Larry Baker, John Bilotta, John Chapman, Shahram Missaghi (U of M), David Fairbairn (MPCA liaison)

Minnesota Stormwater Research CouncilJune 27, 2018

This work is supported by Minnesota Clean Water Land and Legacy Amendment funds allocated through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency .

2

Slide 1

2 Add watermark "driven by discover"Lawrence Baker, 10/13/2016

Larry BakerResearch Professor

Bioproducts and Biosystems Engineering

John BilottaU of M Extension and Minnesota

Sea Grant

John ChapmanBioproducts and

Biosystems Engineering

Shahram MissaghiU of M Extension

Stormwater Research Roadmap Team

Guiding Principles for Stormwater Research Roadmap

1. The goal of stormwater research was to attain clean water (effectiveness) at reasonable cost (efficiency).

2. The Roadmap has been informed by input from about 200 stormwater professionals throughout the state (legitimacy).

3. The Roadmap was based on adaptive management(accountability),with the intent that it could be updated periodically.

4. The process was transparent and accessible.

Is there a need for urban stormwater research?

Urban lakes are a valuable resourceWhy Urban Waters are Important

1. Nearly all Minnesotans (92%) live in cities with populations greater than 2,500.

2. Urban lakes are widely used for recreation (close to home).

3. 11% of Metro region residents own shoreline property (Sea Grant Survey, 1998).

4. $1.4 million Minnesotans drink surface water, often influenced by upstream cities.

5. Many cities use groundwater, which can be polluted from urban runoff (e.g., chloride).

Why Urban Stormwater Research Is Important

1. Meeting TMDL goals for MS4s will be expensive –estimated $317 million per year (Barr Engineering).

2. Overall effectiveness of urban stormwater management is not known.

3. Research can improve the return on investment on stormwater management, making it more effective at improving water quality & more cost efficient.

“Urban stormwater is still a relatively new field and we have huge and important gaps in our knowledge and understanding.”– letter from MCSC to Clean Water Council, April 28, 2018.

Methods: 1. Research Roadmap Survey (RRS) Defined population: MS4s,

WSMDs, WMOs, County Planners, SWCDs.

Census (not sample). Extensive triangulation among

questions. 150 responses throughout the

state.

Methods: 2. Policy Actor Interviews

Policy actors: Government and non-government actors, 5+ years of experience, metro & outstate, 30,000 foot perspective.

Interviews recorded, transcribed, analyzed.

Methods: 3. Workshops Seven focus groups at three

workshops, 4-6 person subgroups.

Used versions of the prescribed questions prepared for one-one-interviews.

Archived worksheets and flipcharts

In total, nearly 200 stormwater professionals provided input to the Roadmap process.

Research Needs To… Improve characterization of urban stormwater

runoff and watersheds. Evaluate the efficacy of stormwater

management practices at the watershed scale. Inform effective pollution reduction at the

source. Improve performance and reduce

maintenance on structural BMPs.

Research Needs To… Determine the cost efficiency of stormwater

practices. Develop new and innovative stormwater

management practices and to better understand emerging stormwatermanagement practices.

Linking education to behavioral changes to which improve water quality

Improve stormwater management policies.

Research Need #1: Improve characterization of watersheds and stormwater runoff.

Supporting evidence: Financial constraints

identified as major barrier toward characterization (RRS).

Overarching need to relating source of pollutants to land use (RRS).

New capacity to acquire, store and process data creates research opportunities.

Example: Mapping P removal from Prior Lake Street Sweeping Study into CRWSD using fine-scale land cover mapping.

“Somereallygoodguidanceaboutmonitoring,methodologythatcouldworkbetter.Thatcouldbevaluable,...couldextendresources..”

Research Need #2: Evaluate efficiency/effectiveness of stormwater management practices at the watershed scale

Supporting evidence: We have not yet evaluated their

overall effectiveness of stormwater management toward improving water quality.

We now have sufficient data to do this inquiry.

The RRS revealed interest in trends in conventional pollutants as well as biological metrics and ecosystem services.

Research Need #3: Reduce pollutants at their source.

Supporting evidence: Large potential for source

reduction, but high barriers. High potential: chloride, street

sweeping for nutrients, erosion control.

Increased efficiency ($/lb pollutant).

Could reduce pond maintenance.

Research Need #4: improve maintenance of structural BMPs.

Supporting evidence: A major barrier toward effectiveness of BMPs were long-

term maintenance. Improved maintenance was highly ranked for research. Previous MPCA survey also shows “long term

considerations” highly ranked for research.

“The new research could give us information[on life cycle of ponds] we need on that, especially on operation and maintenance in 10 and 15 years...” (City engineer)

Research Need #5. Determine the most cost effective stormwater practices.

“I think there is a definite need for someone to do some legitimate life cycle costs analysis. This isn't about putting out a monitoring station. What is the true cost when we are building it now versus the way we could build it?” – City Engineer.

Comparison of opera ons and maintenance (O&M) costs with capital costs for several BMPs in the Capital Region Watershed District (CRWSD 2012).

Supporting evidence:Financial constraints was the

top general barrier for stormwater management(RRS).

Costs & benefits was identified as one of top priorities for BMP research (RRS).

Research Need #6. Develop new, innovative stormwater management practices.Supporting evidence: Design and performance of innovative BMPs was the top

ranked priority for BMP research (RRS) Stormwater reuse, enhanced filtration, trees for hydrologic

control, street sweeping, and manufactured devices for particle removal were highly ranked in RRS.

Especially needed for built-up areas.

“Is there any human risk when using stormwater reuse? What grows in a cistern? In a rain barrel? What are the concerns for pollutants in water reuse? Is there legionnaire’s bacteria in there? We don’t know.” (NGO policy actor)

Research Need #7. Link behavioral change to water quality improvement.

Supporting evidence: Lack of public support is an important

issue (RRS). Top research priorities were “to elicit

behavior change” and “effectiveness of education to improve water quality”(RRS).

We have little empirical knowledge of how effective behavior change is toward improving water quality.

“Research is needed for better knowledge of the effectiveness of various education and behavior change strategies”. - City engineer.

Research Need #8: Stormwater management policies.

Supporting evidence: There is a perception from RRS that

stormwater management is not as effective or as efficient (cost) as it could be.

Top research priorities include cost & benefits of BMPs, statewide effectiveness of MS4 program, adaptive management approaches, and ag-urban pollution trading.

“Research is needed for better knowledge of the effectiveness of various education and behavior change strategies”. - City engineer.

How the Stormwater Research Roadmap could be used

University of Minnesota Water Resources Center –framework for Clean Water Legacy Fund research RFP.

U of M Stormwater Research Council – framework for local research funding.

MPCA and other agencies - communication among senior administrators.

Local Roads Research Board and other research-funding organizations.

Integration into Clean Water Roadmap.

Next Steps

SWRR should be available late summer

Will be available at www.wrc.umn.edu/stormwaterroadmap

“Urban stormwater is still a relatively new field and we have huge and important gaps in our knowledge and understanding.”– letter from MCSC to Clean Water Council, April 28, 2018.