Advertisement

Environmental Management

, Volume 51, Issue 6, pp 1093–1108 | Cite as

Perspectives on the Use of Green Infrastructure for Stormwater Management in Cleveland and Milwaukee

  • Melissa Keeley
  • Althea Koburger
  • David P. Dolowitz
  • Dale Medearis
  • Darla Nickel
  • William Shuster
Article

Abstract

Green infrastructure is a general term referring to the management of landscapes in ways that generate human and ecosystem benefits. Many municipalities have begun to utilize green infrastructure in efforts to meet stormwater management goals. This study examines challenges to integrating gray and green infrastructure for stormwater management, informed by interviews with practitioners in Cleveland, OH and Milwaukee WI. Green infrastructure in these cities is utilized under conditions of extreme fiscal austerity and its use presents opportunities to connect stormwater management with urban revitalization and economic recovery while planning for the effects of negative- or zero-population growth. In this context, specific challenges in capturing the multiple benefits of green infrastructure exist because the projects required to meet federally mandated stormwater management targets and the needs of urban redevelopment frequently differ in scale and location.

Keywords

LID Green infrastructure Cleveland OH Milwaukee WI Urban redevelopment Stormwater management 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported, in part, by the US EPA Office of Research and Development (ORD) and National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL), under contract EP-11-C-000067. The authors wish to thank Kyle Dreyfus-Wells, Frank Greenland, Peter McAvoy, Terry Schwarz, Kevin Shafer, Lilah Zautner, and two interviewees who wished to remain anonymous for their contributions to the study. We also appreciate the helpful input of Laura Grape, Sayedul Choudhury, Bob Newport, Brooke Furio, and four anonymous reviewers. This research was performed in compliance with the US ethical standards under the review of the George Washington University Institutional Review Board. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ab Razak IA, Christensen ER (2001) Water quality before and after deep tunnel operation in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Water Res 35(11):2683–2692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Assad N (2012) Locating barriers to and opportunities for implementing low impact development within a governance and policy framework in southern Ontario. Thesis, University of GuelphGoogle Scholar
  3. Briglio D (2011) Practicality, feasibility, and compliance in stormwater management. Stormwater. www.stormh2o.com/forms/print-7447.aspx. Accessed 20 May 2011
  4. Brookes K, Brown R, Morrison P (2011) A case study analysis of the critical factors influencing a private land developer adopting water sensitive urban design. http://www.watersensitivecities.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2011_Brookes-and-Brown_12ICUD.pdf. Accessed 3 July 2012
  5. Brown R (2005) Impediments to integrated urban stormwater management: the need for institutional reform. Environ Manag 36(3):455–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown R, Clarke J (2007) Transition to water sensative urban design: the story of Melbourne, Australia. Facility for Advancing Water Biofiltration, Monash University, ClaytonGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown RR, Farrelly MA (2009) Delivering sustainable urban water management: a review of the hurdles we face. Water Sci Technol 59(5):839–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burkholder S (2012) The new ecology of vacancy: rethinking land use in shrinking cities. Sustainability 4:1153–1172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Callenbach E (2011) Sustainable shrinkage: envisioning a smaller, stronger economy. Solutions 2(4):10–15Google Scholar
  10. Carmon N, Shamir U (2010) Water-sensitive planning: integrating water considerations into urban and regional planning. Water Environ J 24:181–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. City of Cleveland (2011) Sustainability at work. Department of Water Pollution Control. www.clevelandwpc.com. Accessed 19 Sept 2011
  12. Clean Water America Alliance (2011) Barriers and gateways to green infrastructure. http://www.cleanwateramericaalliance.org/news_NewsWaves_2011_09.php. Accessed 3 Jan 2012
  13. Cleveland City Planning Commission (2010) Connecting Cleveland 2020 Citywide plan: population. http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/cwp/pop_trend.php. Accessed 21 Nov 2012
  14. Cleveland City Planning Commission (2012) Ideas for vacant land reuse in Cleveland. http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/#. Accessed 2 Dec 2012Google Scholar
  15. Corbett D (2010) Achieving sustainable stormwater management in Melbourne, Australia, as part of the journey to a water sensitive city. Novatech, 2010. http://documents.irevues.inist.fr/bitstream/handle/2042/35638/13101-015COR.pdf?sequence=1. Accessed 21 Nov 2012
  16. Creswell JW (1998) Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  17. de Graff R, van der Brugge R (2010) Transforming water infrastructure by linking water management and urban renewal in Rotterdam. Technol Forecast Soc 77:1282–1291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Demographia (2006) International: selected cities with declining population ranked by annual loss rate. http://www.demographia.com/db-intlcitylossr.htm. Accessed 21 Nov 2012
  19. Department of Public Works (2011) Infrastructure division: environmental section. http://city.milwaukee.gov/mpw/divisions/infrastructure/EnvironmentalSection.htm. Accessed 25 Sept 2011
  20. Doll A, Scodari PF, Lindsey G (1999). Credits as economic incentives for on-site stormwater management: issues and examples. In: Proceedings of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Conference on Retrofit Opportunities for Water Resource Protection in Urban Environments, Chicago, pp 113–117Google Scholar
  21. Dunn AD (2010) Siting green infrastructure: legal and policy solutions to alleviate urban poverty and promote healthy communities. Pace Law Faculty Publications, Paper 559, 41–66Google Scholar
  22. Easterling DR et al (2000) Observed variability and trends in extreme climate events: a brief review. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 81:417–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ellis JB, Green C, Revitt DM (2012) Identifying success factors in urban surface water BMP implementation: mission impossible? http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/6503/. Accessed 3 July 2012
  24. Enterprise Community Partners (2012) Building American cities toolkit. Center for Community Progress. http://www.communityprogress.net/toolkit-pages-292.php. Accessed 8 Dec 2012
  25. Fullilove M (2004) Root shock: how tearing up city neighborhoods hurts America and what can we do about it. One World/Ballantine, New yorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Girardet H (1999) Creating sustainable cities. Green Books, DevonGoogle Scholar
  27. Green O et al (2012) Identification and induction of human, social and cultural capitals through an experimental approach to stormwater management. Sustainability 4(8):1669–1682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hawthorne M (2011) Feds probe chronic sewage overflows into lake, streams. Chicago Tribune, March 19, 2011Google Scholar
  29. Hein S (2003) Government pollution: the metropolitan Milwaukee sewerage district’s impact on Lake Michigan. Wisconsin Policy Research Institute Report, 16, 6Google Scholar
  30. Hoornbeek J, Schwarz T (2009) Sustainable infrastructure in shrinking cities: options for the future. Kent State University, Kent. www.cudc.kent.edu/shrink/Images/neorc_infrastructure_report.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2011
  31. Hull P (2000) NPDES phase II: the next phase. Eros Control J 7(1):40–47Google Scholar
  32. Kahn ME (1998) The silver lining of Rust Belt manufacturing decline. J Urban Econ 46:360–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kaspersen J (2000) The stormwater utility: will it work in your community? Stormwater MagazineGoogle Scholar
  34. Keeley M (2007) Using individual parcel assessments to improve stormwater management. J Am Plan Assoc 73:149–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lach D, Ingram H, Rayner S (2005) Maintaining the status quo: how institutional norms and practices create conservative water organizations. Tex Law Rev 80:2027–2053Google Scholar
  36. LaCroix CJ (2010) Urban agriculture and other green uses: remaking the shrinking city. Urban Law 42:225Google Scholar
  37. Larson K (2009) Social acceptability of water resource management: a conceptual approach Resources Conference. http://www.gwri.gatech.edu/uploads/proceedings/1999/MillerA-99.pdf. Accessed 3 Sept 2011
  38. Lee S, Yigitcanlar T (2010) Sustainable urban stormwater management: water sensitive urban design perceptions, drivers and barriers. IGI Global, Engineering Science Reference, Hershey, pp. 26–37Google Scholar
  39. Livingston D, Ashbolt N, Colebatch H (2006) Institutional barriers to decentralized systems. J Aust Water Assoc 33(3):75–77Google Scholar
  40. Means EG, Laugier MC, Daw JA, Owen DM (2010) Impacts of climate change on infrastructure planning and design: past practices and future needs. J Am Water Works Assoc 102:56–65Google Scholar
  41. Miller AE, Kundell JE (1999) Insight into state and local government responsibilities for effective watershed management in Georgia. In: Proceedings of the 1999 Georgia Water Resources Conference. http://www.gwri.gatech.edu/uploads/proceedings/1999/MillerA-99.pdf. Accessed 3 Sept 2011
  42. Mitchell B (2005) Integrated water resource management, institutional arrangements, and land-use planning. Environ Plan A 37(8):1335–1352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. MMSD (2011) Every Drop Counts. http://v3.mmsd.com/. Accessed 11 Jan 2012
  44. Montalto F, Behr C, Alfredo K, Wolf M, Arye M, Walsh M (2007) Rapid assessment of the cost-effectiveness of low impact development for CSO control. Landsc Urban Plan 82:117–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Neiswender C, Shepard R (2010) Elements of successful stormwater outreach. www.epa.gov/owow/NPS/natlstormwater03/25Neiswender.pdf. Accessed 31 May 2011
  46. NEORSD (2011) Project clean lake. NEORSD. www.neorsd.org/projectcleanlake.php. Accessed 24 Jan 2011
  47. Office of Environmental Sustainability (2011) Green Milwaukee. http://city.milwaukee.gov/sustainability. Accessed 24 Sept 2011
  48. Olsson P, Folke C, Berkes F (2004) Adaptive co-management for building resilience in social-ecological systems. Environ Manag 34(1):75–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Parikh P, Taylor M, Hoagland T, Thurston H, Shuster W (2005) Application of market mechanisms and incentives to reduce stormwater runoff: an integrated hydrologic, economic and legal approach. Environ Sci Policy 8(2):133–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pitt R et al. (2003) Evaluation of NPDES phase 1 municipal stormwater monitoring data (EPA/625/R-03/003). In: National conference on Urban stormwater: enhancing the programs at the local level, pp 306–327Google Scholar
  51. ReImagining Cleveland (2012) ReImagining a more sustainable cleveland: about. http://reimaginingcleveland.org/about/. Accessed 21 Nov 2012
  52. Rosenberg EA et al (2010) Precipitation extremes and the impacts of climate change on stormwater infrastructure in Washington State. Clim Chang 102:319–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Roy AH, Shuster WD (2009) Assessing impervious surface connectivity and applications for watershed management. J Am Water Resour Assoc 45:198–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Roy AH et al (2008) Impediments and solutions to sustainable, watershed-scale urban stormwater management: lessons from Australia and the United States. Environ Manag 42:344–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Saleth RM, Dinar A (2005) Water institutional reforms: theory and practice. Water Policy 7:1–19Google Scholar
  56. Schilling J, Logan J (2008) Greening the rust belt. J Am Plan Assoc 74:451–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Schumacher EF (1999) Small Is beautiful: economics as If people mattered: 25 years later… with commentaries. Hartley & Marks Publishers, VancouverGoogle Scholar
  58. Shafer K (2011) Fresh coast, green solutions; weaving Milwaukee’s green and grey infrastructure into a sustainable future. http://v3.mmsd.com/Sustainability.aspx. Accessed 27 July 2011
  59. Sharma A, Cook S, Tjandraatmadja G, Gregory A (2012) Impediments and constraints in the uptake of water sensitive urban design measures in greenfield and infill developments. Water Sci Technol 65:2Google Scholar
  60. Shuster WD et al (2011) Moving beyond the udorthent—a proposed protocol for surveying urban soils to service data needs for contemporary ecosystem management. Soil Surv Horizons 201:1–8Google Scholar
  61. Somekh B (2005) Research methods in the social sciences. Sage Publishing, LondonGoogle Scholar
  62. Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust (2012) An introduction to sweet water. http://www.swwtwater.org/home/about_swwt.cfm. Accessed 12 Feb 2012
  63. Starkl M, Brunner N, Flogl W, Wimmer J (2009) Design of an institutional decision-making process: the case of urban water management. J Environ Manag 90(2):13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Taylor AC, Fletcher TD (2007) Nonstructural urban stormwater quality measures: building a knowledge base to improve their use. Environ Manag 39:663–677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Thurston HW (2006) Opportunity costs of residential best management practices for stormwater runoff control. J Water Resour Plan 132(2):89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Thurston HW, Goddard HC, Szlag D, Lemberg B (2003) Controlling stormwater runoff with tradable allowances for impervious surfaces. J Water Resour Plan 129(5):409–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Trauth KM, Shin YS (2005) Implementation of the EPAs water quality trading policy for storm water management and smart growth. J Urban Plan D-ASCE 131:258–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Tsihrintzis V, Hamid R (1997) Modeling and management of urban stormwater runoff quality: a review. Water Resour Manag 11:137–164Google Scholar
  69. Tzoulas K et al (2007) Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green infrastructure: a literature review. Landsc Urban Plan 81:167–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. US EPA (2007a) Memorandum from Benjamin H. Grumbles, to Regional Administrators re: Using Green Infrastructure to Protect Water Quality’ (March 2007), Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  71. US EPA (2007b) Using Green Infrastructure to Protect Water Quality in Stormwater, CSO, Non-point Source and Other Water Programs, Washington DC. http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/greeninfrastructure_h2oprograms_07.pdf. Accessed 3 Feb 2008
  72. US EPA (2008) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/menuofbmps/index.cfm. Accessed 3 Sept 2011
  73. US Government Accountability Office (2011) Vacant properties: growing number increases communities’ costs and challenges. Report to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform House of RepresentativesGoogle Scholar
  74. Van de Meene SJ, Brown R, Farrelly M (2009) Exploring sustainable urban water governance: a case study of institutional capacity. Water Sci Technol 59(10):1921–1928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. van der Tak L, Pasteris P, Traynham L, Salas C, Ajello T, Baker E (2010) Storm sewer infrastructure planning with climate change risk: the City of Alexandria Virginia Case Study. Water Pract Technol, 5(4). http://www.iwaponline.com/wpt/005/wpt0050085.htm. Accessed 18 Jan 2012
  76. The Water Council (2011) Water Council Mission. Milwaukee Water Council: Serving the Word water hub. http://www.thewatercouncil.com/about/. Accessed 17 Jan 2012
  77. Wong THF (2006) Water sensitive urban design—the journey thus far. Aust J Water Resour. Special Issue, 10(3): 213–222Google Scholar
  78. Yeh CH, Labadie JW (1997) Multiobjective watershed-level planning of storm water detention systems. J Water Resour Plan 123:336–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Melissa Keeley
    • 1
  • Althea Koburger
    • 2
  • David P. Dolowitz
    • 3
  • Dale Medearis
    • 4
  • Darla Nickel
    • 5
  • William Shuster
    • 6
  1. 1.Department of GeographyGeorge Washington UniversityWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Masters CandidateGeorge Washington UniversityWashingtonUSA
  3. 3.Department of PoliticsUniversity of LiverpoolLiverpoolUK
  4. 4.Northern Virginia Regional CommissionFairfaxUSA
  5. 5.Ecologic InstituteBerlinGermany
  6. 6.US Environmental Protection AgencyCincinnatiUSA

Personalised recommendations