Comparison of Stormwater Biofiltration Systems in Southeast Australia And
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Focus Article Comparison of stormwater biofiltration systems in Southeast Australia and Southern California Richard F. Ambrose1,2∗ and Brandon K. Winfrey1 Stormwater biofilters (also called rain gardens, bioretention systems, and bioswales) are used to manage stormwater runoff in urbanized environments. Some benefits of biofilters include flood prevention, stormwater runoff water qual- ity improvement, and wildlife habitat. This technology has been implemented on a larger scale in southeast Australia, but cities and counties in southern California just beginning to construct biofilter systems to manage stormwater runoff. Biofil- ters tend to be larger in southern California than in southeast Australia. Differences in rainfall patterns likely affect biofilter function. Southern California has much longer periods between rain events than southeast Australia, providing challenges to establishing and maintaining vegetation in biofilters. The use of biofilters for restoring predevelopment flow regimes has been studied in a peri-urban water- shed in southeast Australia, but flow regime restoration is not likely in highly urbanized locations in both Australia and southern California. However, stormwa- ter runoff treatment and harvesting in decentralized biofilters could substantially reduce storm flows and improve water quality in receiving waters while improv- ing urban water supply and extending the life of existing stormwater management infrastructure. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Howtocitethisarticle: WIREs Water 2015, 2:131–146. doi: 10.1002/wat2.1064 INTRODUCTION also capture and treat dry-weather runoff not asso- ciated with storms. There are many similarities in rban stormwater management is important for design criteria of bioswales, vegetated strips, rain gar- controlling pollution and flooding associated U dens, and bioretention or biofiltration systems; we with runoff from impervious surfaces following rain are considering the term ‘biofilter’ to encompass all events but has often been at the cost of important systems that filter stormwater runoff through a vege- ecosystem services and functioning in urban streams tated filter media and convey treated stormwater into (i.e., the urban stream syndrome).1 Low Impact perforated pipes leading to a discharge pipe and/or Development or Green Infrastructure stormwater sys- percolate into the underlying soil. Biofilters remove tems that infiltrate water through a vegetated fil- pollutants such as metals, solids, oils and grease, termediacanbeusedtocaptureandtreaturban nutrients, and pathogens through a myriad of phys- stormwater runoff and re-establish predevelopment ical, physicochemical, and biological processes. All flow patterns.2 In this article, we refer to these sys- of these processes occur as a result of gravity-fed tems as stormwater biofilters, but recognize that they hydraulics, filter media characteristics, and captur- ing sunlight through photosynthesis, making these ∗Correspondence to: [email protected] systems low-energy options for stormwater manage- 1Department of Environmental Health Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA ment. Biofilters are used in stormwater management 2Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, University of in a variety of regimes. Currently, many cities in California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA the United States and Australia offer rebate pro- Conflict of interest: The authors have declared no conflicts of interest grams and guidance documents to design and con- for this article. struct biofilters at residents’ homes. Government and Volume 2, March/April 2015 © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 131 Focus Article wires.wiley.com/water nonprofit organizations are also building biofilters at scientists in Melbourne is also noteworthy. The the single project and neighborhood scale. Typically, Water for Liveability Centre at Monash University single projects capture runoff from parking lots or has played a central role developing the scientific a large commercial or industrial development; these foundations for biofilter construction and the imple- projects are commonly constructed by private com- mentation of actual projects. The Little Stringybark panies who own the lots from which stormwater is Creek Project is a collaborative research program collected. Neighborhood-scale projects aim to manage where researchers from Monash University and Uni- larger catchments and often include several types of versity of Melbourne have investigated the potential stormwater management technologies; these projects of watershed-scale impact of managing stormwater are commonly constructed by government agencies, runoff with biofilters and rainwater harvesting. This often in collaboration with other organizations, and project is the largest of its kind in the world and has so are more extensive and expensive. far resulted in the construction of dozens of biofilters. Comparing the U.S. and Australian stormwater In southern California, the impetus for stormwa- management infrastructure is useful because both ter biofilter implementation has been control of water developed countries are mitigating the effects of pollution under the federal Clean Water Act. Initially, urban stormwater runoff on aquatic ecosystems using the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) low impact development.3 In this article, we compare promulgated regulations requiring stormwater be the implementation of stormwater biofilters in south- retained on new construction sites. Under the east Australia and southern California. Although 2009-0009-DWQ Construction General Permit, stormwater biofilters have been constructed in both stormwater runoff originating in new developments of these regions, they differ in the motivations behind in California was recognized as point source pollution their construction. We discuss these motivations as and regulated under the Clean Water Act. The Clean well as differences in the climates of the two regions, Beach Initiative, a fund under California’s SWRCB, design and maintenance of biofilters, and the ecology provided funding to projects aimed at reducing fecal of biofiltration systems. We show how the differ- indicator bacteria (FIB) loads to California’s beaches ent environmental settings could influence optimal from urban runoff.7 Stormwater biofilters were implementation in each region, although little work suggested as a best management practice (BMP) to has been performed so far to identify the optimal preserve drainage in urban areas and prevent FIB from implementations. reaching beaches. These stormwater biofilters (among other techniques for retaining stormwater) were largely constructed by permittees on private property. IMPETUS FOR IMPLEMENTATION More recently, Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Sys- In southeast Australia, a major impetus for the tem (MS4) regulations have led to broader adoption construction of stormwater biofilters was water con- of stormwater biofilters. Stormwater biofilters con- servation in response to the so-called Millennium structed by government agencies are typically larger, drought.4 Additionally, stormwater biofiltration was more expensive, and may include other stormwater recognized as an effective method to prevent nitrogen management techniques such as infiltration galleries from reaching Port Phillip Bay because these systems and pervious pavement. Most neighborhood-scale can handle the variable concentrations and flows of systems have been built by local government agencies. runoff events.5,6 The major water purveyor, Victorian The Elmer Avenue Green Street project, coordinated state statutory authority Melbourne Water, adopted by a consortium including the City of Los Angeles, policies and incentives to encourage large-scale imple- the Council for Watershed Health and TreePeople mentation of stormwater biofilters. Melbourne Water (nonprofit organizations), mitigated flooding ina programs include a ‘Ten Thousand Rain Garden’ Sun Valley neighborhood by capturing runoff in program. In addition, studies by Melbourne scientists a large infiltration gallery installed beneath Elmer had demonstrated an adverse effect of stormwater Avenue.8 This project also included the construction runoff from urbanized watersheds.1 Besides the active of 24 street-side biofilters and rainwater-harvesting support of Melbourne Water, regulatory require- tanks. The California Department of Transportation ments encourage the construction of stormwater (CalTrans) constructed a biofilter in 2006 as part of biofilters. New developments and redevelopments a pilot project to investigate the suitability of using are required to manage stormwater according to this technology as a BMP for stormwater manage- Clause 56.07-4 of the Victoria Planning Provisions ment. Monitoring of the treatment performance and (http://planningschemes.dpcd.vic.gov.au/schemes/ maintenance requirements of the CalTrans biofil- vpps/56_07.pdf). The involvement of academic ter is ongoing. There has been limited engagement 132 © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Volume 2, March/April 2015 WIREs Water Comparison of stormwater biofiltration systems Average temperature in Melbourne, VIC 30 27 27 25 25 25 23 21 20 20 18 18 16 15 15 15 16 17 15 14 13 10 12 Temperature (°C) 11 10 9 8 8 5 7 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Average high temperature Average low temperature Average temperature in Los Angeles, CA 30 26 26 25 24 25 23 22 22 20 21 19 20 19 20 15 17 17 17 15 15 13 13 Temperature (°C) 10 12 11 11 10 11 5 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr