DOCSLIB.ORG

Integrated Report to EPA and US Congress Regarding DC's Water Quality

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Integrated Report to EPA and US Congress Regarding DC's Water Quality THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT 2014 INTEGRATED REPORT TO THE US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND CONGRESS PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 305(b) AND 303(d) CLEAN WATER ACT (P.L. 97-117) District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division i PREFACE The Water Quality Division of the District of Columbia's District Department of the Environment, Natural Resources Administration, prepared this report to satisfy the listing requirements of §303(d) and the reporting requirements of §305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117). The report provides water quality information on the District of Columbia’s surface and ground waters that were assessed during 2012-2013 and updates the water quality information required by law. Various programs in the Natural Resources Administration contributed to this report including the Fisheries and Wildlife Division, the Stormwater Management Division, and the Watershed Protection Division. The Lead and Healthy Housing Division, Environmental Protection Administration also contributed to this report. Questions or comments regarding this report should be forwarded to the address below. The District of Columbia Government District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division 1200 First Street, NE 5th Floor Washington, D.C. 20002 Attention: N. Shulterbrandt ii TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE..................................................................................................................................................................... ii ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................................................ viii PART I: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. 1 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER QUALITY ................................................................................................................ 1 CAUSES AND SOURCES OF WATER QUALITY IMPAIRMENT ........................................................................................ 2 PROGRAMS TO CORRECT IMPAIRMENT ...................................................................................................................... 3 WATER QUALITY TRENDS ......................................................................................................................................... 3 HIGHLIGHTS .............................................................................................................................................................. 4 PART II: BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................................... 5 ATLAS AND TOTAL WATERS ..................................................................................................................................... 5 MAPS ......................................................................................................................................................................... 8 WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS ................................................................................................................ 9 Watershed Approach ............................................................................................................................................ 9 Water Quality Standards Program ...................................................................................................................... 11 Point Source Program ........................................................................................................................................ 11 Nonpoint Source Control Program ..................................................................................................................... 17 COST/BENEFIT ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................................... 53 Cost .................................................................................................................................................................... 53 Benefits .............................................................................................................................................................. 56 SPECIAL STATE CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................ 57 PART III: SURFACE WATER ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................... 61 CURRENT SURFACE MONITORING PROGRAM .......................................................................................................... 61 PLAN FOR ACHIEVING COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENTS .......................................................................................... 61 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND SUMMARY DATA .............................................................................................. 61 Assessment Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 61 Maps ................................................................................................................................................................... 65 Section 303(d) Waters ........................................................................................................................................ 65 RIVERS AND STREAMS WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................... 71 LAKES WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT.................................................................................................................... 75 ESTUARY AND COASTAL ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................... 77 SPECIAL TOPICS ....................................................................................................................................................... 80 WETLANDS ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................................................ 88 DRINKING WATER PROGRAM MONITORING & ASSESSMENTS ................................................................................. 90 FISH TISSUE STUDY ................................................................................................................................................. 91 PART V: GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................... 93 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................ 93 SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER QUALITY ................................................................................................................. 93 OVERVIEW OF GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION SOURCES .................................................................................... 93 OVERVIEW OF GROUNDWATER PROTECTION PROGRAMS ........................................................................................ 94 SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION SOURCES .................................................................................... 96 BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................................................................... 98 iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1 Monthly, yearly and normal total rainfall (inches), 2012-2013 .................................... 6 Figure 2.2 Monthly and yearly average flow on the Anacostia River, 2012-2013 ......................... 7 Figure 2.3 Monthly and yearly average flow on the Potomac River, 2012-2013 ........................... 8 Figure 2.4 DC Water Service Area ............................................................................................... 54 Figure 3. 1 Relative Abundance of Harvestable Largemouth Bass vs. SAV Cover Density at Site W1E .......................................................................................................................................... 84 Figure 3.2 Relative Abundance of Harvestable Largemouth Bass vs. SAV Cover Density at Site P2E ............................................................................................................................................ 85 iv LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1.1 DESIGNATED USE SUPPORT BY RIVERS OR STREAMS ................................ 1 TABLE 1.2 DESIGNATED USE SUPPORT BY LAKES ............................................................ 2 TABLE 1.3 DESIGNATED USE SUPPORT BY ESTUARIES ................................................... 2 TABLE 2.1 ATLAS ........................................................................................................................ 5 TABLE 2.2 NPDES PERMITTED FACILITIES IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ........... 11 TABLE 2.3 NPDES PERMITTED FACILITIES INSPECTED .................................................. 12 TABLE 2.4 PERMITS REVIEWED AND CERTIFIED BY WQD ............................................ 13 TABLE 2.5 NWPs REVIEWED AND CERTIFIED ................................................................... 14 TABLE 2.6 RIVERSMART SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Montgomery County Council Resolution
    Resolution No.: 18-1339 Introduced: November 27, 2018 Adopted: November 27, 2018 COUNTY COUNCIL FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND SITTING AS THE DISTRICT COUNCIL FOR THAT PORTION OF THE MARYLAND-WASHINGTON REGIONAL DISTRICT WITHIN MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND Lead Sponsor: County Council ______________________________________________________________________________ SUBJECT: Approval of Planning Board Draft Bicycle Master Plan 1. On May 7, 2018, the Montgomery County Planning Board transmitted to the County Executive and the County Council the Planning Board Draft Bicycle Master Plan. 2. The Planning Board Draft Bicycle Master Plan amends the Master Plan of Highways and Transitways within Montgomery County; the General Plan (on Wedges and Corridors) for the Physical Development of the Maryland-Washington Regional District in Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties, as amended; the Rustic Roads Functional Master Plan, as amended; the Preservation of Agricultural and Rural Open Space Functional Master Plan; the Aspen Hill Master Plan; the Bethesda Downtown Sector Plan; the Bethesda-Chevy Chase Master Plan; the Boyds Master Plan; the Burtonsville Commercial Crossroads Neighborhood Plan; the Capitol View and Vicinity Sector Plan; the Chevy Chase Lake Sector Plan; the Clarksburg Master Plan and Hyattstown Special Study Area, as amended; the Cloverly Master Plan; the Countywide Bikeways Functional Master Plan; the Countywide Transit Corridors Functional Master Plan; the Damascus Master Plan; the East Silver Spring Master Plan; the Fairland Master
    [Show full text]
  • Hawlings River Watershed Restoration Action Plan
    Hawlings River Watershed Restoration Action Plan December 2003 MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Montgomery County’s Water Quality Goals Montgomery County has a rich and diverse natural heritage, which includes over 1,500 miles of streams that provide habitat vital to aquatic life. To preserve this natural heritage, the County has adopted the following water quality goals (Montgomery County Code, Chapter 19, ArticleIV): • Protect, maintain, and restore high quality chemical, physical, biological, and stream habitat conditions in County streams that support aquatic life and uses such as recreation and water supply; • Restore County streams damaged by inadequate stormwater management practices of the past by re-establishing the flow regime, chemical and physical conditions, and biological diversity of natural stream systems as closely as possible through improved stormwater management practices; • Work with other jurisdictions to restore and maintain the integrity of the Anacostia River, the Potomac River, the Patuxent River, and the Chesapeake Bay; and • Promote and support educational and volunteer initiatives that enhance public awareness and increase direct participation in stream stewardship and the reduction of water pollution. What is the Countywide Stream Protection Strategy? The Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) first published the Countywide Stream Table 1. Montgomery County Stream Protection Strategy (CSPS) in 1998. The CSPS provides Resource Conditions County stream resource conditions on a subwatershed* (1994-2000) basis and recommends programs or policies to preserve, Percent Monitored protect, and restore County streams and watersheds. Condition Monitored Stream Miles Stream resource condition results for the year 2003 update Stream Miles are shown in Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Access Points Within 50 Miles of Capitol Hill
    Public Access Points within 50 Miles of Capitol Hill Public Access Point Boat Ramp Fishing Swimming Restrooms Hiking/Trekking Location 2900 Virginia Ave NW, Thompson's Boat Center X X X X Washington, DC 20037 3244 K St NW, Washington, DC Georgetown Waterfront Park X X 20007 George Washington Memorial Theodore Roosevelt Island X X X Pkwy N, Arlington, VA 22209 West Basin Dr SW, Washington, West Potomac Park X X DC 20024 Capital Crescent Trail, Washington Canoe Club X Washington, DC 20007 600 Water St SW, Washington, DC Ganglplank Marina X X X X 20024 George Washington Memorial Columbia Island Marina X X X Parkway, Arlington, VA 22202 99 Potomac Ave. SE. Washington, Diamond Teague Park X X DC 20003 335 Water Street Washington, DC The Yards Park X 20003 Martin Luther King Jr Ave SE, Anacostia Boat House X Washington, DC 20003 700-1000 Water St SW, Washington Marina X X X X Washington, DC 20024 Anacostia Park, Section E Anacostia Marina X X X Washington, DC 20003 2001-2099 1st St SW, Washington, Buzzard's Point Marina X X X DC 20003 2038-2068 2nd St SW, James Creek Marina X X X Washington, DC 20593 Anacostia Dr, Washington, DC Anacostia Park X X X 20019 Heritage Island Trail, Washington, Heritage Island X DC 20002 Kingman Island Trail, Washington, Kingman Island X DC 20002 Mt Vernon Trail, Arlington, VA Gravelly Point X X 22202 George Washington Memorial Roaches Run X X X X Pkwy, Arlington, VA 22202 1550 Anacostia Ave NE, Kenilworth Aquatic Gardens/Park X X X Washington, DC 20019 Capital Crescent Trail, Jack's Boat House X X Washington, DC 20007 Daingerfield Island X X X X 1 Marina Dr, Alexandria, VA 22314 67-101 Dale St, Alexandria, VA Four Mile Run Park/Trail X X X 22305 4601 Annapolis Rd.
    [Show full text]
  • Gazetteer of West Virginia
    Bulletin No. 233 Series F, Geography, 41 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES D. WALCOTT, DIKECTOU A GAZETTEER OF WEST VIRGINIA I-IEISTRY G-AN3STETT WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1904 A» cl O a 3. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. DEPARTMENT OP THE INTEKIOR, UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, Washington, D. C. , March 9, 190Jh SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith, for publication as a bulletin, a gazetteer of West Virginia! Very respectfully, HENRY GANNETT, Geogwvpher. Hon. CHARLES D. WALCOTT, Director United States Geological Survey. 3 A GAZETTEER OF WEST VIRGINIA. HENRY GANNETT. DESCRIPTION OF THE STATE. The State of West Virginia was cut off from Virginia during the civil war and was admitted to the Union on June 19, 1863. As orig­ inally constituted it consisted of 48 counties; subsequently, in 1866, it was enlarged by the addition -of two counties, Berkeley and Jeffer­ son, which were also detached from Virginia. The boundaries of the State are in the highest degree irregular. Starting at Potomac River at Harpers Ferry,' the line follows the south bank of the Potomac to the Fairfax Stone, which was set to mark the headwaters of the North Branch of Potomac River; from this stone the line runs due north to Mason and Dixon's line, i. e., the southern boundary of Pennsylvania; thence it follows this line west to the southwest corner of that State, in approximate latitude 39° 43i' and longitude 80° 31', and from that corner north along the western boundary of Pennsylvania until the line intersects Ohio River; from this point the boundary runs southwest down the Ohio, on the northwestern bank, to the mouth of Big Sandy River.
    [Show full text]
  • Foundations for Memorials and Monuments on the National Mall
    Missouri University of Science and Technology Scholars' Mine International Conference on Case Histories in (2008) - Sixth International Conference on Case Geotechnical Engineering Histories in Geotechnical Engineering 14 Aug 2008, 7:00 pm - 8:30 pm Foundations for Memorials and Monuments on the National Mall Douglas W. Christie Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers, New York, NY Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icchge Part of the Geotechnical Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Christie, Douglas W., "Foundations for Memorials and Monuments on the National Mall" (2008). International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering. 4. https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icchge/6icchge/session08/4 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. This Article - Conference proceedings is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars' Mine. It has been accepted for inclusion in International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering by an authorized administrator of Scholars' Mine. This work is protected by U. S. Copyright Law. Unauthorized use including reproduction for redistribution requires the permission of the copyright holder. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FOUNDATIONS FOR MEMORIALS AND MONUMENTS ON THE NATIONAL MALL Douglas W. Christie, P.E. Associate Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers New York, New York 10122 ABSTRACT As the western end of the National Mall in Washington, DC was made by filling in portions of the Potomac River, memorials and monuments have required deep foundations. The site history including stream channels, canals, and materials used in filling various areas has had a large impact on the development of the Mall.
    [Show full text]
  • Buzzard Point, DC: a Brief History of a Brief Neighborhood
    Buzzard Point, DC: A Brief History of a Brief Neighborhood Hayden M. Wetzel November 2014 (revised) Mid -1920s, from a glass-plate negative (HSW) Sachse, 1884 (LOC) Foreword This short study of the almost forgotten (but soon to be resurrected) area of southwest Washington DC known as Buzzard Point grew out of a landmark nomination for the Buzzard Point Power Plant researched and written in 2014 on behalf of the Southwest Neighborhood Assembly. There was no dedicated study of the history of this curious neighborhood beyond its very early years (after which chronicles of southwest Washington move to the more northerly parts), and I decided to continue the work to fill this hole. Due to the work’s origin in the power plant that part of our story has been given somewhat disproportionate attention but I have left it that way; the information is interesting and useful. (Sections on the history of electrical power generation in Washington and the design/construction company Stone & Webster have been removed here but will be found in the nomination on file with the city’s Historic Preservation Office.) The supporting material used in this study has been deposited with the Historical Society of Washington. The Capitol Riverfront BID and the Southwest Neighborhood Assembly generously underwrote the expenses of printing this booklet, and Mr. Baubak Baghi helped prepare the manuscript. I offer them my sincere thanks, as also to the institutions listed below. Illustration sources: Library of Congress, Prints and Maps Division (LOC); Historical Society of Washington, Kipplinger Library (HSW); National Defense University library, Special Collections (NDU); National Archives, National Capitol Planning Commission (NARA); author (HMW) Hayden M.
    [Show full text]
  • BUZZARD POINT Vision Framework + Design Review Guide NOVEMBER 2017
    BUZZARD POINT Vision Framework + Design Review Guide NOVEMBER 2017 BUZZARD POINT Vision Framework + Design Review Guide A New Waterfront Neighborhood The vision for Buzzard Point is to be a well-designed and well-programmed neighborhood with multiple attractions, excellent architecture, accommodating parks and public realm, and destination waterfront with greatly improved multi- modal transportation connections. This concept involves creating strong relationships to the surrounding areas and the Anacostia River, enhancing the environment and leveraging public investment in the South Capitol Street Corridor and the Soccer Stadium Project as catalysts and anchors for additional private investment. This document outlines a trio of goals which are supported with design concepts, recommendations, and implementation guidelines, as well as the partnerships necessary to make this vision and these goals a reality. It also describes the broader context, relevant planning initiatives, and regional influences. Vision Frameworks are pragmatic strategic planning efforts. Through targeted public outreach and data analysis, Vision Frameworks deliver high-level aspirations for a neighborhood and identify key implementation items and design guidelines to direct public investment and private actions. A Small Area Plan, on the other hand, is a more in-depth plan that typically includes recommendations to change future land use designations within the Comprehensive Plan. Small area plans are submitted to and adopted by the DC Council by resolution. Since land use changes were not needed for Buzzard Point, the Vision Framework approach was selected as the planning tool. During the Comprehensive Plan Second Amendment process, currently underway, key recommendations from the Buzzard Point Vision Framework + Design Review Guide will be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan and submitted for DC Council adoption.
    [Show full text]
  • REFLECTIONS Washington’S Southeast / Southwest Waterfront
    REFLECTIONS Washington’s Southeast / Southwest Waterfront CAMBRIA HOTEL Washington, DC Capitol Riverfront REFLECTIONS Washington’s Southeast / Southwest Waterfront Copyright © 2021 by Square 656 Owner, LLC Front cover image: Rendering of the Frederick Douglass Memorial ISBN: 978-0-578-82670-7 Bridge. The bridge connects the two shores of Designed by LaserCom Design, Berkeley CA the Anacostia River and is named after a former slave and human rights leader who became one of Washington’s most famous residents. District Department of Transportation vi FOREWORD REFLECTIONS Washington’s Southeast / Southwest Waterfront Marjorie Lightman, PhD William Zeisel, PhD CAMBRIA HOTEL Washington, DC Capitol Riverfront QED Associates LLC Washington, DC CAMBRIA HOTEL n REFLECTIONS vii Then ... A gardener’s residence on the site of the Cambria Hotel. The flat-roofed frame house, 18 feet wide and costing $1,800 to construct more than a century ago, was home to Samuel Howison, a market gardener. The cornice at the top of the building now graces the Cambria Hotel’s lobby, and a fireplace mantle accents the rooftop bar. Peter Sefton Now ... The Cambria Hotel at 69 Q Street SW, a part of the Southeast/Southwest waterfront’s renaissance. Donohoe Welcome to the Cambria Hotel Located in an historic part of one of the world’s great cities. ashington is a star-studded town where money and influence glitter on a world stage of W24/7 news bites. Images of the White House, the Capitol, and the Mall are recognized around the world as synonymous with majesty and power. Washington, the nation’s capital, shapes our times and history.
    [Show full text]
  • District of Coulmbia: the Likelihood of Shore Protection
    The Likelihood of Shore Protection in the District of Columbia James G. Titus U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C. September 2005 Draft The final version of this document can be cited as: J.G. Titus. 2010. “District of Columbia.” In James G. Titus and Daniel Hudgens (editors). The Likelihood of Shore Protection along the Atlantic Coast of the United States. Volume 1: Mid- Atlantic. Report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C. The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official opinion of the Environmental Protection Agency. The primary referring page for this report is http://risingsea.net/ERL/DC.html CHAPTER 7 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA : James G. Titus U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [ 664 THE L I K E L I H O O D O F S H O R E P R O T E C T I O N I N T H E D I S T R I C T O F C O L U M B I A] CONTENTS Introduction................................................................................................................................... 665 Background................................................................................................................................... 667 Response to Sea Level Rise ........................................................................................................ 671 Stakeholder Review...................................................................................................................... 679 A Note on Horizontal Scale.........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeological Excavations at Mattapany-Sewall (18ST390) Naval Air Station, Patuxent River St
    "A Fair House of Brick and Timber": Archaeological Excavations at Mattapany-Sewall (18ST390) Naval Air Station, Patuxent River St. Mary's County, Maryland Author(s) / Editor(s): Edward E. Chaney, Julia A. King Published: 1999 Document Type: other Stable URL: http://core.tdar.org/document/393670/a-fair-house-of-brick-and-timber-archa eological-excavations-at-mattapany-sewall-18st390-naval-air-station-patuxen t-river-st-marys-county-maryland DOI: doi:10.6067/XCV8P2706H Note: DISCLAIMER: The following report is a very preliminary DRAFT. It has not been through the editing process and many of the figures have not been generated. Additionally, when the report was written in 1999, the inclusion of the figures and appendices in the final formatting were not easily done in one document because of technological limitations. In preparation for inclusion in tDAR, this document was therefore updated in 2014 so that complete components of the report could be incorporated into one file. Since... Downloaded: by Julie Darsie on 9/25/15 11:15 AM Your use of tDAR indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, availablle at http://www.tdar.org/support/policies/term-of-use/. tDAR is an international digital repository developed and maintained by the Center for Digital Antiquity, a not-for-profit organization that helps scholars, researchers, educators and students, and interested members of the geneeral public discover, use, and preserve a wide range of information about archaeology and archaeological resources. For more information about the Center for Digital Antiquity, visit our web site http://digitalantiquity.org. For more information about tDAR, see http://www.tdar.org.
    [Show full text]
  • Huntingdon County Municipal Contacts
    HUNTINGDON COUNTY MUNICIPAL CONTACTS - JUNE 6, 2016 Middle Postal Home Date Municipal Meeting Time, Date, Prefix First Name Last Name Title Title 2 Organization Name Address City State Work Phone Fax Number Email Name Code Phone Updated Place VACANT ASSESSOR ALEXANDRIA BORO 4/18/2016 (814) 237- MR JEROME ITINGER AUDITOR ALEXANDRIA BORO 638 E MCCORMICK AVE STATE COLLEGE PA 16801- 4/18/2016 3634 10773 WILLIAM PENN HWY (814) 643- (814) 643- MR RODNEY SMAY DEV PERMIT OFFICER ALEXANDRIA BORO HUNTINGDON PA 16652- 4/18/2016 SUITE D 3480 3766 (814) 946- (814) 942- TOM LEVINE ENGINEER ALEXANDRIA BORO 1108 13TH AVE PO BOX 429 ALTOONA PA 16603- 4/18/2016 4859 1175 (814) 946- (814) 942- TOM LEVINE FLOODPLAIN ADMINISTRATOR ALEXANDRIA BORO 1108 13TH AVE PO BOX 429 ALTOONA PA 16603- 4/18/2016 4859 1175 (814) 669- MR SAM MILLER MAYOR ALEXANDRIA BORO PO BOX 124 ALEXANDRIA PA 16611- [email protected] 4/18/2016 9233 (814) 669- MRS BARBARA H RYZNER SECRETARY ALEXANDRIA BORO PO BOX 291 ALEXANDRIA PA 16611- [email protected] 4/18/2016 2nd Mon, 7pm, Alexandria Fire Hall 9478 ALEXANDRIA PORTER (814) 669- SEWAGE ENF OFFICER ALEXANDRIA BORO PO BOX 113 ALEXANDRIA PA 16611- 4/18/2016 JOINT SEWER AUTHORITY 9309 (814) 234- DAVID CONSIGLIO SOLICITOR ALEXANDRIA BORO 720 S ATHERTON ST STATE COLLEGE PA 16801- 4/18/2016 1500 (814) 669- KRISTA RUPERT TAX COLLECTOR ALEXANDRIA BORO 601 MAIN ST ALEXANDRIA PA 16611- 4/18/2016 4752 10773 WILLIAM PENN HWY (814) 643- (814) 643- RODNEY SMAY UNIFORM CONST CODE INSP ALEXANDRIA BORO HUNTINGDON PA 16652- 4/18/2016 SUITE
    [Show full text]
  • Restoring the Lost Rivers of Washington: Can a City’S Hydrologic Past Inform Its Future?
    rrestoringestoring thethe lostlost riversrivers ofof washington:washington: ccanan a ccity’sity’s hydrologichydrologic pastpast informinform itsits future?future? ccurtisurtis a.a. millaymillay restoring the lost rivers of washington: can a city’s hydrologic past inform its future? by Curtis A. Millay Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfi llment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE November 15, 2005 Dean Bork, Chair Alexandria, Virginia Adele Ashkar Keywords: urban hydrology, urban design, daylighting, landscape architecture, stormwater management Caren Yglesias, Ph.D. Copyright 2006, Curtis A. Millay the lost rivers of washington: can a city’s hydrologic past inform its future? Curtis A. Millay Abstract Washington, D.C., like many older U.S. cities, suffers the woes of rapid urbanization and aging in- frastructure. The city’s combined sewer and stormwater system dumps millions of gallons of raw sewage into the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers over 70 times annually during signifi cant rain events. While many groups, both public and private, attempt to clean the river, billions of dollars are still necessary over several years to remedy the combined sewer overfl ow (CSO) problem alone. Current plans for a solution include constructing large underground storage tanks that store millions of gal- lons of wastewater during overfl ow periods. Washington, however, once had a network of waterways that naturally drained the Federal City. At least three major stream systems—the Tiber Creek, James Creek and Slash Run—and over 30 springs fl owed within the boundaries of the emerging capital.
    [Show full text]