability/ risk assessments on critical infrastructure

Copenhagen Case Study

Integrated Management

Climate Change Adaptation Plan: Prepared innovative plan to adapt to climate change that considers: – Increasing precipitation (mainly as rain) – More intense weather (cloudbursts, storms etc.) – Summers with dry spells interspersed by heavy thunderstorms – More annual rain (expected about a 30% increase) – Rising sea levels – Rising ground water levels

8 2/16/2019

Public Education and Outreach

100% of respondent communities have customized public education programs to address local conditions such as pollutants, receiving water, and audience

Common Tools: 58% of respondent communities participate in regional • Branding consortiums to coordinate regional public education • Regional Consortiums • Watershed Signage • Pollutant-focused Campaigns • Media

80% Use targeted public education 83% 17% Use only pollutant-focused Both pollutant-focused campaigns and watershed-focused campaigns

Erosion and Sediment Control

Integrated Management 100% of respondent communities encourage compliance by implementing fines for violations of erosion and sediment control requirements

100% 61% 17% 22% Use Use fines ≥ $1000 per Use fines Use fines < $500 fines for violation-day between $500 per violation-day enforcement and < $1000 per violation-day

9 2/16/2019

Post-Construction Stormwater Management

55% ofIntegrated respondent communities Management have a disturbed area threshold lower than ¼ acre 53% of respondent communities have an impervious area threshold lower than 2,500 sf

Disturbed Area Thresholds

55% 27% Have a threshold < ¼ acre Have a threshold of 1 acre

8% 5% Have a threshold from ¼ acre Have a threshold > 1 acre to < ½ acre 5% Have a threshold from ½ acre < 1 acre

Impervious Area Thresholds

53% 21% Have a threshold < 2,500 sf Have a threshold from 5,000 sf to < 10,000 sf 13% 13% Have a threshold from 2,500 sf Have a threshold ≥ 10,000 sf to < 5,000 sf

Atlanta Case Study

Post-Construction Stormwater Ordinance

2004: 2013: • Focused on water quality • New non-residential development • Retention Requirement for 1.2- that involves creation of impervious inches of runoff cover • Remove 80% of TSS • Redevelopment that includes creation, addition, or demolition and replacement of ≥ 500 sf of impervious cover • Demolition that leaves in place ≥ 500 sf of impervious cover • Single family residential development for new homes and large additions ≥ 1000 sf • Water quality requirements include treating the 1st 1-inch of runoff with green infrastructure

10 2/16/2019

Floatables

Integrated Management 76% of the programs implement a floatable program. 57% of programs responding to regulatory requirements also have a floatables TMDL

70% of respondent communities implement structural controls for floatable reduction

Floatable Controls (most common to least common)

Public Education

Netting or Litter Traps

Focused street sweeping

Volunteers

Catch Basin Inserts or Hoods

Bag Tax and Styrofoam Laws

47% of respondent communities prioritize hot spot areas for floatable reduction

Floatables Case Study

Los Angeles New York City Case Study Case Study

Floatable Structural Control: Floatable Media Campaign: In partnership with the Wildlife Flow Activated Catch Basins are used Conservation Society and centered to maximize the amount of trash kept around the New York Aquarium in on the street and minimizes flooding. Coney Island, this media campaign Los Angeles sets the trigger at which highlights the impact of litter on local the screen will swing open. waterways and wildlife, and aims to reduce littering behavior.

11 2/16/2019

Stormwater Monitoring

44% of respondent communities perform land use/ wet weather monitoring 80% of respondent communities perform in-stream monitoring

The average number of land use monitoring sites is 5 with an average annual monitoring frequency of 7. The average number of in-stream monitoring sites is 30 with an average annual monitoring frequency 8.

Funding Sources

76% of communities use a Fees 76% stormwater fee to fund stormwater management programs General fund 36% Other sources 15%

66% Impervious-based stormwater utility 28% Flat rate utility 6% Development intensity- based stormwater utility

The average monthly residential stormwater fee is $8.79 for the communities that utilize a stormwater fee.

12 2/16/2019

Halifax Case Study

Change: Went from a flat rate stormwater fee to a tiered system. Basis of Tiered System - Residential: Median impervious area associated with residential properties Basis of Tiered System – Non-Residential: Exact calculated impervious area • Previously billed per 1 m2, change to billed per 10 m2 • Charge each unit based on the contribution it makes

Financial Incentive Programs

Integrated Management Types of Financial Incentive Programs 62% of communities with • Stormwater Fee Credits stormwater fees offer a • Off-site Mitigation Programs stormwater fee credit program • Fee-In-Lieu-Of Programs Average maximum fee credit is 70% of the stormwater fee • Green Infrastructure Grant Programs

65% of communities offer a green infrastructure grant program

Off-Site mitigation 50% Mitigation banks 45% Fee-in-lieu-of 41%

13 2/16/2019

Washington, DC Case Study

Integrated Management Stormwater Retention Credits RiverSmart Rewards

• Earn credits by doing voluntary retrofits with • Private property rebates for green roofs, rain green infrastructure barrels, newly planted trees, and stormwater management facilities • Buy and sell credits to properties that are subject to regulation • Has to manage impervious surface

• DOEE oversees the exchange through a registry

Retention Volume Eligibility Comparison 1.7” storm SRCs 1.2” storm SRCs 0.8” storm

Volume retained RSR Discount RSR Discount Stormwater RetentionCredits

before stormwater RSR Discount StormwaterRetained Volume green infrastructure involved Voluntary Projects Major Substantial Improvement Major Land Disturbing REGULATED SITES

Type of Activity

Lessons Learned and Conclusions

Comprehensive planning of permit compliance, consent decree compliance, TMDL compliance, etc. allows for efficiencies to be identified and overall goals coordinated while also meeting minimum regulatory requirements.

Post-construction requirements that Comprehensive monitoring programs target specific waterbody impairments, that assess all monitoring needs and not just state minimums, better leverage measure actual receiving waterbody community investment. improvements provide the basis for more cost-effective programs. Co-assessing all three water infrastructures results in cost-savings and co-benefits.

14 2/16/2019

How to find the report

Please find information on the report NYC DEP’s website: https://medium.com/nycwater/innovative- and-integrated-stormwater-management- 26158da223d8

The report can also be found for download or print copy at http://www.waterrf.org/resources/Pages/N YC-Stormwater-Report.aspx

Google: Innovative and Integrated Stormwater Management or NYC Stormwater Report