Preparing Stormwater Systems for Climate Change...
60
Leslie Yetka, Education Manager [email protected] Preparing Stormwater Systems for Climate Change October 10 th , 2013 – Monroe, MI
Transcript of Preparing Stormwater Systems for Climate Change...
Leslie Yetka, Education Manager [email protected]
Preparing Stormwater Systems for Climate Change October 10th, 2013 – Monroe, MI
National Climate Assessment Report 2013
Presenter
Presentation Notes
The information gathered during the technical modeling and assessment phase will be combined with the outreach piece to create a framework for addressing community stormwater adaptation planning. Information can be provided to local policy makers, developers, landowners and other interested stakeholders about current models and tools, trends, projected conditions, adaptation options and costs, education and communication strategies
Duluth, MN – June, 2012
Rainfall: ~9-14”/24 hrs Damage Total: $108 million
Rainfall: 15.10”/24 hrs – state record Damage Total: $27 million in property and crop damage
Rainfall: ~10”/8 hrs Damage Total: $30 million
Heavy Precipitation Trends
Percentage increase in very heavy precipitation (heaviest of 1% of all events) from 1958-2011
Karl et al. 2011
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Precipitation is increasing, but the way it is coming is also changing. We are experiencing more frequent and severe storms, as well as more severe drought. This graph demonstrates the increase in more severe events (31% change in the Upper Midwest).
10/11/2013
National Climate Assessment Report 2013
Provide local communities an adaptation framework to address changes in precipitation patterns and land use.
Duluth - MN Sea Grant
Presenter
Presentation Notes
The overarching study goal is to provide a framework for communities who want to address stormwater adaptation to climate change. This includes assessing vulnerabilities and adaptation options, and drawing on existing or creating new resources to respond.
1. Is the frequency and intensity of rain events likely to change in the Twin Cities area?
2. Will existing stormwater infrastructure be sufficient to manage future precipitation changes and land use changes? If not, to what degree is flooding expected to increase?
3. What are the available options to adapt stormwater
infrastructure to manage predicted precipitation and land use changes? What are the costs of these options?
4. What are the best ways to engage local communities to support adaptation planning?
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Watershed Size (181 sq miles) Municipalities (29 whole or partial) Primary (iconic) waterbodies of importance (Lake Minnetonka, Minnehaha Creek, Chain of Lakes, Minnehaha Falls) Subwatersheds (11 subwatersheds) Issues of Importance Grays Bay Dam Operation for Flood control Impaired Waters and TMDL’s: (nutrients, chlorides, biotic communities) Capital Improvement Programs and long term planning Land Acquisition and upland/wetland/stream habitat restoration Aquatic Invasive Species (zebra mussels, aquatic vegetation, carp) Low Impact Development and Green Infrastructure – permits/grants Education and Communications with stakeholders/partners/MS4’s/developers/K-12/general public
Current Land Characteristics
Soils,
Water Bodies Parks /Protected Land
Projected Land Characteristics
Impervious Surfaces Green Infrastructure
Pipe Configuration
Minneapolis (Hiawatha basin) Victoria
Run-off / Peak Flow Calculations
EPA-SWMM Calibration
System Components Adequacy
Current
Projected
Projected Pipe Sizing
Historical Climatic Data
Precipitation Evapotranspiration
Precipitation Scenarios
Global Circulation Models Down-Scaling
Projected Cost Impacts
DATA Input
Modeling
Outputs
Impact of Green Infrastructure
Extent of Mitigation
Projected Precipitation Amounts
Optimistic - Pessimistic
Generation: Model: Grid_size: Scenario: Most Likely
% Increase over
Historical +95% CI
Historical NCDC Station Recent 3.99 0.0%
CMIP5 CCSM4 9-grid rcp45 3.83 -4.0% 5.82 CMIP3 PCM 9-grid A1b 3.97 -0.5% 6.69 CMIP5 CM3 6-grid rcp60 4.08 2.1% 6.33 CMIP5 CCSM4 9-grid rcp85 4.08 2.3% 6.09 CMIP3 cm2.1 4-grid A1b 4.19 5.0% 6.16 CMIP5 CCSM4 9-grid rcp60 4.25 6.5% 6.06 CMIP5 CM3 9-grid rcp60 4.29 7.5% 7.29 CMIP3 cm2.1 9-grid A1b 4.81 20.4% 7.53 CMIP3 cm2.1 6-grid A1fi 4.94 23.8% 7.10 CMIP3 cm2.1 4-grid A1fi 4.99 25.2% 10.03 CMIP3 cm2.1 9-grid A1fi 5.09 27.5% 7.08 CMIP3 cm2.1 6-grid A1b 5.13 28.5% 6.16 CMIP5 CM3 9-grid rcp85 5.18 29.9% 7.88 CMIP5 CM3 6-grid rcp85 5.26 31.8% 7.67
Modeled Downscaled Climate Precipitation Projections (mid-century)
Projected Precipitation Amounts and Frequency: Current and Future
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
2.5 5 7.5 10 25 50 75 100
inch
es/2
4 hr
s
Return Period (years)
Recent
Optimistic Scenario
Moderate Scenario
Pessimistic Scenario
Return period (years) Recent climate mid-21st cent.
Optimistic mid-21st cent.
Moderate mid-21st cent.
Pessimistic
2.5 2.5 2.84 3.3 6.86
5 3.17 3.47 4.11 8.4
7.5 3.57 3.88 4.66 9.39
10 3.86 4.19 6.56 10.13
25 4.84 5.28 6.74 12.75
50 5.67 6.22 8.31 15.03
75 6.2 6.82 9.39 16.5
100 6.59 7.27 10.23 17.59
Projected Precipitation Amounts and Frequency: Current and Future
+9% +70% +157% “Design Storm”
Recent Storms Moderate Projection
Pessimistic Projection
3.9” 6.6” 10.1”
City of Minneapolis – Lake Hiawatha Pipeshed
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Transition – is flooding likely to increase: yes! On the basis that the pipes in this network were designed for a smaller event. What are options to deal with? Will table this for a bit… But next, what about situations in which must consider not only changing precip patterns, but also changing land uses, such as in developing rural communities like Victoria.
Flood Volume (MG) Precip. Scenario
(in) Total Street Storage Over-curb 3.93 2.46 1.60 0.86 4.15 2.92 1.89 1.03 4.77 3.95 2.33 1.62 5.66 5.82 3.21 2.61 6.56 10.05 4.14 5.91 8.07 20.02 5.22 14.80 10.1 40.05 5.56 34.49
Hiawatha Flood Volumes
• Stay the course • Increase Pipe Size • Flood reduction • projects Infiltration-based
practices (LID) • Protect open space
and existing green infrastructure
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Infiltration-based stormwater management – which gets at the issue of stormwater volume – may be a valuable component of a holistic adaptation strategy, both in developing communities such as Victoria but also as retrofits in built-out, urbanized communities such as the Lake Hiawahta waterhsed in S. Minneapolis. Though more challenging in urban environments, other studies have shown that the greatest benefits in runoff reduction are to be had in poor quality soils with high density development as these are the areas producing the greatest volume of runoff
1 Bancroft Meadows Flood Basin Built 1989 (Bloomington and 42nd )
Presenter
Presentation Notes
First was Bancroft Meadows, at Bloomington and about 42nd St. Twenty-some houses were purchased and removed, and residents were given relocation assistance. The second – Sibley Field – was of a similar type. 39th St between Longfellow and 20th Av
Precipitation Flooding Over Curb Flooding low high
(inches) (Mgal) (Mgal) acre-feet costs costs
6.56 10.05 8.7 26 $ 554,373 $ 2,600,797
8.07 20.02 17.4 58 $ 831,582 $ 4,142,518
10.10 40.05 35.3 107 $ 1,257,860 $ 6,659,056
Hiawatha : Dry Basin Cost Estimates for
Post-Piping Upgrade Volumes
37th Avenue Greenway Flood Project 2011
152,000 ft3 underground storage
# of projects
Precipitation Flooding Over Curb Flooding
Over Curb Flooding
Underground Basin comparable
(Mgal) (Mgal) acre-feet costs to 37th ave
6.56 10.1 8.7 26.7 $ 20,200,366 8
8.07 20.0 17.4 53.4 $ 40, 400,732 15
10.1 40.1 38.8 119.1 $ 90,088,989 34
Hiawatha : Underground Storage Cost Estimates for
Post-Piping Upgrade Volumes
LID: Reduction in Impervious Connectivity - Hiawatha Pipeshed: Impact on over-curb flooding
Over-curb + BRC 1-in 10% Over-curb + BRC 1-in 15% Over-curb + BRC 1-in 20% Precipitation
(inches) Existing Over-curb flooding
(MG)
Flood Vol. (MG)
% Change, Existing Over
Curb
Flood Vol. (MG)
% Change, Existing
Over Curb
Flood Vol. (MG)
% Change, Existing
Over Curb
3.93 0.86 0.37 -57.0% 0.35 -59.3% 0.3 -65.1%
4.15 1.03 0.46 -55.2% 0.44 -57.2% 0.39 -62.0%
4.77 1.62 0.74 -54.2% 0.71 -56.0% 0.66 -59.1%
5.66 2.61 1.37 -47.5% 1.18 -54.8% 1.13 -56.7%
6.56 5.91 3.81 -35.6% 3.67 -37.9% 3.47 -41.3%
8.07 14.80 12.03 -18.7% 11.83 -20.1% 11.6 -21.6%
10.1 34.49 31.77 -7.9% 31.67 -8.2% 31.89 -7.5%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
3.93 4.15 4.77 5.66 6.56 8.07 10.1
Tota
l Flo
od V
olum
e (m
illio
n ga
llons
)
Precip Depth (in) Existing L/U Build-Out
City of Victoria: Flood Volume… With and Without Build-out
Recent Storms - 3.9” in 24 hrs
City of Victoria
Moderate Projection - 6.6” in 24 hrs
City of Victoria
Increased flooding in some existing ponds
Some street
flooding expected
Increased
flooding in low lying areas
Pessimistic Projection - 10.1” in 24 hrs
City of Victoria
Many ponds overtopped
More streets
flooded Significant
flooding in recreational areas
City of Victoria Plans and Policies: Looking Ahead and Looking Back
Key policies that increased resilience: • Shoreland Ordinance • Wetlands and Buffer in Outlots • Park Dedication • Woodland Protection/Preservation • Stormwater Management
City of Victoria Plans and Policies: Looking Ahead and Looking Back
Fully developed: • Lake Minnetonka • Lake Virginia
Partially developed: • Schutz Lake • Lake Zumbra • Kelzer Pond
• Lake Wassermann • Lake Auburn
Undeveloped: • Stone Lake • Lake Tamarack • Stieger Lake • Church Lake • Carl Krey Lake
Shoreland Ordinance
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Purpose of article. The uncontrolled use of shorelands affects the public health, safety and general welfare not only by contributing to pollution of public waters, but also by impairing the local tax base. Therefore, it is in the best interests of the public health, safety and welfare to provide for the wise use and development of shorelands of public waters. The provisions of this district are to enhance the quality of surface waters, conserve the economic and natural environmental values of shorelands and provide for the wise use of waters and related land resources. Shoreland: 125’ min width, ½ acre min size
City of Victoria Plans and Policies: Looking Ahead and Looking Back
Wetlands and Buffers
City of Victoria Plans and Policies: Looking Ahead and Looking Back
Stormwater Management
10-yr Event
Flood Volume
Increase Undersized Pipes Reduce Street
Flooding Create Flood
Storage 50% LID – Impact on Undersized Pipes *
MG Ft of Pipe
After pipe
upsizing (MG) Cost
Excess Street (MG) Cost
Pipes Filled
Flooding MG Cost
3.9” 0.07 0 0% $0 0 $0 -27% 0 --
6.6” 1.6 4,199 -75% $205,000 0.91 $150,000-$575,000 -9% -19% --
10.1” 16.9 14,132 -30% $775,000 7.47 $1,015,000-$2,350,000 -9% -3% --
City of Victoria Options for Adaptation
*LID does not provide effective flood control during large storm events
Study Goal: Provide local communities an ‘adaptation framework’ to address changes in precipitation and land use. How did we do this?
Collaborative Approach: “Collaborative planning that was informed by science and led through a participatory stakeholder process.”
• Drawing on local knowledge to improve decision making.
• Using a public process that…
– Identifies values, interests, and concerns of all who are interested in or might be affected by the process or decisions
– Uses the best available knowledge – Incorporates new information, methods, and concerns
Improve quality…
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Quality of the outcomes in enhanced by including social values, interests, concerns of all those that are affected, including best available knowledge/science, and incorporating these into the decision making process.
• Fostering legitimate and equitable decision-making by… – A process that is seen by the interested and affected
parties as fair and competent – A process that follows the governing laws and regulations – Doesn’t necessarily mean everyone agrees
Improve legitimacy…
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Recommended actions/solutions…no matter how brilliant, are of little value if there is no legitimacy of the process. The process must both be and be perceived as fair/competent…and following due process of law.
• By increasing resilience, adaptive capacity, and social capital by… – Engaging the public with vetted data on severe weather
trends and best available climate change science – Fostering inter-town/region/watershed wide
understanding, trust, and collaboration to increase resilience to stormwater risks
– Developing widely shared understanding of the issues and decision challenges
Improve capacity…
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Finally, a goal of public participation includes enhancing the overall capacity of the system to make needed changes. This includes raising the understanding of the situations, building networks and partners, developing a shared understanding of both the challenges that need to be faced and the work that should go forward.
1. Convening
2. Assessing
3. Visioning and Objectives
4. I.D. Barriers
5. Strategies
6. Partners & Resources
7. Action Plan
8. Leadership Team
9. Actions
10. Feedback & Base of Support
Inputs (considerations prior to moving into this phase)
Outputs (what is likely to result from this step?)
Model we used for collaborative planning…
Gruber, J. 2013
May be iterative…
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Inputs include considerations prior to moving into the next phase. Outputs are what is likely to result form this step of the process. Also note, sometime outcomes from some of these steps need to be vetted by those involved in a previous step. That is, sometime there may need to be an iterative process.
1. Convene community leaders and a broad list of stakeholders
Convened a broad cross-section of stakeholders that included representatives of: • Education/Academic Organizations • Local Officials • Federal Government • Municipal Employees • NGO/Conservation Orgs. • Private Citizens/ Public • Regional official • State Agencies Staff • State Officials • Students
1. Convening Inputs Outputs
Education/Acad. Organizations
4%
Local Officials 28%
Federal Government
4% Municipal Employees
2% NGO/Conservation
Organizations 11%
Private Citizens/General
Public 9%
Private Sector 18%
Regional official 4%
State Agencies Staff 7%
State Officials
11%
Students 2%
Who was present?
Input example: clear ground rules Output example: greater trust across stakeholder groups
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Input example…clear ground rules. Output example: greater trust across different stakeholder groups
2. Assessing the situation and affiliated problems
2. Assessing
Assessment included research by a science/technical team and discussions during the stakeholder sessions. The goal was to: • Collect and analyze essential data – Science/technical team • Document current conditions – Science/technical team and stakeholders • Include diverse views and perspectives – in small and large group
discussions • Provide an opportunity to reflect on the situation • Help participants understand the underlying causes or problems
Inputs Outputs
Input example: broad cross-section of public participating Output example: shared understanding of challenges and systems that need to be addressed
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Example of input: Broad cross-section of stakeholders/public participating. Example of output: A shared understanding of the challenges and system that needs to be addressed.
• In what ways have you observed or heard about land-use/development and changing weather patterns impacting this region?
• Do you think some of these impacts might reoccur?
• What are the underlying causes and/or problems?
• Top reasons why these impacts might reoccur? –Participants then voted (with dots) on the top reasons. Results were then grouped into four categories for future Working Groups.
For example: guiding questions…
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Here are a few example questions that could be used during the assessment phase.
3. Visioning opportunities and articulating objectives
From the previous assessment process… 1. Priority areas were identified 2. “What could be done?” 3-5 objectives identified for each
priority area Work Groups: A. Education, Outreach, and Stakeholder Engagement
B. Land Use Planning and Policy
C. Stormwater Infrastructure (Green/Grey) and LID
D. Sustainable Funding: Stormwater Infrastructure
3. Visioning & Objectives
Inputs Outputs
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Based on the assessment process…an overall vision is framed and specific objectives are developed. The work groups typically finalize overall objectives that is consistent with the vision. Inputs: shared understanding of the problems being addressed Outputs: clear priority goals and objectives to achieve goals
“What could be done?” • Identify strategies to increase stakeholder awareness,
level of interest, and ownership of stormwater mgmt issues
• Identify strategies to educate local policy-makers about stormwater vulnerabilities, long term needs, and adaptation options
• Identify strategies to inform developers of alternative stormwater methods and techniques
• Foster consensus and cooperation among stakeholders for adaptation planning
Education, outreach objectives….
4. Identification of barriers preventing progress (economic, social, cultural, political, etc. )
4. Identification of Barriers
Barriers/challenges are…financial, political, social, cultural, logistical, and/or philosophical difficulties…that get in the way of accomplishing the objective.
Inputs Outputs
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Progress on challenges such as adaptation to climate change are held hostage due to a wide range of barriers. These barriers range from financial, political, social, cultural, etc. In New England at a Town Meeting, they are usually communicated by the next three speakers after you stand up and raise a new idea. Inputs: identified goals and objectives, understanding of needs Outputs: roadmap for overcoming barriers that may be faced, in all areas
Objective: Identify strategies to educate local policy-makers… Barriers/Challenges 1) Lack of knowledge of
connections between individual actions and cumulative problem….
2) Unclear how problems can be solved and what actions there should be?
3) ….
Potential Approaches to Resolve Barriers/Challenges
1) Educate city councils and staff
2) Use successes of existing unified groups (eg. AIS) and adopt that model
3) Recommend new standards or specific actions leaders should take
4) …
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Here is on example of how to flush out the barriers/challenges for an objective.
5. Identification of strategies that recognize barriers and overall objectives
• Prioritizing strategies and tools for implementation • Assessing impact vs. feasibility of each alternative
5. Strategies Inputs Outputs
FEAS
IBIL
ITY
high
med
low
low med high
IMPACT
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Understanding the barriers will help participants come up with creative approaches to move forward. These strategies and tools for implementation are typically developed in the Working Groups that include people knowledgeable in this area. Inputs: shared understanding of challenges and opportunities, broad knowledge base to devise strategies Outputs: prioritized strategies based on high feasibility and hi impact, reduce needless use of resources
6. Identification and engagement of potential partners and types of resources required
• Identifying and forming potential: – PPP (public-private partnerships) – PPCP (public-private-community partnerships) – Other governmental partnerships – Etc.
6. Partners & Resources
Inputs Outputs
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Few societal changes can be accomplished without a broad group of partners. These need to be identified and engaged in the work. They could include PPP, PPCP and others. Inputs: broad cross-section of stakeholders at table, shared understanding of possible strategies Outputs: partnership, leadership groups identified, formed
7. Formulating action plans based on data and social values
“How to Proceed” –Action steps –Responsible parties –Timelines –Resources available/needed
7. Action Plan Inputs Outputs
Presenter
Presentation Notes
An action plan is only as valuable as to how wells it was developed AND the level of commitment for it’s implementation. If the process was inclusive and careful developed to this step…there will be many knowledgeable and well connected individuals ready to draft an action plan that…hopefully…will not sit on a shelf. Inputs: stakeholder groups knowledgable about goals and objectives and strategies, barriers and possible challenges, ready to develop action plans to proceed forward Outputs: action plans that are high quality and legitimate, wise use of available resources, more likely to be implementable
Objective: Identifying strategies to educate local policy makers about stormwater vulnerabilities, long term needs, and options Timeline: Not identified
Responsible Parties: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, UMN Extension, Water Resources Center, Freshwater Society, Local Leaders, NOAA, MN Sea Grant
Project: Convene a summit to educate local policy makers about creating resilient stormwater management systems.
Action Items: 1) Identify audience: local decision makers, commissioners, volunteers
Assess/Prioritize vulnerabilities 2) Convene a focus group of audience. What draws them? Will draw them?
Needs assessment of targeted audience. 3) Frame the summit – Develop learning objectives with:
1) Planning team 2) Include participants in planning summit
4) …….
Sample Action Plan: Education, Outreach, Stakeholder Engagement
8. Formalizing inclusive implementation leadership team
8. Leadership Team Inputs Outputs
Others…..
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Leadership team is essential to push for implementation. It could be a formal group or a local or indigenous group. This slide shows an VT legislative committee and an Antioch Graduate working in Haitie. Inputs: everyone on board Outputs: everyone on board, energized to act, with clear process to do so, clearly implementable actions
9. Initiating actions based on priorities, balancing highest return with feasibility of achieving results
9. Actions
Inputs Outputs
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Actions can range from a university rain garden to re-building a neighborhood with underground stormwater storage.
10.Embracing open and dynamic feedback on process and actions taken.
10. Feedback and Base of Support
Inputs Outputs
Continue to build broad base of support...
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Finally, as is common with all healthy ecological systems, there need to be a process that encourages dynamic feedback. This process should also continue to build support for continuing implementation efforts.
“Gaining consensus on issues/impacts.” “Great conversation!” “Comments from diverse stakeholders, not just technical
professionals, is important.” “I also like how we got to help shape future efforts.” “The exercise…brought up different perspectives on the issues of stormwater management.”
Types of Positive Responses
“Include people from where the problem is coming from (agriculture, development, big-box stores).”
“Pre-release topics to be discussed so participants can come with suggestions.”
“Well, none really…this is just the start of a long journey.” “Invite less engineers.”
Types of Concerns or Proposed Changes
This study was funded through a grant from the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration SARP program.
10/11/2013
Project team and partners
Questions?
www.minnehahacreek.org/WET
