LID Regulations: Moving Beyond Encouragement

Transcription

1 LID Regulations: Moving Beyond Encouragement NEIWPCC Annual NPS Conference Plymouth, MA May 19, 2010 Michelle West, P.E

2 Presentation Outline Brief History of LID Taking LID Further State-level t l Policy: Rhode Island Case Study Local-level Policy: City of Attleboro, MA Case Study Lessons Learned

3 A.R.M Low Impact Development Avoid Impacts Reduce Impacts Manage Impacts Roads on ridge lines or upland areas Houses located on brow of ridge Vegetated drainage swales Natural drainageways preserved Undisturbed vegetation on slopes

4 History of LID Mid-1980s in Prince George's County, Maryland Interest in LID has spread throughout the U.S. Many states/municipalities have begun to actively encourage LID: stormwater credits developer incentives awards and recognition trainings i and demonstrations ti

5 LID in New England Revised Stormwater Manuals RI 1993, no LID Revision Pending VT 2002, Voluntary LID Credits CT 2004, Ch 4 Site Planning/Design ME 2006, Vol 1: Ch 3 & Vol 3: Ch 10 MA 2008, Vol 2: Ch 1 Site Planning & Voluntary LID Credits NH 2008, Proposed Antidegradation Reqts & Vol 2: Ch 4.1 LID Practices 10% EIC, 65% UDC OR pollutant loading calcs

6 Grants and Demonstration Projects Jordan Cove 319 Grant Project in Waterford, CT Study began in 1995 Traditional Subdivision Monitoring took place for 10 years LID Subdivision

7 Where do we go from here? 25 years later, LID is still not widespread in New England Is it time to get tough?

8 Case Study 1 Rhode Island

9 1993 Manual Revisions The Smart Development for a Cleaner Bay Act of 2007 requires DEM and CRMC to amend the 1993 Stormwater Design and Installation Standards Manual to: Use LID techniques as the primary method of stormwater control to the maximum extent practicable.

10 Minimum Standard 1 LID Site Planning and Design Strategies First of 11 standards Required to the maximum extent practicable Compliance will be phased-in over time 10 site planning and design objectives that fall into the 3 main categories (ARM) Based on documentation of efforts Checklist in Appendix A

11 Avoid the Impacts Preservation of Undisturbed Areas Preservation of Buffers and Floodplains Minimized i i Clearing and Grading Locating Sites in Less Sensitive Areas Compact Development Work with Natural Landscape Conditions, i Hydrology and Soils

12 Reduce the Impacts Reduction of Impervious Cover Roadway Area Sidewalk Area Driveway Area Cul-de-Sac Area Building Footprint Parking Lot Area

13 Manage g the Impacts p at the Source Disconnecting Impervious Area Runoff Mitigation at Source Stream/Wetland Restoration Reforestation Source Control

14 LID Stormwater Credits LID Site Design Credit: Disconnected Rooftop Runoff Disconnected Non-Rooftop Runoff Used to reduce/eliminate rqmts Direct runoff over qualifying pervious areas

15 Outreach and Feedback Several meetings with the Planning Community, Department of Transportation, and Rhode Island Builder s Association (RIBA) Many concerns were raised about LID requirement Language in Checklist was very important

16

17

18 Moving Forward Local municipal codes need to be updated Regulatory agencies to phase in compliance over time Form advisory work group Agency staff Affected stakeholders Address LID review consistency and associated issues

19 Case Study 2 - City of Attleboro, MA Extensive Code Update Process Community Development Office Created New Stormwater Ordinance in 2008 Phase II Permit Requirements Desire to really push the envelope with LID Attleboro, MA

20 Site Design Criteria A. Use LID measures to MEP B. Document Planning Process 1. Identify and map critical resources 2. Delineate potential building envelopes that avoid these resource areas C. Document % Natural Open Space Retained D. Minimize Impervious Surfaces E. Disconnect Impervious Surfaces F. Document Use of Applicable Site Design Features (MASWMS)

21 Concept and Final Plans Concept Plans an optional step Both Concept and Final Submissions require a checklist

22 Is it Working? Second year in effect 10 projects reviewed Education still needed d for both applicants and review boards

23

24 Lessons Learned Change is hard. And slow. Specific language is important get feedback from affected stakeholders to increase buy-in Regulating g LID is a continuous effort Enforcement and education are key

25 Questions?