Retrofitting LID Practices into Existing Neighborhoods: Is It Worth It?

Wright, Timothy J.; Liu, Yaoze; Carroll, Natalie; Ahiablame, Laurent; Engel, Bernard A.

doi:10.1007/s00267-015-0651-5

Cited by 55 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The National Green Values Calculator is an online tool developed to compare costs, benefits, and performance of GI compared to conventional stormwater management practices [39]. It has been used to assess the impact of stormwater management practices on water quality [40], adaptive capacity [41], runoff capture [42], and GI impacts on new housing [43], Using the calculators formulas, the total runoff reduction due to the LID retrofit design was calculated. Table 1 shows the input data used from Sugarland’s site characteristics into the National Green Values Calculator.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Projected Impact of a Neighborhood-Scaled Green-Infrastructure Retrofit

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change and its related factors are increasing the frequency of hurricanes, coastal storms, and urban flooding. Recovery from disasters can be slow, with jurisdictions failing to build back better, wasting time and money without improving resilience to the next disaster. To help attenuate floods and mitigate their impacts, Low Impact Development (LID) and the incorporation of green infrastructure (GI) is gaining in popularity. LID installs more natural methods of absorbing, redirecting, retaining, and filtering water, through GI installations such as rain gardens, detention ponds, and the reduction of impervious surfaces. LID is, however, primarily implemented and evaluated only on a local scale; few studies have assessed the broader impacts of GI on a larger scale. In fact, most performance calculators that evaluate the effects of GI are only useful at the site scale. Further, most advocates of GI propose its use in new developments, without much attention to retrofitting existing, suburban development. This article seeks to determine what the potential effects of retrofitting an existing, suburban neighborhood with GI for flood protection at a larger scale could be, using Sugar Land, Texas, USA as a case site. First, low-impact facilities are proposed and schematically designed at a site scale for a typical single-family lot. The volume of rainfall that can be retained on site, due to each incorporated feature, is then derived using the Green Values National Storm Water Management Calculator. Using this data, the total volume of rainfall that could be retained if all residential sites in Sugar Land incorporate similar facilities is then projected. The result show that Sugar Land has the capacity to capture 56 billion liters of stormwater water annually if all residential properties use LID. Additional benefits of the use of GI include reduced heat (37%), improved aesthetics and property values (20%), increased recreational opportunities (18%), improved water quality (12%), improved air quality (5%), increased green collar jobs (4%), reduced damage from harmful gas emissions (3%), and increased energy savings (1%), thereby surpassing conventional storm water management techniques [1].

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Projected Impact of a Neighborhood-Scaled Green-Infrastructure Retrofit

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The potential payback period of LID implementation was assessed for neigborhoods in Lafayette, Indiana (USA) and found that payback (relative to cost per cubic meter runoff reduction and saving from reduced runoff volume) ranged anywhere from less than 3 years to not possible to generate a payback (Wright et al, 2016). A cost-benefit analysis of a typical community in Beijing (China) revealed that stormwater management by green infrastructure has higher construction and maintenance cost, the comprehensive benefits warrant promotion of green infrastructure for sustainable urban stormwater management (Liu et al, 2016a).…”

Section: Planning and Ecosystem Service Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…compared to pre-GI-development conditions, would contribute to a modest reduction in stormwater peak flow (> 4 %) and total runoff volume (> 5 %) across the simulated sewersheds(Sun and Hall, 2016) Wright et al (2016). assessed the effectiveness of LID in Lafayette, Indiana (USA) and found, depending on LID practice implemented and adoption level, runoff volume reduction of 10-70% volume could be achieved.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability

Chang¹,

DiGiovanni²,

Mei³

2017

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Selected 2016 publications on the focus of Sustainability are reviewed and discussed here. The followings are the topics presented: • Sustainable water and wastewater utilities •Sustainable water resources management • Stormwater and green infrastructure • Sustainability in water and wastewater treatment •Life cycle assessment (LCA) applications • Sustainability for water and energy, • Sustainability and asset management.

show abstract

“…It also provides environmental services, territorial cohesion, preservation of biodiversity, and sustainable development [18,19]. However, LID is not typically integrated at the beginning of the planning process because of the high capital and retrofitting cost for some BMPs [12,20], more specifically in rapidly grown urban areas. Even though it is recommended on some occasions, it is not mandated in the drainage ordinances [21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decision-Support System for LID Footprint Planning and Urban Runoff Mitigation in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of South Texas

Guerrero¹,

Alam

Mahmoud

et al. 2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To address regional flooding in the United States, federal and state agencies are adopting strict drainage policies in any large-scale commercial development within the watershed boundary. The conventional approach of implementing a wet detention pond (WP) reduces the land cover and causes operation and maintenance challenges eventually. The present study developed a decision-support system (DSS) in the Lower Rio Grande Valley region of South Texas for optimal selection of Best Management Practices (BMPs) by substituting a portion of the WP footprint with three regionally promising low-impact development practices, namely, porous concrete pavement (PCP), bioretention (BR), and bioswale (BS). Source Load Assessment and Management Model for Windows (WinSLAMM) was used as the foundation for the DSS database and algorithm development. This tool suggested that the implementation of bioswale alone can considerably reduce the footprint and construction cost. Less than 0.95 ha of installation of BR and BS can mitigate 79–91% of runoff from a maximum of 5 ha of commercial development. A combination of BR, BS, and WP was found to reduce runoff significantly (~100%), which suggests that the successful adoption of DSS might support better planning of the urban stormwater management in the Lower Rio Grande Valley (LRGV).

show abstract

Retrofitting LID Practices into Existing Neighborhoods: Is It Worth It?

Cited by 55 publications

References 35 publications

The Projected Impact of a Neighborhood-Scaled Green-Infrastructure Retrofit

The Projected Impact of a Neighborhood-Scaled Green-Infrastructure Retrofit

Sustainability

Decision-Support System for LID Footprint Planning and Urban Runoff Mitigation in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of South Texas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About