A Mapping of Tools for Informing Water Sensitive Urban Design Planning Decisions—Questions, Aspects and Context Sensitivity

Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) poses new challenges for decision makers compared with traditional stormwater management, e.g., because WSUD offers a larger selection of measures and because many measures are multifunctional. These challenges have motivated the development of many decision support tools. This review shows that the tools differ in terms of the types of questions they can assist in answering. We identified three main groups: “How Much”-tools, “Where”-tools and “Which”-tools. The “How Much”-tools can further be grouped into tools quantifying hydraulic impacts, hydrologic impacts, water quality impacts, non-flow-related impacts and economic impacts. Additionally, the tools differ in terms of how many aspects of water they address, from those focused only on bio-physical aspects to those attempting to find the best WSUD based on multiple criteria. Finally, we suggest that variability among the tools can partly be explained by variability in local context including conditions such as type of existing stormwater systems, groundwater conditions and legislative frameworks

Multiple criteria assessment of apartment building performance for refurbishment purposes

The selection of buildings for refurbishment is a multi-objective problem and it should be based on integrated assessment of the current performance of the buildings. Accurate assessment allows the development of strategies for the optimisation of building performance and the selection of appropriate and most efficient refurbishment measures. This paper presents a computer-based integrated building performance assessment methodology based on the multiple-criteria approach. A case study from the Šiauliai district, Lithuania, illustrates the proposed methodology in use. The assessment results indicate what are the worst performing buildings and help with the selection of appropriate refurbishment measures and estimation of possible outcomes

Rapid expert tool for different professions based on estimated ecosystem variables for retrofitting of drainage systems

There is a need for a geospatial decision support tool for different professions such as drainage engineers and urban planners, which is useful for a quick assessment of the potential of ecosystem services when retrofitting sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) in urban areas. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to develop an innovative rapid decision support tool based on ecosystem service variables for retrofitting of key SuDS techniques by different professionals such as drainage engineers, developers, ecologists, planners and social scientists. This unique and transparent spreadsheet-based tool proposes the retrofitting of a SuDS technique that obtained the highest ecosystem service score for an urban site. This approach is based on a novel ecosystem service philosophy adapted to SuDS rather than on traditional engineering judgement associated with variables based on quick community and environment assessments. For the Greater Manchester example case study area, a comparison with the traditional approach of determining community and environment variables indicates that infiltration trenches, soakaways and belowground storage systems are usually less preferred than permeable pavement systems regardless of the professional perspective. However, ponds also received relatively high scores, because of their great potential impact in terms of water quality improvement and flood control. The estimation of variables was undertaken with high confidence and manageable error

Water, Fish, and Fire: Interdisciplinary Research on Ecosystem Services and Climate Adaptation

Ecosystem services, or benefits from the environment, are plentiful and vary from place to place. Human activities and climate change have impacted these services in every region of the world. This dissertation explores multiple ecosystem services, from water quality improvement to provisioning of fish and habitat, in multiple and international contexts. The first chapter synthesizes the literature on stormwater management and ecosystem services, finding that research at this intersection has provided many parcel-level studies and frameworks for implementing green infrastructure. The second chapter extends the stormwater management literature by quantifying the impacts of green infrastructure on water quantity and quality at the watershed scale, showing that various amounts of green stormwater infrastructure lead to reduction in peak flow and water quality improvements via reductions in total phosphorus loadings. The third chapter contributes to our understanding of fire trends in the Intermountain West, the economic impacts of fire, and how fire managers are adapting their actions and policies.The final chapter extends this dissertation to the Lower Mekong Basin, which is experiencing heavy fishing pressure that threatens the livelihoods and food security for millions in the Tonle Sap system of Cambodia. The results show that changes in timing, duration, and magnitude of flows from hydropower development pose risks for many migratory fish in this region. With interdisciplinary approaches, these chapters have led to a multi-faceted study of ecosystem services

Evaluation of the Ecosystem Services and multiple benefits provided by SUDS and non SUDS ponds

This thesis explored the potential of four Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDS) ponds, and four non-SUDS pond, to deliver key Ecosystem benefits, and services. Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems are designed to improve water quality, and provide amenity, biodiversity, and flood alleviation benefits. Ecosystem Services (ES) refer to the end user benefits associated with an ecosystem, and which are of direct use for humans. Within the context of this study, the key Ecosystem Service (ES) is water quality regulation which was considered using the proxies of macroinvertebrates and diatoms. An additional Ecosystem Service is wild species diversity which involved monitoring and evaluating flowering plants in relation to pollination. The project had four main research questions (RQ), and each was supported by its own research methodology. First the effectiveness of water quality regulation in SUDS and non-SUDS ponds using Average Score per Taxon was monitored (RQ1); secondly, nutrient removal services was observed between pond inlets and outlets, and potential indicators for reference, disturbed, and toxicity (RQ 2) for the ES of water quality regulation. RQ3 considered the potential for ponds to support flowering plants suitable for pollinators for the ES of wild species diversity. RQ4 focussed on the public perception survey, and willingness to pay for the multiple benefits of ponds and evaluated these in relation to the Whole Life Cost of the pond. RQ1 revealed that median values were higher for SUDS ponds than non SUDS ponds but not of statistical significance (p>0.05). For RQ2, median diatom counts were not statistically significant between SUDS and non SUDS ponds (p>0.05). There was a statistical difference between median observations for plants suitable for insect pollinators (p0.05). RQ4 revealed that habitat provision benefits outweighed costs for SUDS and non SUDS ponds in relation to Whole Life Cost analysis. The proposed framework, resulting from this research, may be used to inform local decision making and policy for SUDS design. This research aids the understanding of valuing ponds in relation to ecosystem benefits and services. It also highlights the significance of incorporating disadvantages into economic assessment; particularly where direct comparisons are made between ponds

Rapid decision support tool based on novel ecosystem service variables for retrofitting sustainable drainage systems in the presence of trees

There is a lack of practical decision support tools useful for a rapid assessment ofthe potential of ecosystem services when retrofitting permeable pavements in urban areasthat either feature existing trees or should be planted with trees in the near future.There isalso a need for a geospatial decision support tool for different professions such as drainageengineers and urban planners, which is useful for a quick assessment of the potential ofecosystem services when retrofitting sustainable drainage systems (SUDS) in urban areasTherefore the aim is to develop adecision support tool for choosing the best possibleoptions for theretrofitting ofsustainable urban drainage system techniquesusing novelecosystem servicevariables and modifyitto includeareflection of the confidence level oftheassessorto minimise uncertainty,andweighting factors that will reflect theprofessional background of thestakeholders to reduce professional bias.Thistool wasdeveloped andused to assess 100 sites in Greater Manchester withretrofittingpotentials including Brownfield sites.The introduced weighting factors helpedtonarrow down the choicesfurther.Since the retrofitting ofSUDS, especially permeablepavements, and other urban development projects usually involve areas where there arealready existing mature trees, further studies were carried out on the damagecharacteristics of urban tree species on urban structures including permeable pavements,impermeablepavements, kerbs, roads and retaining walls. This was conducted on adifferent 100 sites also in Greater Manchester. Further studies were also carried out aboutpublic acceptance of the urban tree species using pictures taken of trees from theWestonbirt National Arboretum.The resultsof the ‘ecosystem service’ approachwere compared with thoseoftraditional‘community and environmental’approachdeveloped by CIRIA.A comparisonwith the traditional approach of determining community and environment variablesindicates that permeable pavements are generally a preferredSUDSoption regardless ofthe professional perspectives.The introduced weighting factorsmade the toollend itself tobe used by stakeholders of varying professional backgrounds.The results of thecomparison of the different approaches showed that the ‘ecosystem service’ approach gavea rather more thorough and precise assessment and will give a less misleading choice ofSUDStechniques.In comparison to common public opinion, statistically significantdifferences between social scientists and the general public for the estimation ofland costsusing the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U-test were found. It was also surprising to findno significant differences in the estimation ofhabitat for speciesby civil engineers andxviiiecologists.Permeable pavements combined with urban trees received relatively highscores, because of their great potential impact in terms of water and air qualityimprovement, and flood control, respectively.Theresultofthe assessmentof damages to structures by urban tree speciesrevealed that Norway maple, Lime, Common Ash and Sycamore dominated GreaterManchester, andshowed that certain tree species are better suited for certain structureseither because ofthe damage or the nuisance that the trees cause. Impermeable pavementswere subject to the highest number of damage from trees (44%), followed by permeablepavements and kerbs (22% and 19%, respectively).Trees planted close to impermeablepavements will cause more damage to the structure compared to those planted close topermeable pavements under the same conditions. Wild cherry, large leaved lime, horsechestnut and hawthorn may are the best recommended trees for use alongsidemostroadsandSUDSstructures as they have least potential to damage structures. However, horsechestnuts produce lots of litters with their conkers. From aesthetics point of view,sycamore was the most aesthetic tree all-round the year.This study therefore suggests best tree species for permeable pavements and otherrelated structures, and its outcomes are likely to lead to more combined permeablepavement and tree systems in the urban landscape, which are beneficial for humans andthe environment.It will help urban developers inchoosing the most suitable trees for theright urban environment. It will also help to save money in maintaining infrastructure suchas roads and pavements.Keywords:Sustainable urban drainage systems; Ecosystem services; Permeablepavements; Expertsystem; Different professions;Stakeholders;Uncertainty; Urban trees;Urban structures, Structural damage

Linking sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) together with ecosystem services and disservices : new connections in urban ecology

Increased flooding, urban diffuse pollution and habitat fragmentation are predicted as the climate changes and urbanisation increases; all will affect human and wildlife well-being negatively. Sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) have the potential to mitigate these effects and also provide additional amenity and biodiversity benefits. However, the current SuDS approach is site-specific and technically focused, hence, failing to generate anticipated amenity and biodiversity benefits. Therefore, a new SuDS approach is required. A critical evaluation of the SuDS approach, the Ecosystem Approach, ecosystem services and disservices enabled an innovative SuDS Communication and Planning Framework to be created. The framework highlights key amenity and biodiversity related ecosystem services and disservices produced by vegetated SuDS systems, coupled with drivers affecting the production of these services and disservices.This framework was validated by examining 49 representative sites within Greater Manchester using two ecosystem services and disservices variables assessment methods (vegetation structure cover-abundance and cultural ecosystem services and disservices appraisals). Resultant scores for five ecosystem services were calculated, where habitat for species and recreation ecosystem services were found to be synergistically linked to each other in a positive correlation. The result also enabled recommendations to be made that future vegetated SuDS development would benefit from involving local communities.Overall the research produced practical Ecosystem Approach methods for SuDS development decision making, and the SuDS Communication and Planning Framework provides an innovative, easy to use tool to implement Ecosystem Approach compliant solutions for key SuDS stakeholders (planners, developers, designers, researchers and policy makers). Finally, the SuDS Communication and Planning Framework can now be found in the second part of the UK National Ecosystem Approach, UK NEA follow-on, as part of a series of Ecosystem Approach toolkits incorporated into the decision making processes for managing the urban environment in a sustainable way