21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Changes in event‐based streamflow magnitude and timing after suburban development with infiltration‐based stormwater management

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Green stormwater infrastructure implementation in urban watersheds has outpaced our understanding of practice effectiveness on streamflow response to precipitation events. Long‐term monitoring of experimental suburban watersheds in Clarksburg, Maryland, USA, provided an opportunity to examine changes in event‐based streamflow metrics in two treatment watersheds that transitioned from agriculture to suburban development with a high density of infiltration‐focused stormwater control measures (SCMs). Urban Treatment 1 has predominantly single family detached housing with 33% impervious cover and 126 SCMs. Urban Treatment 2 has a mix of single family detached and attached housing with 44% impervious cover and 219 SCMs. Differences in streamflow‐event magnitude and timing were assessed using a before‐after‐control‐reference‐impact design to compare urban treatment watersheds with a forested control and an urban control with detention‐focused SCMs. Streamflow and precipitation events were identified from 14 years of sub‐daily monitoring data with an automated approach to characterize peak streamflow, runoff yield, runoff ratio, streamflow duration, time to peak, rise rate, and precipitation depth for each event. Results indicated that streamflow magnitude and timing were altered by urbanization in the urban treatment watersheds, even with SCMs treating 100% of the impervious area. The largest hydrologic changes were observed in streamflow magnitude metrics, with greater hydrologic change in Urban Treatment 2 compared with Urban Treatment 1. Although streamflow changes were observed in both urban treatment watersheds, SCMs were able to mitigate peak flows and runoff volumes compared with the urban control. The urban control had similar impervious cover to Urban Treatment 2, but Urban Treatment 2 had more than twice the precipitation depth needed to initiate a flow response and lower median peak flow and runoff yield for events less than 20 mm. Differences in impervious cover between the Urban Treatment watersheds appeared to be a large driver of differences in streamflow response, rather than SCM density. Overall, use of infiltration‐focused SCMs implemented at a watershed‐scale did provide enhanced attenuation of peak flow and runoff volumes compared to centralized‐detention SCMs.

          Abstract

          Streamflow magnitude and timing were altered by suburban development, even with stormwater control measures implemented to treat 100% of the impervious area. Stormwater control measures were able to mitigate some of the impacts of increased impervious cover on peak streamflow and runoff yield, particularly for events with precipitation depths < 20 mm. Differences in impervious cover between the urban treatment watersheds appeared to be a large driver of differences in streamflow response, rather than stormwater practice density.

          Related collections

          Most cited references34

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The Natural Flow Regime

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Impacts of impervious surface on watershed hydrology: A review

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Hydrologic shortcomings of conventional urban stormwater management and opportunities for reform

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                khopkins@usgs.gov
                Journal
                Hydrol Process
                Hydrol Process
                10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1085
                HYP
                Hydrological Processes
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                0885-6087
                1099-1085
                13 November 2019
                January 2020
                : 34
                : 2 ( doiID: 10.1002/hyp.v34.2 )
                : 387-403
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] U.S. Geological Survey, South Atlantic Water Science Center Raleigh NC USA
                [ 2 ] Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Colorado State University Fort Collins CO USA
                [ 3 ] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park NC USA
                [ 4 ] U.S. Geological Survey, Maryland‐Delaware‐District of Columbia Water Science Center Baltimore MD USA
                [ 5 ] Annis Water Resources Institute Grand Valley State University Muskegon MI
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                U.S. Geological Survey, South Atlantic Water Science Center, 3916 Sunset Ridge Road,Raleigh, NC 27607

                Kristina G. Hopkins, U.S. Geological Survey, South Atlantic Water Science Center, Raleigh, NC, USA.

                Email: khopkins@ 123456usgs.gov

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1699-9384
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9803-4003
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0369-2298
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0874-1925
                Article
                HYP13593 HYP-19-0425.R1
                10.1002/hyp.13593
                7006812
                32063664
                8128edcb-4f79-4915-a9f6-700abb7bdd55
                © 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 14 June 2019
                : 11 September 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 10, Tables: 5, Pages: 17, Words: 10479
                Funding
                Funded by: National Science Foundation , open-funder-registry 10.13039/100000001;
                Award ID: 1349815
                Funded by: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency , open-funder-registry 10.13039/100000139;
                Award ID: DW14921533, DW14921811, DW14922385
                Award ID: DW14922385
                Award ID: DW14921811
                Award ID: DW14921533
                Funded by: U.S. Geological Survey Land Change Science Program
                Categories
                Research Article
                Research Articles
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                January 2020
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:5.7.5 mode:remove_FC converted:06.02.2020

                best management practice,green infrastructure,hydrograph analysis,maryland,usa,rainfall‐runoff response,stormwater,urbanization

                Comments

                Comment on this article