United States
Environmental Protectio
\'^l m ^Agency
August 2016
EPA 832-R-16-004
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wastewater Management
Green Infrastructure and Climate Change
-------
Contents
Introduction
How Does Green Infrastructure Improve
Climate Resiliency? 2
Case Studies
Using Green Instructure along Transportation
Corridors for Climate Resiliency in
Los Angeles, California 13
Using Resiliency and Energy to
Implement Sustainable Solutions in
New Orleans, Louisiana 19
Using Green Infrastructure to Balance Water Supply,
Flood Control, and Regulatory Requirements in
Albuquerque, New Mexico............. 3
Green Infrastructure and Climate Resiliency in
Grand Rapids, Michigan.. .9
Albuquerque
Grand Rapids
Los Angeles
New Orleans
This report was developed under
EPA Contract No. EP-C-11-009.
Photography courtesy of (top to bottom):
Vic D'Amato, Tetra Tech • Gail Gunst Heffner, Calvin
College • Brad Wardynski, Tetra Tech • Hope Herrori,
-------
What is green infrastructure?
Green infrastructure uses vegetation, soils,
and natural processes to manage water and
create healthier urban environments. Green
infrastructure can range in scale from site
design approaches such as rain gardens and
green roofs to regional planning approaches
such as conservation of large tracts of open
land. In conjunction with gray infrastructure,
interconnected networks of green
infrastructure can enhance community
resiliency by increasing water supplies,
reducing flooding, combatting urban heat
island effect, and improving water quality.
Introduction
Communities across the nation already are experiencing the
effects of climate change. As different parts of the country
become drier, wetter or hotter, community leaders and
citizens are looking to green infrastructure to improve their
community's resiliency to the effects of climate change.
In 2015, EPA convened charrettes, or intensive planning
sessions, in four cities: Albuquerque, Grand Rapids, Los
Angeles, and New Orleans, to explore the ways in which green
infrastructure could help cities become more resilient to
climate change. In each city, participants were selected from a
variety of disciplines, including city decision makers, climate
scientists, water resource specialists, city planners, and
neighborhood and environmental groups, among others.
Participants considered the following concepts as they
explored green infrastructure options that would help their
cities be better prepared for climate change impacts:
• Identifying the multiple benefits of green infrastructure practices.
• Collaborating across city agencies to maximize benefits.
• Unifying solutions across multiple disciplines.
• Achieving efficiencies in project implementation.
Each city's charrette focused on different issues based on the most pressing climate change impacts they were facing
and their current level of green infrastructure implementation. The key goals of the charrettes are listed below - the
findings of each charrette are summarized in case studies beginning on page 4.
Albuquerque
• Determine how green infrastructure can be used
to meet the region's stormwater permit
requirements and address flooding and water
supply concerns.
• Outline the process to identify and evaluate
green infrastructure opportunities.
• Identify implementation issues might arise as
projects are undertaken.
Grand Rapids
• Discuss which climate resiliency concerns can
be addressed by green infrastructure.
• Identify green infrastructure success stories in
Grand Rapids as potential case studies.
• Determine areas of focus for future actions.
Los Angeles
• Identify transportation corridor improvements
that meet multiple objectives, including heat
island relief, reconnecting citizens to the
Los Angeles River, and preparing for drought.
• Discuss ways to overcome potential
implementation issues across multiple disciplines.
New Orleans
• Explore enhancements for public properties such
as parks, playgrounds, schools, right-of-ways, and
vacant lots.
• Demonstrate the benefits of green infrastructure
in addressing water pollution, flooding, energy
use, greenhouse gas emissions, and heat island
-------
How Does Green Infrastructure Improve Climate Resiliency?
Green infrastructure strategies can help communities prepare for and manage climate change impacts.
For more information, visit www.epa.gov/green-infrastructure/green-infrastructure-climate-resiiienc
Manages Flood Risk
High intensity storms are expected to become more frequent and intense as global
temperatures continue to rise. As a result, the risk of flooding is likely to increase dramatically.
Green infrastructure can help manage both localized and riverine floods by absorbing rainfall,
preventing water from overwhelming pipe networks and pooling in streets or basements.
Green infrastructure, open space preservation, and floodplain management can complement
gray infrastructure approaches by reducing the volume of stormwater that flows into streams
and rivers, protecting floodplain functions and reducing infrastructure and property damage.
Builds Resiliency to Drought
Fragile local water supplies are being stressed by decreased precipitation associated with
climate change in some areas of the country. When a storm event does occur, rain falling on
roofs, parking lots, streets, and other hard surfaces runs directly into city storm drains or water
bodies. Communities are losing valuable water that could be used or stored for use when it is
needed most. Prepare for drought by infiltrating water where it falls. Green infrastructure can
help replenish groundwater reserves, relieving stress on local water supplies and reducing the
need to import potable water.
Reduces the Urban Heat Island Effect
Urban heat islands occur when cities replace natural land cover with dense concentrations of
pavement, buildings, and other surfaces that absorb and retain heat. This effect increases
energy costs (e.g., for air conditioning), air pollution, and heat-related illness and mortality.
Climate change will likely lead to more frequent, more severe, and longer heat waves during
summer months. Extreme heat events often affect our most vulnerable populations first.
Trees, green roofs, and vegetation can help reduce urban heat island effects by shading
building surfaces, deflecting solar radiation, and releasing moisture into the atmosphere.
Lowers Building Energy Demands
Trees and vegetative cover can lower ambient air temperatures in urban areas through
shading, windbreak, and evapotranspiration. The result is lower demand for the energy
needed to provide air conditioning in summer months. Green roofs can greatly reduce the
amount of energy needed to keep the temperature of a building comfortable year-round by
insulating against extensive heat loss in the winter and heat absorption in the summer. A
National Research Council of Canada study found that an extensive green roof reduced daily
energy demand for air conditioning in the summer by over 75 percent.1
Improves Coastal Resiliency
Coastal areas are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Sea-level rise and
heavy storms can cause erosion and flooding of sensitive coastal areas and destroy natural
habitat. Climbing global temperatures will result in continued sea level rise, amplified storm
surges, and more frequent and intense storms that will continue to erode the shoreline and
damage property and infrastructure. Living shorelines can be created using plants, reefs, sand,
and natural barriers to reduce erosion and flooding. Restoring affected wetlands can reduce
wave heights and property damage.
Reduces Energy Needed to Manage Water
Communities and their residents use a lot of energy treating and moving drinking water and
wastewater. They can significantly reduce municipal and domestic energy use with green
infrastructure practices that will reduce rainwater flows into sewer systems, recharge aquifers,
and conserve water. Cities, states, or regional entities should consider tying energy efficiency
savings resulting from implementing these practices to reduced demand at power plants.
1 Liu, K., and B. Baskaran. 2.003. Thermal Performance of Green Roofs through Field Evaluation. In Proceedings
for the First North American Green Roof Infrastructure Conference, Awards and Trade Show, Chicago, Illinois,
-------
Using Green Infrastructure to Balance
Water Supply, Flood Control, and
Regulatory Requirements in
Albuquerque, New Mexico
How is Albuquerque's climate
predicted to change?
Weather has already become more
extreme in Albuquerque. A number of
recent climate studies for the region by
EPA, the U.S. Geological Survey, U.S.
Bureau of Reclamation, Mid Region
Council of Governments, local univer-
sities and others predict that by mid
century Albuquerque will experience:
On August 11-12, 2015, the EPA Green Infrastructure Program and Urban
Waters Partnership Program hosted a Green Infrastructure and Climate
Change Resiliency Charrette. The goals of the charrette were to:
• Increase understanding of climate change effects in the Albuquerque
region.
• Explore how green infrastructure can be used to help meet the region's
stormwater permit requirements, address flooding, and make the
community more resilient.
• Explain a screening technique for identifying potential green
infrastructure sites that meet multiple community needs.
• Evaluate potential green infrastructure practices in four diverse districts
of the city as examples of how green infrastructure could be used to
meet multiple community needs.
• Discuss green infrastructure implementation issues as well as methods
to build more green infrastructure in an arid community.
Continued flooding.
Hotter temperatures.
Longer and more severe droughts.
Significant stream flow reductions.
Reduced surface water allocation.
Photo courtesy of Vic D'Amato, Tetra Tech
Albuquerque streetscape with street trees
3
Many of these studies call for using
green infrastructure to lessen the
threats to water supplies, public health,
property, and the environment, with
the overall goal of making the City
more resilient to climate change.
How can green infrastructure
help?
Green infrastructure has been used in
public and private development
projects over the last ten years to meet
multiple needs on the site, including:
• Meeting stormwater permit
requirements for on-site
detention and treatment.
• Supplying irrigation water.
• Reducing impacts of flooding and
peak stormwater flow.
• Providing additional landscaping.
• Shading and cooling buildings,
parking areas, and sidewalks.
-------
Case Study: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Impacts of Climate Change in Albuquerque
Several agencies have studied how climate may change in the Albuquerque region over the next 30 to 40 years and
beyond, and how these changes may impact the region's water resources. The charrette presented some of the major
findings of these studies including:
• Snow water equivalent is projected to drop
42 percent in New Mexico and 13 percent in
Colorado in the 2041-2070 period compared to
the 1971-2000 period (Melillo et al. 2014).
• Regional annual average temperatures in New
Mexico are projected to rise by up to 5.5 °F by the
period 2041-2070 compared to the 1971-2000
period, with longer and hotter summer heat
waves, decreased winter cold outbreaks, and
slightly reduced winter and spring precipitation
(Melillo et al. 2014).
• By mid-century, in Bernalillo County, average
annual maximum and minimum temperatures are
projected to increase by 7.2 °F and 6.2 °F,
respectively, compared to the 1950-2005
baseline period (USGS 2014).
• No substantial change is predicted for mean
annual precipitation in New Mexico, but due to
the increases in heat, there will be large increases
in evapotranspiration (USEPA 2013; Volpe
National Transportation Systems Center 2015).
• Given climate change and urban development
projections at mid-century, the Rio Grande at
Albuquerque is projected to have a significant
reduction in high and low flows; total volume; and
nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment loading
(USEPA 2013).
• Precipitation intensity and flooding risks are not
projected to increase substantially (USEPA 2013;
Southern Sandoval County Arroyo and Flood
Control Authority 2015).
• Flows in the San Juan River, the region's surface
water supply source, are projected to decrease by
25 percent by 2050-2099 compared to the
baseline period 1950-1999 (Sandia National Lab
and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 2013).
Photo courtesy of Vic D'Amato, Tetra Tech
-------
Case Study: Albuquerque, New Mexico
-A
W 3?
Choosing the Best Project Sites
In addition to identifying best practices, the charrette also included the
presentation of a screening process that may be used to identify good candidate
sites for green infrastructure (see page 7). The process uses mapping and
geographic information systems (GIS) to analyze sites and select areas best suited
for green infrastructure implementation. It then sets priorities, using a
prioritization matrix as a decision-making tool for the remaining parcels.
Four City districts were the focus of the charrette exercise. All have existing
flooding issues, represent a wide range of land uses and socioeconomic status,
and include various scales. The areas included:
South Broadway Area
Glenrio
Mid-Valley
Ventana Dam
100 acres urban mixed-use development
70 acres residential development
450 acres residential development
270 acres residential, 560 acres undeveloped
For each of these districts, EPA developed an aerial map showing the following:
Parcels
Buildings
Roads
Topography
Hydrology
Location of publicly owned parcels
Storm drain network
Existing stormwater control measures
Existing flooding problems
Soil infiltration categories
The group used a matrix to evaluate different green infrastructure options
based on stormwater, climate resiliency, and community livability benefits.
Green Infrastructure Benefits by District
Benefit
South
Broadway
Glenrio
Mid
Valley
Ventana
Reduces water treatment needs
¦/
•/
¦/
L—
o
Increases available water supply
¦/
•/
_Oj
Increases groundwater recharge
¦/
¦/
¦/
(D
C£
Reduces energy use
~
¦/
QJ
+-»
Improves air quality
¦/
•/
¦/
•/
£
u
Reduces atmospheric C02
¦/
¦/
¦/
¦/
Reduces urban heat island
~
•/
¦/
•/
Improves aesthetics
¦/
¦/
¦/
¦/
>
+-»
Increases recreational opportunity
¦/
¦/
•/
•/
15
ru
Reduces noise pollution
•/
"_i
Improves community cohesion
¦/
¦/
¦/
¦/
Urban agriculture
•/
¦/
•/
Improves habitat
•/
¦/
¦/
¦/
Offers public education opportunities
¦/
¦/
•/
•/
Which green infrastructure
practices are best for
Albuquerque?
Presenters reviewed the current
state of stormwater management
and related regulations in
Albuquerque and shared
information on how to develop
green infrastructure practices with
climate change in mind. The most
promising green infrastructure
practices for addressing climate
resiliency, flooding issues, and water
rights constraints include:
• Bioretention areas/bioswales
with internal water storage
design features that hold water
longer.
• Permeable pavement.
• Water harvesting devices such
as rain barrels.
• Tree and vegetation plantings
in barren areas of the city
(drought tolerant
plants/vegetation that will not
require irrigation after the
establishment period).
• Planter boxes (again, drought
tolerant plants/vegetation that
will not require irrigation after
the establishment period).
• Other types of biological
filtration systems that use
plants and soils to remove
-------
Case Study: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Findings and Next Steps
This case study presents the approach used and the key findings of the
charrette, and includes examples of how green infrastructure can be used to
meet multiple community needs in four diverse districts of the City. This
approach could be used in other districts and other MS4 communities to
identify best candidate sites for green infrastructure.
The charrette closed with a discussion of next steps. The group discussed the
audience for the findings and recommendations of the charrette and divided
the communication and outreach into three areas;
1. General education about the approach and findings of the charrette.
2. Financial/funding strategies.
3. Outreach specific to the four district areas
Photo courtesy of Jason Wright, Tetra Tech
Bioretentiori in Albuquerque
Hurd, B., and J. Coonrod. 2007. Climate
Change and Its Implications for New
Mexico's Water Resources and Economic
Opportunity. New Mexico State
University Technical Report #45.
aces.nmsu.edu/ pubs/research/
economics/TR45.pdf,
Melillo, J.M,, T.C. Richmond, and G.W. Yohe,
Eds. 2014. Climate Change Impacts in the
United States: The Third National Climate
Assessment. U.S. Global Change
Research Program, 841 pp.
doi:10,7930/J0Z31WJ2.
Sandia National Lab and U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation. 2013. West-Wide Climate
Risk Assessment: Upper Rio Grande
Impact Assessment.
www.usbr.gov/%20WaterSMART/
wcra/reports/urgla.html.
Southern Sandoval County Arroyo and Flood
Control Authority. 2015. Flood Risk
Analysis Potential Impacts of Climate
Change on the Upper Calabacillas
Arroyo.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2013.
Watershed Modelling to Assess the
Sensitivity of Streamflow, Nutrient, and
Sediment Loads to Potential Climate
Change and Urban Development in 20
U.S. Watersheds.
cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/global/
recordisplay.cfm?deid=256912.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2014,
Green Infrastructure for Climate
Resiliency, water.epa.gov/infrastructure/
greeninfra structure/upload/
climate_res_fs.pdf
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2014. National
Climate Change Viewer (NCCV) Home.
www.usgs.gov/climate_landuse/clu_rd/
%20nccv.asp.
Volpe National Transportation Systems
Center. 2015. Integrating Climate
Change in Transportation and Land Use
-------
Case Study: Albuquerque, New Mexico
What are the benefits of a
screening process for green
infrastructure?
The first step in selecting the best
potential candidate locations for
implementing green infrastructure
improvements and solutions is a
site-selection and prioritization
analysis. The analysis will begin by
assessing landscape characteristics,
jurisdictional attributes, water
quality needs, and general site
sustainability. The site screening and
prioritization process systematically
evaluates and prioritizes potential
sites with GIS-based analyses using
the best available landscape and
water quality data and a
reconnaissance-level aerial
imagery survey.
The advantage of this prioritization
process is the ability to select
potential locations that are best
suited for maximum cost-
effectiveness, resulting in the
greatest volume and pollutant load
reductions per dollar. Because
implementing green infrastructure
concepts at any scale involves
identifying and setting aside land for
stormwater treatment, assessing
opportunities on existing, publicly
owned lands is especially important.
Green infrastructure practices often
can be integrated into parks or
playing fields without compromising
function, so opportunities for
incorporating practices in recreation
areas and other public open spaces
are typically prioritized and used as
a first step in evaluating available
sites.
Screening Process to Identify Candidate Sites for
Green Infrastructure
A site selection process was used to identify, assess, and prioritize potential
locations for green infrastructure practices in the City of Albuquerque. Below is
an outline of a generalized screening approach that can be used by other
communities to identify parcels potentially suitable for green infrastructure.
The screening approach has two main steps:
1. A primary screening to eliminate unsuitable parcels based on physical
and jurisdictional characteristics.
2. A site prioritization process to rank the suitability of the remaining
parcels.
Primary Screening
The primary screening identifies parcels potentially suitable for green
infrastructure practices based on two parameters:
• Parcel zoning: Parcels classified as single-family residential will not be
considered in the assessment activities due to their small average size and
the typically low cost/benefit ratio of implementing green infrastructure
practices on single-family residential parcels. Research and experience
nationally indicates that the runoff impacts of single-family parcels can be
addressed more cost-effectively through outreach and education or
incentives for practices such as rain barrels or downspout disconnection.
• Slope: Parcels with a slope greater than 10 percent will not be considered
for green infrastructure practice opportunities. Slope can be determined
on the basis of digital elevation model or other available topography data
sets. In areas where the overall slope of the parcel is in question, slope
will be verified through review of aerial imagery and field reconnaissance.
Parcels where the slope exceeds 10 percent will be eliminated from
consideration.
The results of the primary screening will provide a base list of parcels potentially
suitable for green infrastructure practices.
Prioritized LID
Opportunities
Prioritization
Matrix
Screening Process to Identify Candidate Sites for Green Infrastructure.
Parcel
Screened Parcels
and Streets
Contaminated Sites
Preferences
Subbasins
Zoning
Parcels and Streets
Slopes
-------
Case Study: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Site Prioritization
A GIS analysis performed on the parcels remaining identified the potential sites for LID improvements and ranked
their potential suitability based on the characteristics listed below. Potential sites can be prioritized using a scoring
methodology developed and refined on the basis of local preferences and priorities.
• Public ownership: Land costs generally are minimized by using existing public lands; therefore, a higher priority
will be placed on publicly owned parcels.
• Infiltration capacity: The mapped hydrologic soils groups are used as an initial estimate for the infiltration rate
and storage capacity of the soils. Sites where mapped hydrologic soil groups have infiltration rates suitable for
infiltration BMPs receive higher priority for further investigation.
• Contaminated sites: Areas near contaminated sites receive lower priority due to the potential for increased
costs and complications during implementation.
• Environmentally sensitive areas: Areas where runoff can be treated prior to draining directly to surface waters
will be given a higher priority.
• Total impervious area: Parcels representing a larger total impervious area typically generate more runoff and
greater pollutant loads and will be given a higher priority. Impervious area will be estimated using aerial imagery
in areas where impervious data are not available.
• Percent impervious: Parcels with a higher percentage of impervious area relative to the size of the parcel also
typically produce more runoff and are targeted based on the greater potential to achieve volume reduction and
water quality improvements.
• Space requirements: To determine if sufficient space is available to implement an appropriately sized BMP, the
potentially available space on a parcel will be evaluated based on the size of the parcel and the amount of
existing impervious area.
• Proximity to existing green infrastructure improvements: To distribute treatment opportunities effectively
throughout the watershed, areas in close proximity to existing or planned future green infrastructure projects
are given a lower priority.
• Proximity to parks and schools: Areas closest to parks and schools are given a higher priority, in part to provide
a greater opportunity for public outreach and education.
• Proximity to the storm drainage network: Areas in close proximity to the storm drain network are given a
higher priority. Green infrastructure practices located on poor-draining soils require underdrain systems that tap
into existing infrastructure; siting these in proximity to the storm drain network minimizes costs in these cases.
• Parkway width: Typically, the largest areas owned or controlled by municipalities are in the transportation
corridor, making green streets, or implementation of green infrastructure practices within the right-of-way, a
cost effective strategy for pollutant reduction. Areas with the most available space within the right-of-way will
be given priority.
• Multi-benefit use: Implementation of green infrastructure concepts can achieve multiple purposes. For
instance, some stormwater practices, such as grassed swales, constructed stormwater wetlands, or turfed
bioretention areas, can serve a dual purpose of stormwater management and community park space. Sites that
offer multi-benefit opportunities will receive higher priority in the ranking.
-------
Green Infrastructure and
Climate Resiliency
in Grand Rapids, Michigan
How is Grand Rapids' climate
predicted to change?
In 2013, Grand Rapids experienced a
significant flooding event, which
highlighted the vulnerability of the city
to heavy precipitation events.
On October 6, 2015, the EPA Green Infrastructure Program and Urban
Waters Partnership Program hosted a Green Infrastructure and Climate
Change Resiliency Charrette in Grand Rapids, Michigan. The one-day
charrette focused on exploring how green infrastructure can be better
supported by new and existing requirements, and what additional actions
could be beneficial. The key outcomes of the charrette were as follows:
Photography courtesy of Gail Gunst Heffner, Calvin College
Flooding of the Grand River in Downtown Grand Rapids, April 2013.
9
Climate change is expected to
exacerbate current vulnerability, as
climate models predict the following:
• Air temperature will rise.
• Average precipitation could
increase.
• Extreme flood events will
increase.
How can green infrastructure
help?
Green infrastructure practices can be
integral to climate resiliency, including
the following:
• Identifying current resiliency concerns and green infrastructure
opportunities for the City of Grand Rapids.
• Developing local case studies.
• Highlighting focus areas and discussion of potential actions.
Grand Rapids has taken a series of steps to be a national leader in
resiliency efforts. The city has developed a series of community plans and
actions that support resiliency efforts including:
• Grand Rapids Master Plan (City of Grand Rapids 2002).
• Green Grand Rapids (City of Grand Rapids 2012).
• Grand Rapids Climate Resiliency Report (WMEAC 2013).
• Grand Rapids Forward—Downtown and River Action Plan
(City of Grand Rapids 2015a).
• Sustainability Plan (City of Grand Rapids 2015b).
Storing rainwater for
groundwater reserves.
Harvesting rainwater onsite for
irrigation or other uses.
Using engineered green
practices, such as implementing
bioretention areas, to reduce
localized flooding and water
quality impacts.
Using trees and living roofs to
lower building energy use and
reduce the urban heat island
effect.
-2
-------
Case Study: Grand Rapids, Michigan
Impacts of Climate Change in Grand Rapids
Observed increases in total precipitation, as well as more frequent and intense storms are already impacting the Grand
Rapids area In 2013, Grand Rapids experienced a significant flood event: the Grand River was sending 37,000 cubic feet
of water per second through downtown. Heavy precipitation resulted in a dramatic rise in water levels in the Grand
River—almost three feet above flood stage—and caused flooding in the Grand Rapids Metropolitan area (Bunte 2014;
Tunison 2013). This flood highlighted the vulnerability of the city to heavy precipitation events.
Climate change is expected to exacerbate current vulnerability, as climate models predict that air temperature will rise,
average precipitation could increase, and extreme flood events will increase.
• The strongest storms have become more intense
and more frequent. The amount of precipitation
falling in the heaviest 1 percent of precipitation
events increased by 37 percent in the Midwest
and by 71 percent in the Northeast from 1958 to
2012 (GLISA undated).
• EPA's Climate Resilience Evaluation and
Awareness Tool (CREAT) shows that more rain is
projected for the winter and spring, and less for
the summer for Grand Rapids (USEPA 2015).
• EPA's CREAT predicts the amount of rain during a
24-hour event for all return intervals is expected
to increase; which means that rain events are
going to become more severe in the future.
• The consensus across climate models is that
average air temperature will increase over the
next century. By 2084, average annual
temperature is expected to have increased by
about 2.9-8.0 degrees Fahrenheit (World Bank
Climate Change Knowledge Portal 2015).
Photography courtesy of Gail Gunst Heffner, Calvin College
Flooding of the Grand River in in Downtown Grand Rapids, April 2013
-------
Case Study: Grand Rapids, Michigan
What are the issues facing the
city as it addresses climate
change?
Several local issues that would drive
city actions were identified by
representatives:
• Decreasing available amount of
vacant land, reducing the
potential to influence new
development.
• Shrinking city resources.
• Emerald Ash Borer has affected
the tree population.
• Stormwater management issues,
including aging and under-
performing infrastructure.
• Underutilization of Grand River,
which could better enhance
economic development and
provide more ecosystem services.
Local Success Stories
The city has experienced recent success in implementing green
infrastructure. These actions provide examples that can be replicated and
used to educate stakeholders on green infrastructure benefits. Six case
studies were identified as having lessons to draw on for future efforts:
• Joe Taylor Park—Joe Taylor Park was identified as an area in need of
change by neighborhood residents. The city worked with local
stakeholders to design, fund, and implement a stormwater retention
project.
• Grand River Restoration Project—The Grand River restoration project
seeks to provide cleaner water and increased ecological health,
including more habitat for fish. The city has conducted an economic
study and is working with stakeholders to achieve necessary funding
needed to implement the project.
• Mary Waters Park—Mary Waters Park was identified as an area that
could serve as a detention basin. The park is 80 acres and the goal is to
detain the first 1 inch of runoff. Storage was developed for 720,000
gallons, with 11 million gallons infiltrated annually.
• Tremont Avenue—Grand Rapids planted a rain garden in an area prone
to recurrent flooding. The city obtained a FEMA grant to purchase the
homes from willing home-owners who petitioned the city to participate
in the program. The city designed a 4,000 square foot rain garden with
15 plant varieties. The rain garden was planted by city staff members
and volunteers.
• Plainfield Bioretention Islands—Using an MOOT enhancement grant,
bioretention islands were designed as water quality islands for Plainfield
Avenue Area businesses. Neighbors were engaged and contributed to
the effort, while students conducted measurements on rainfall. This
example highlights the importance of stakeholder engagement to
implementation of a successful pilot.
There are several positive actions that
the City can draw upon:
• Citizen awareness of tree
canopy benefits.
• Requests for bike lanes.
• Local food interest.
• New economic development
strategy.
Photography courtesy of Dari Christian, Tetra Tech
Porous concrete parking lot and bioretention at Joe Taylor Park in Grand Rapids.
-------
Case Study: Grand Rapids, Michigan
Areas of Focus
Stormwater Design Standards
The City of Grand Rapids recently completed a study to understand how to
better design for future precipitation events (Tetra Tech 2015). Hydrologic
events are summarized through Intensity-Duration Frequency curves, which
are used to develop design standards. The study found that there is a high
probability of increased risk for the city due to more intense storms and
greater design volumes under future climate projections. Green
infrastructure was identified as an adaptation strategy that can be used to
meet projected climate change impacts.
Bunte, M.V. 2014, January 5. 2013 Flood:
Experts describe how close Grand Rapids was
to crippling floodwal! breach. Mlive (Grand
Rapids, Ml: Booth Newspapers). Accessed
January 2016.
City of Grand Rapids. 2002. Grand Rapids
Master Plan, grcity.us/design-and-
development-services/Planning-
Department/Pages/Master-Plan.aspx.
Accessed October 2015.
Focus on Trees
The City of Grand Rapids has developed aggressive tree canopy goals.
Participants agreed that focusing on trees would provide significant benefits
for the city: reducing stormwater runoff, atmospheric C02, energy use, and
urban heat islands; increasing groundwater recharge; and improving air
quality, habitat, and community livability,
Stakeholder Engagement
Participants agreed that there are several examples in Grand Rapids that
successfully show the efficacy and multiple benefits of green infrastructure.
Stakeholder awareness and engagement are critical to implement and scale
up green infrastructure.
Lessons Learned
Several lessons learned emerged from these and other regional efforts:
1. Stakeholder engagement and awareness are essential.
2. Networks across city departments are critical to foster planning.
3. Creativity and flexibility are important when addressing complexity.
Photography courtesy of Dari Christian, Tetra Tech
A green roof over an exhibit at the John Ball Zoo in Grand Rapids.
City of Grand Rapids. 2012. Green Grand
Rapids, grcity.us/design-and-development-
services/Planning-Department/Documents/
GGR_REPORT_3_l_12_.low%20rz.pdf.
Accessed October 2015.
City of Grand Rapids. 2015. Grand Rapids
Forward—Downtown and River Action Plan,
grforward.Org/#section-the-plan. Accessed
October 2015.
City of Grand Rapids. 2015. Sustainability Plan
and Progress, grcity.us/enterprise-services/
officeofenergyandsustainability/Pages/default.
aspx. Accessed October 2015.
GLISA. Undated. Extreme Precipitation.
http://glisa.umich.edu/climate/extreme-
precipitation. Accessed January 2016.
Tetra Tech, Inc. 2015. Flydrologic Design
Standards for Future Climate for Grand Rapids,
Michigan. Prepared for the City of Grand
Rapids by Tetra Tech, Inc., Research Triangle
Park, NC.
Tunison, J. 2013, April 25. Grand River Almost
Back to Flood Stage in Downtown Grand
Rapids. MLive (Grand Rapids, Ml: Booth
Newspapers). Accessed October 2015.
USEPA. 2015. Assess Water Utility Climate
Risks with the Climate Resilience Evaluation
and Awareness Tool, www.epa.gov/crwu/
assess-water-utility-climate-risks-clirnate-
resilience-evaluation-and-awareness-tool.
Accessed January 2016.
West Michigan Environmental Action Council.
2013. Grand Rapids Climate Resiliency Report.
wmeac.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/
grand-rapids-climate-resiliency-report-master-
web.pdf. Accessed January 2016.
World Bank Climate Change Knowledge Portal.
2015. Grand Rapids, Ml. sdwebx.worldbank.
org/climateportal/. Accessed October 2015.
-------
Using Green Instructure along
Transportation Corridors for
Climate Resiliency in Los Angeles,
California
Concrete-lined sections of the Los Angeles River show how urbanization affects hydrology and
water quality.
How is climate change
impacting Los Angeles?
The City has developed a drinking water
infrastructure system that relies largely
on purchased water; the City imports
an average of 385,500 acre-feet of
water from Northern California and the
Colorado River annually (City of Los
Angeles 2015). However, this system is
not sustainable due to the persistent
drought that has been impacting
California for the last four years and
climate change impacts on the Sierra
snowpack. As part of the Mayor's
Sustainable City pLAn (City of Los
Angeles 2015), the City set the
following three goals:
1. Reduce imported water by
50 percent by 2025.
2. Increase the percentage of water
sourced locally by 50 percent by
2035 (currently the City only gets
19.6 percent of its water from
local sources).
3. Reduce overall water
consumption by 20 percent by
2017.
How can green infrastructure
help?
The natural services of Los Angeles River tributaries have largely been
replaced by streets, curbs, and gutters, which do not allow for treatment of
the stormwater runoff prior to discharge to surfaces waters. These hard
surfaces prevent infiltration of storm flows that recharge the aquifers below
the City. As a result, the receiving waters within the City suffer from
pollution impacts, and the City's reliance on imported water to meet the
population's demand is a growing concern for local policymakers.
To begin to address these concerns and move toward a more sustainable
transportation and drainage network in Los Angeles, EPA's Green
Infrastructure and Urban Waters Partnership Programs hosted a Green
Infrastructure and Climate Change Resiliency Charrette in Los Angeles on
September 24, 2015. The goal of the charrette was to identify the needs of
groups of people who use or manage transportation corridors and
stormwater infrastructure and reconcile those needs with ways to improve
the City's climate resiliency.
The charrette built upon the principles of the One Water Los Angeles
2040 Plan and work that the City has completed to develop watershed-
wide, connective stormwater greenways that restore tributary functions
that balance water supply and flood control. The Greenways to Rivers
Arterial Stormwater System (GRASS) tool identifies a methodology and
opportunities for prioritizing multi-use transportation corridors within
Los Angeles' existing regional arterial streets, and concrete tributary
channels for the design of multi-benefit stormwater storage and use
projects.
The City has been exploring
opportunities to use green
infrastructure practices in
transportation corridors to capture,
treat, and store stormwater for a
variety of uses and to infiltrate runoff
into the aquifers for eventual use as
drinking water. It will also serve to
enhance recreation and create more
livable spaces.
-------
Case Study: Los Angeles, California
Resiliency Themes
To focus the charrette discussions, local expert guides explained to the charrette participants the resiliency issues
challenging residents in three project areas in the city:
• Provide relief from the urban heat island. Vermont Avenue in South Los Angeles forms the spine of the City -
providing a connective thoroughfare between Downtown and communities from the most economically and
environmentally challenged areas of Los Angeles, through many other City jurisdictions, on to the Port of Los
Angeles and Los Angeles Harbor. Many of the early 20th century homes along the corridor lack air conditioning,
and residents depend on public transit. The corridor offers very few shade structures and street trees to protect
residents as they walk to bus stops and cooling centers in extreme heat, increased energy consumption to cope
with urban heat islands also contributes to hazardous air quality conditions.
• Restore connections to a revitalized river. South Mission Road, a major arterial running parallel to the
Los Angeles River, provides access to industrial areas along the river. South Mission Road is traversed repeatedly
by railroad spurs and major utilities, including a large storm drain and two major sanitary sewer interceptors.
This corridor showcases the challenges faced by planners wanting to implement green infrastructure in a highly
constrained right-of-way. it also serves as a case study for using green infrastructure as a tool to restore the
balance of water to the riverbed from the Mission Street terrace and Hollenbeck Park uplands. Redesign of the
Mission Road cross-section also offers the potential to improve residents' access to the River by providing safe
walking/biking routes.
• Prepare for drought. Eastern San Fernando Basin and Sylmar Basin aquifers were targeted for groundwater
recharge and projects that augment local water supply and provide resilience to increasingly frequent droughts.
Photo courtesy of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation
This section of Vermont Avenue illustrates the lack of trees found along most of the thoroughfare.
-------
Case Study: Los Angeles, California
Collaborative Problem-Solving
Participants formed small groups to review the challenges associated with the three resiliency themes described above.
They were asked to identify and design workable green infrastructure features at the case study locations to achieve the
desired goals, including the steps necessary to implement projects.
Inderdrain
Charging and
Information
Totem provides
USB charging while
waiting for public
transit, displays
announcements,
and shades the bus
stop.
Back-in Street
Parking can be a
safer alternative to
improve lines of
sight while
maximizing on-
street parking for
residents and
patrons.
Shade Canopies
create a "cooling
corridor" over
sidewalks to enable
mobility during
extreme heat and
collects rainwater
that can be used for
below-ground
irrigation.
•i utr
Permeable
pavement along
the service drive
intercepts runoff and
pollutants from
parcels and the road
surface.
Existing utility
Brainstorming for Heat Island Relief along the Vermont Avenue Corridor
The group proposed creating a cooling corridor connecting the downtown area and Valley to the Los Angeles Harbor
along Vermont Avenue. A suitable corridor cross-section would accommodate pedestrian traffic in heat wave
emergencies. The corridor would also integrate sustainable irrigation supply standards while restoring ecosystem
services and reducing pollutants in runoff.
As with all greenway network corridors, this major connector could potentially incorporate water storage silos for
certain side streets. The corridor is designed to collect captured and stored water from nearby sites (including existing
storm drains and contributing projects on side-streets, rooftops, graywater systems, and HVAC). Runoff sources such as
air conditioning condensate could safely flow via sub-surface irrigation chambers to plant root zones for filtration and
uptake.
Water quality would be enhanced via biofiltration practices that incorporate storage cells, engineered soil media, and
suspended pavements; the practices would optimize the soil volumes needed for healthy street tree canopy coverage.
Filtered stormwater would contribute to the subsurface storage in chambers, where it could then be recirculated back
to the green infrastructure through a subsurface irrigation system.
Cisterns provide
storage for captured
water and pressure
for non-potable
uses.
Suspended
Pavement
Systems provide
large volumes of
uncompacted soil
below grade for
rapid and healthy
growth of street
trees.
Protected Bike
Lanes improve
cyclist safety and
promote alternative
transportation.
Curbless
Planted Medians
enable wheelchair
accessibility from
on-street parking
and allow sheet flow
of street runoff over
permeable
pavement. Street
trees planted at
intervals in tree
wells provide relief
from heat.
High Groundwater Table
precludes infiltration and instead
promotes runoff capture and local use.
Subsurface
Storage and
Conveyance
provides a regional
water capture and
distribution network
within the
transportation
corridor.
Rendering of green infrastructure features that create a multi-benefit cooling corridor along Vermont Avenue.
-------
Case Study: Los Angeles, California
Brainstorming for Urban Connectivity and Revitalization along the South Mission Road Corridor
The South Mission Road region is characterized by multiple challenges associated with inner-city retrofit planning. It is a
major arterial running parallel to the Los Angeles River and presents opportunities for using green infrastructure as a
tool to implement the City and County's river revitalization goals outlined in the Los Angeles River Revitalization
Master Plan.
The group was intent on not only incorporating green infrastructure into the project area, but also providing
disadvantaged communities with access to the Los Angeles River. The group proposed two green streets in the area to
connect surrounding communities to the Los Angeles River:
• The first, along South Mission Road, incorporated bike lanes to allow north-south bike commuting in addition to
vehicular traffic.
• The second, along 6th Street, would allow residents to drive, bike, and walk safely from the residential area
through the industrial area to the parks proposed for the 6th Street Viaduct project.
The group also envisioned a paseo from Hollenbeck Lake down the existing Willow Street to allow for walking and as a
transport corridor for water between the lake and the planned parks and green streets. Finally, they proposed
Hollenbeck Lake as a potential gravity-fed source of irrigation water for the terrace and upland tiers of green
infrastructure projects proposed at Hollenbeck Park.
TERRACE i
Phase I construction
VIADUCT AND STREET PROJECT
iiksh.'k;
Phase II nnmnfl procurement
HOLLENBECK LAKE (STORMWATER & UPLAND HABITAT)
PHASE III FIlKBimi PROCUREMENT
ATF/ mission Jesse (terrace habitat)
PHASE IV MASTER PLINMN4J
WATER SUPPLY (LA RIVER ZONE RESTORATION)
# RE-VITALIZATION: 6TH STREET VIADUCT
I hi i !
# UTILIZE LA RIVER
RUNOFF TO REVITALIZE
ECOSYSTEM
VIADUCT UNDERSTORY:
RECREATION AND PARKS TERRACE FACILITIES
LASAN FACILITY: MISSION MESSEE ATF
C.REENSTREETS, SIMILAR >
HOLLENBECK LAKE
*
I
I
"upland
JOSEHUIZAR
Rendering of green infrastructure and transportation features that revitalize the ecosystem and connect residents to the Los Angeies River.
-------
Case Study: Los Angeles, California
Brainstorming for Drought Preparation along the Pacioma Wash/Roscoe Boulevard Corridor
At the time of this charrette, California had experienced historic exceptional drought conditions across much of the
state. Despite declaring a state of emergency in January 2014 and establishing the first statewide mandatory water
restrictions in March 2015, data indicated a persistent deficit in local water supplies. The Mayor of Los Angeles set a
goal to supply 50 percent of the City's water demand from local sources by 2024 The areas overlying the eastern San
Fernando Basin and Sylmar Basin aquifers were targeted for groundwater recharge and projects that augment local
water supply and provide resilience to increasingly frequent droughts.
The group focused on the neighborhood around the Pacoima Wash and Roscoe Boulevard to integrate the following
green infrastructure approaches that would provide multiple benefits in addition to stormwater management:
• Bioretention areas in the form of parkway swales, infiltration galleries, and dry wells could later be incorporated
along Roscoe Boulevard along with permeable bike lanes to reduce polluted stormwater runoff.
• Adding tree canopy in the parkway swales would provide shade for the area, reducing the heat island effect,
improving air quality, and absorbing greenhouse gases.
• Bike lanes would provide a cooler and safer route for bicyclists.
The group also developed concepts for the surrounding neighborhood area:
• Stormwater storage would be integrated as widely as feasible into public areas based on landscape water
demands and the volume of supply resources available.
• Stormwater from paved areas, such as parking lots, would undergo pretreatment prior to entering infiltration
galleries constructed under public rights-of-way.
• Open spaces would be used more efficiently by planting taller trees with large canopies to intercept rainfall,
absorb runoff, and provide shade to reduce the heat island effect.
Bioswciles
intercept runoff
from the gutter
through curb cuts,
where the runoff
then infiltrates into
soil media and
ultimately to
groundwater.
Vertical
Subsurface
Storage allows
large volumes of
runoff to be stored
in a relatively small
footprint.
Onsite Capture
via rain gardens
and cisterns helps
retain runoff on
parcels.
measures.
Painted Bike
Lanes improve
visibility of cyclists
and promote
alternative
transportation.
Existing utilrh
Existing utility
Subsurface
Infiltration
Galleries provide
regional capture,
storage, and
infiltration
opportunities.
Infiltration
Chambers below
the bioswale
could provide
additional storage
volume.
Existing utility
Dry Wells can
effectively
capture and
infiltrate runoff
where there is
limited space or
where utility
conflicts preclude
other control
Rendering of green infrastructure and transit streetscape improvements that would facilitate water capture.
-------
Case Study: Los Angeles, California
A concept was also proposed to divert flows from
the Pacoima Wash into public parcels in the area
(e.g., open spaces at public schools) along the GRASS
corridors so that other projects—and ultimately the
aquifer—might benefit from this water resource that
wouid otherwise be conveyed to the ocean via the
concrete channel. Diverted water could be
infiltrated subsurface or treated to surface irrigation
standards. Ultimately, all of these projects are
intended to be off-line and would add to the
capacity of the stormwater system and controlling
flooding in the original system. Thus, the proposal
would provide flood mitigation, storage volume, and
pollutant capture while providing a potential source
for irrigation of the proposed green space.
Taken together all of these strategies support the goals of the Mayor's Great Streets Initiative and Sustainable City pLAn
for local water supply as well as provide flood mitigation, storage volume, pollutant capture, and a potential source for
irrigation of the proposed green space.
Big Picture and Next Steps
During the last phase of the charrette, the group synthesized lessons learned into big picture concepts and outlined a list
of next steps. The following are the key needs and solutions expressed by participants:
• Ensure that stakeholders are engaged early and often during project planning, design, and implementation.
• Institutionalize green infrastructure practices in local design standards and planning processes to reduce
inadequate designs and long approval times, and to increase the universe of local designers able and willing to
"put their stamp" on green infrastructure projects.
• Expand the current funding partners and benefactors to include (for example) insurers, healthcare systems,
private developers, and financial institutions.
• Ensure that projects incorporate multiple, community-driven benefits to expand possible funding opportunities.
• Incorporate green infrastructure into existing capital projects to meet the project permit requirements and
agency/stakeholder goals.
• Conduct data-driven, high-resolution planning, and incorporate quantifiable performance metrics early in the
planning phase to evaluate effectiveness and alter designs as needed.
• Humanize the metrics to incorporate goals meaningful to the community.
• Plan for adequate operation and maintenance, as well as advocate for sustainable funding resources during the
design phase of projects (i.e., staff, funding).
• Maintain the energy and enthusiasm exhibited at the charrette through continued communication, collegiality,
and collaboration among participants (e.g., social media) and perhaps additional charrettes that move forward
with the designs generated at this charrette.
• Propose that the next phases of the effort look at the opportunities at the watershed scale (using the GRASS tool)
that may have been identified at project planning level during the charrette.
Reference
City of Los Angeles. 2015. pLAn: Transforming Los Angeles, http://lamayor.org/plan. Accessed May 4, 2016.
-------
Using Resiliency and Energy to
Implement Sustainable Solutions in
New Orleans, Louisiana
How is climate change
impacting New Orleans?
New Orleans is particularly susceptible
to climate change impacts, such as sea
level rise, storm surge, extreme heat,
and intense precipitation. These
impacts will exacerbate existing
stressors, such as land subsidence and
wetland loss. Climate change impacts
are projected to increase in the future.
Developing an understanding of climate
variability and change are important to
begin to plan for, and adapt to, future
impacts.
Sea level rise could be particularly
problematic. Louisiana has lost
approximately 2,000 square miles of its
coastal landscape to open water in the
last 80 years (Marshall 2014). A recent
study found that the rate of land
subsidence in the New Orleans metro
region averages 5 mm/yr, which
predicts a net 1-meter decline in
elevation during the next 100 years
relative to present sea level (Burkett et
al. 2003). The Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (Church et al. 2013)
projects a two- to four-fold acceleration
of sea-level rise over the next 100
years.
The map at right shows areas of
Louisiana at risk under different sea
level rise scenarios.
In August 2015, EPA's Green Infrastructure Program and Urban Waters
Partnership Program hosted a Green Infrastructure and Climate Change
Resiliency Charrette in New Orleans. The planning session was conducted in
the pilot project area of the Lower Ninth Ward, which was one of the
neighborhoods most heavily devastated by Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The
session provided stakeholders with a forum to consider opportunities
provided by green infrastructure on public properties, how those
opportunities could be applied in their neighborhood to support resiliency
goals, and how those practices could be scaled across the city. The planning
session was designed to work with city stakeholders and technical advisors
to achieve the following specific goals:
• Explore potential enhancements for selected properties, such as
public parks and playgrounds, to engage citizenry in community
resiliency.
• Demonstrate how green infrastructure practices can support urban
resiliency by reducing water pollution, flood volume, energy use,
greenhouse gas emissions, and urban heat island impacts.
• Support city resiliency goals and community-driven initiatives, and
develop a strategy for incorporating green infrastructure specifically
on:
Park and recreational lands.
Schools and other institutional sites.
Public right-of-way corridors.
City-owned vacant lots.
o
o
o
o
® Baton
Rouge
Slidell
o
New Iberia
K
LaPlace
o
Lake
Pontchartrain
NevvOrleans
h *
Morgan City *
A
Lake
Borgne
B 1 foot rise
~ 2 foot rise
Q 3.3 foot rise
Note: The NRDC report suggests
water levels in southeast Louisiana
could rise to 4.6 feet by 2100 under a
scenario (not depicted on map) where
ice caps and glaciers melt rapidly.
Thibodaux
o
Houma
o
Breton
Sound
m
Gulf of Mexico
10 miles
Source: Carbonell and Meffert 2009
-------
Case Study: New Orleans, Louisiana
How will the city use greeri
infrastructure to find
solutions?
There have been several planning
efforts by Louisiana and New
Orleans following Hurricane
Katrina. Resilient New Orleans
was released by the Mayor of New
Orleans in August 2015 as
"a concrete, strategic roadmap for
the city of New Orleans to build
urban resilience" and describes a
vision of the city as a dynamic
urban environment that is more
closely aligned with the natural
environment.
The Greater New Orleans Urban
Water Plan (2013) was funded by
Louisiana's Office of Community
Development—Disaster Recovery
Unit to develop a comprehensive,
integrated, and sustainable water
management strategy for the east
banks of Orleans and Jefferson
Parishes and for St. Bernard Parish.
Resiliency Goals
The group discussion identified resiliency goals green infrastructure could support:
* Shift residents' paradigm so water is viewed as an asset, as opposed to a
threat Although the city of New Orleans is surrounded by water, it has been
constructed to close itself off from water because of flood threats. The land
is rich in nutrients because of the water that flowed on top of it and
underneath it. City residents should consider water as an asset, and city
leaders should re-vision the city accordingly.
* Realize the opportunity to link to new requirements and planning efforts.
A new master planning process began in 2016. This, in addition to new
stormwater requirements, presents an opportunity to implement green
infrastructure on a larger scale.
* Help to focus on developing closed systems as opposed to open systems.
The city is familiar with thinking of closed and open systems as they relate to
recycling versus trash. The potential exists for the City to look at water in the
same way. How can water be reused closer to the source of capture while
creating benefits that serve multiple purposes?
* Use green infrastructure to enhance educational opportunities. Embarking
on a pilot project that focuses on schools can enable numerous educational
opportunities. It is important that the next generation understands the
concepts and practices that the City is working to implement. How to live with
water will continue to increase in importance and prominence in New Orleans.
An opportunity exists to address it within the context of education. It's not just
a green infrastructure campaign—it is part of a larger paradigm shift.
-------
Case Study: New Orleans, Louisiana
Green Infrastructure
Practices
Group Budget
Rain gardens/swales
Permeable pavement
Impervious disconnection
Soil reconditioning
Wetlands
Green roofs
Dry detention
Cisterns
Bioswales
Tree planting
Native landscaping
Greenway corridors
Small Groups' Conceptual Designs
Participants were asked to explore community resiliency
goals that could be applicable to one of four project areas.
The city developed a Cluster Concept and identified a school,
park, vacant lots, and public rights-of-way in the Lower 9th
Ward as the pilot area with greatest opportunity for impact.
Participants were asked to evaluate which green
infrastructure practices would best meet these goals at the
cluster site (existing conditions at the site are shown on
page 20 and at right). They were required to consider a
hypothetical project budget and prioritize the practices that
they would buy. All four of the small groups focused on the
Lawless High School site. Several community resiliency goals
were identified for the site, including:
• Reduce stormwater runoff and pollution.
• Integrate educational opportunities for students
and community.
• Mitigate urban heat island effects.
• Maximize quality of life benefits for community.
• Maximize recreational opportunities.
Each group had a total budget for the Lawless High School
site. Below is a summary of how each group chose to spend
their budget. A green infrastructure concept design that
applies the groups' input to the Lawless High School site is
shown on page 22.
Green Infrastructure Practices Selected
by Groups for Lawless High School
Note: bioretention and green street corridors were not chosen
by any of the groups.
Groups working on green infrastructure practice selection.
Lawless School
DORGENOIS ST
ROCHEBLAVE ST
ROW Corridor
Vacant Lot Farm
TONTl ST
TONTI ST
Legend
Project Site Boundary
City Parcels
Existing Structure
School Rooftop
School Sidewalk
School Parking
-------
Case Study: New Orleans, Louisiana
Managed Recreation Area
listern
Rainwater Harvesting
Bioretention
Conclusions and Next Steps
The analysis conducted for this project found that green infrastructure practices integrate into public-land clusters to
directly serve the social and quality-of-life needs of communities. A combination of both structural and non-structural
green infrastructure practices can considerably improve flooding and water quality issues in New Orleans. The non-
structural strategies, in particular, showed a considerable volume reduction relative to the structural practices and
warrant further evaluation as part of the city's open space and land use planning. Hydrologic impacts were calculated for
the Lower 9th Ward pilot area and scaled to the other cluster sites within the city. Although these calculations indicate
significant volume control and flood mitigation potential, several next steps are necessary to better quantify the relative
impact to each of the city's subbasin infrastructure:
• Extrapolate cluster site volume reduction
estimates to other publicly owned parcels
beyond the pilot project.
• Use modeling to quantify specific flood
reduction impacts at priority drainage
network locations.
• Use optimization-based modeling tools
(e.g., EPA's SUSTAIN) to prioritize site
locations and determine the most cost-
effective green infrastructure practice
volume capture targets.
• Consider additional cost-benefit analyses
that quantify and value the additional
social, economic and environmental
benefits (including important ecosystem
services to the city) provided by green
infrastructure practices selected during the
pilot project. Many quality of life benefits in
particular (including community cohesion,
public education, and recreation
opportunities) were identified by
participants in the Lower 9th Ward
planning session.
Green infrastructure concept design for the Lawless High School site
References
Burkett, V., Zilkoski, D., and D, Hart, 2003. Sea-Level Rise and
Subsidence: Implications for Flooding in New Orleans,
Louisiana. Available online at http://ossfoundation.us/projects/
environment/global-warming/sea-level-rise/slr-research-
summary/Sea Level-Rise.pdf. Accessed September 2015.
Carbonell, A., and D.J. Meffert. 2009. Climate Change and the
Resilience of New Orleans: the Adaptation of Deltaic Urban
Form. Available online at http://deltacityofthefuture.com/
documents/Neworleans_Session3_Meffert.pdf. Accessed
January 2016.
Church, J.A., P.U, Clark, A. Cazenave, J.M. Gregory, S. Jevrejeva, A.
Levermann, M.A. Merrifield, G.A. Milne, R.S. Nerem, P.D. Nunn,
A.J. Payne, W.T, Pfeffer, D. Stammer and A.S. Unnikrishnan.
2013. Sea Level Change. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical
Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K.
Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley
(eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United
Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
Marshall, B. 2014. Losing Ground: Southeast Louisiana Is
Disappearing, Quickly. Scientific American, August 28, 2014.
Available online at http://www.scientificamerican.com/
article/losing-ground-southeast-louisiana-is-disappearing-
quickly/. Accessed September 2015.
-------
Conclusions
In all cases, the Green Infrastructure and Climate Change Resiliency Charrettes brought together a diverse set of
stakeholders to brainstorm the best ways to integrate green infrastructure concepts into long-term planning. Common
goals were to combat the effects of climate change, improve community livability, and protect water resources. The
resiliency challenges and green infrastructure opportunities differed in each of the four cities, and each community
arrived at a different set of next steps and guiding principles for moving forward:
• Albuquerque, NM - Apply the green infrastructure opportunities screening process to identify potential flood
control and permit compliance projects, and educate stakeholders about the general approach, funding, and
district-specific recommendations.
• Grand Rapids, Mi - Use trees to meet multiple stormwater, climate change, and livability goals. Consider
climate impacts when selecting green infrastructure design standards. Engage stakeholders by highlighting
successful, local green infrastructure projects.
• Los Angeles, CA - Engage stakeholders early, attract novel funding partners by emphasizing multiple benefits,
institutionalize green infrastructure in design standards and capital projects, establish quantifiable performance
metrics, and plan for long-term maintenance.
• New Orleans, LA - Extrapolate pilot project benefits to other publicly owned parcels. Use models to estimate
flood reduction benefits and prioritize site locations. Quantify additional social, economic, and environmental
benefits of green infrastructure.
Other communities that want to examine how green infrastructure can benefit community resiliency can start by
evaluating climate change projections for their region and determining the resiliency challenges they will face. The next
step is to bring together a diverse mix of stakeholders: community leaders, climate change scientists, urban planners,
engineers, environmental advocacy groups, and others. The stakeholders' goals are to define important outcomes,
identify local constraints, prioritize next steps, and assign responsibilities. The charrettes process is a useful tool to foster
this type of communication and to begin to develop an action plan, because strategies for adapting to climate change
and improving resiliency need to be tailored to local conditions and preferences.
-------
Acknowledgments
The following are key organizers and participants in the Green Infrastructure and Climate Change Resiliency Charrettes:
Albuquerque Charrette
Suzanna Perea, USEPA Region 6
Michael Jensen, Urban Waters Ambassador
Kevin Daggett, City of Albuquerque
Jerry Lovato, AMAFCA
Bruce Thomson, University of New Mexico
Jason Wright, Tetra Tech
Kimberly Brewer, Tetra Tech
Grand Rapids Charrette
Robert Newport, USEPA Region 5
Suzanne Schulz, City of Grand Rapids
Carrie Rivette, City of Grand Rapids
Joe Sulak, City of Grand Rapids
Mike Lunn, City of Grand Rapids
Dan Christian, Tetra Tech
Hope Herron, Tetra Tech
Los Angeles Charrette
John Kemmerer, USEPA Region 9
Deborah Deets, City of Los Angeles
Matt Petersen, City of Los Angeles
Rafael Villegas, City of Los Angeles
Nate Hayward, City of Los Angeles
Melinda Bartlett, City of Los Angeles
Enrique Zaldivar, City of Los Angeles
Traci Minamide, City of Los Angeles
Adel Hagekhalil, City of Los Angeles
Shahram Kharaghani, City of Los Angeles
Brad Wardynski, Tetra Tech
Christy Williams, Tetra Tech
Jason Wright, Tetra Tech
New Orleans Charrette
Suzanna Perea, USEPA Region 6
Danny Wiegand, Urban Waters Ambassador
Prisca Weems, City of New Orleans
Mark Jernigan, City of New Orleans
Brad Case, City of New Orleans
Jerome Landry, City of New Orleans
Jeff Hebert, City of New Orleans
Bob Rivers, City of New Orleans
Bill Gilchrist, City of New Orleans
Madeline Goddard, Sewerage and Water Board
Brad Klamer, Sewerage and Water Board
Hope Herron, Tetra Tech
Bobby Tucker, Tetra Tech
------- |