Restoring geomorphic integrity in urban streams via mechanistically-based storm water management: minimizing excess sediment transport capacity

RJ Hawley; K Russell; K Taniguchi-Quan

Journal article

Restoring geomorphic integrity in urban streams via mechanistically-based storm water management: minimizing excess sediment transport capacity

RJ Hawley, K Russell, K Taniguchi-Quan

Urban Ecosystems | SPRINGER | Published : 2022

DOI: 10.1007/s11252-022-01221-y

Download PDF

Abstract

Stream channel erosion, enlargement, and habitat degradation are ubiquitous in urban watersheds with conventional stormwater management that increase channel-eroding flows relative to undeveloped watersheds. Hydrologic-based restoration aims to discharge a more natural flow regime via stormwater management interventions. Whether such interventions facilitate geomorphic recovery depends, in part, on the degree to which they restrict discharges that would otherwise contribute to channel erosion. Erosion potential (E), the ratio of post-developed to predeveloped sediment transport capacity, provides a simplified, mechanistic framework to quantify the relative influence of stormwater interventio..

View full abstract

University of Melbourne Researchers

Kathryn Russell Author

Related Projects (2)

Can dispersed, catchment-scale, urban stormwater retention restore stream ecosystems?

The project, a collaboration with Melbourne Water and the Shire of Yarra Ranges, integrates river, urban stormwater and water resource manag..

Restoration trajectories of stream ecosystems degraded by urban stormwater runoff: a large-scale experiment in urban hydrology and stream ecology

This project aims to assess innovative dispersed stormwater retention systems in catchments for protection and restoration of urban streams...

Grants

Awarded by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Funding Acknowledgements

The data used for the California case study were collected for the development in southern Orange County under the hydromodification management plan and runoff requirements by the County of Orange. Funding to conduct this comparative study was provided by Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. The Kentucky data was funded in part by the USEPA (contract number EP-C-14-012 to C, B, & I Federal Services). SD1 of Northern Kentucky and the Boone County Conservation District also contributed staff and resources to the data collection. The comparative study of the Kentucky data did not have any direct support for this manuscript, but indirect support for a related analysis was provided by SD1 (see Hawley (2021)). The Victoria case study was supported by the Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage Program (LP0883610 and LP130100295), the Cooperative Research Centre for Water Sensitive Cities, Melbourne Waterway Research Practice Partnership (funded by Melbourne Water), Victorian Water Trust, Victorian Urban Stormwater and Recycling Fund, Caring for Our Country Investment Fund, Office of Living Victoria, Yarra Ranges Council, and Yarra Valley Water. The funding sources had no direct involvement in this manuscript.