WATERSHED APPROACH TO RECOVERING URBAN STREAMS: CONNECTING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, URBAN GROWTH, AND SALMON RECOVERY

Transcription

1 WATERSHED APPROACH TO RECOVERING URBAN STREAMS: CONNECTING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, URBAN GROWTH, AND SALMON RECOVERY June Andy Rheaume, Senior Planner. City of Redmond WA, Public Works Department ABSTRACT WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLANNING IN URBAN AREAS Western Washington is planning to accommodate 1.6 million more people by To do so, the region has established an urban growth boundary in which all the growth is to occur inside the boundary, keeping lands outside the boundary rural and reducing sprawl. Due to this, the value of land is high inside the urban growth boundary and every reduction in housing units or jobs is scrutinized. At the same time, salmon species have declining populations in Western Washington, some are on the brink of extinction. Salmon return from the ocean to spawn in freshwater creeks throughout the urban growth area. Lastly, stormwater is the primary source of toxics entering the Puget Sound and local water bodies, and is also considered the primary source of salmon habitat destruction. In recent years the stormwater requirements in Western Washington have increased in an effort to create healthy habitat in developed areas. The underlying architecture to the stormwater requirements is to produce healthy aquatic habitats in urban areas once all lands draining to a water body are outfitted with current stormwater control and runoff treatment facilities. At the current rate of redevelopment it will take between years before any urban watershed will be outfitted with stormwater facilities sufficient to make healthy creeks in urban areas. No other local government regulations establishes a system that spends millions, billions on the Puget Sound watershed scale, and prior to seeing an outcome. Also, no other multimillion dollar infrastructure is without a plan for how that system will function in the future. Further, no real world ground truth of the stormwater design theory on a watershed scale has been completed or evaluated for effectiveness. We have looked at outcomes on a modeling basis, and measured the effect on a development scale, but never at the response in the water body. We don t know if our current stormwater design standards will create healthy urban creeks. Evaluating this situation, Redmond has met regularly with Washington Department of Ecology, expressing concern about the long term viability of the stormwater regulations architecture when it will take upwards of a century to see results, while spending millions (private and public funds). The political viability of such a plan is questionable. To have the goal of recovering urban creeks is better than just meeting regulations; however, regulating and funding such a goal is significant and requires all levels of government (federal, state, and local) to take some financial responsibility and role in the solution. This paper discusses the steps taken by Redmond, and then later the state of Washington, to develop an outcome based alternative to the default stormwater regulations, salmon recovery efforts, and impaired waters cleanup planning in Washington State. Redmond is a 16 square mile city with 20 distinct fish baring water bodies, most of which have a drainage area between acres. Other water bodies, such as Lake Sammamish in Redmond, have a much larger watershed that spans many local governments. To test Redmond s theory that we can recover urban creeks, the smaller water bodies were targeted for recovery. Page 1 of 7

2 THE PUGET SOUND REGION IS A DESIREABLE PLACE TO LIVE, WORK AND INVEST Development continues in the region, the Puget Sound is one of the fastest growing areas in the nation. By 2040, the Puget Sound population is projected to increase by 1.6 million people (2 Tacoma + 2 Seattle, see figure below) inside the urban growth boundary. Such growth must be accommodated and planned for, and the region has done so through local growth management planning and regional growth planning. The urban growth boundary was established for the Puget Sound to reduce urban sprawl, to create centers with dense populations, served by infrastructure and transit that connects the growth centers. Plans for infrastructure are needed to provide services to the growing population. Some plans have been developed including regional mass transit, regional transportation systems, regional water supply systems, salmon recovery plans, regional wastewater systems, regional emergency management systems, and more. We do not have a regional or local plan for how the stormwater system will be built to support our communities. We also don t have a holistic plan for how our urban water bodies will be healthy in the future. The communities in western Washington value the environment and want a healthy environment where they live. The Puget Sound region has the persona nationally that we are a region that is rich with natural features that define the region. Mt. Rainier, the Olympics, the Cascades, the Puget Sound, the forests, and salmon are all examples of iconic features that make the Puget Sound region the place it is. Healthy water bodies are a part of having a healthy environment and attributes to the quality of life for people who live or work in the region. People are largely unaware of the status of our local and regional water bodies, and the cost to have healthy urban water bodies is beyond comprehension for the majority of the population and elected officials. Development and government agencies are building and maintaining stormwater infrastructure that will create healthy urban water bodies, the population at large will pay taxes or costs handed down by developers to the consumers, to build the stormwater infrastructure. The cost of stormwater management to create healthy urban water bodies is mandated by state and federal regulations. It s not an optional expense due the state and federal acts (Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act) and their enforcement mechanisms. Page 2 of 7

3 THE HEALTH OF PUGET SOUND AND SALMON POPULATIONS The region has been implementing plans to recovery Puget Sound and salmon populations in urban areas. The Puget Sound Partnership was formed by the State of Washington to plan for the recovery of Puget Sound and the health of associated rivers, lakes and creeks are all part of the solution. This occurred because the Puget Sound s health is in decline. The Puget Sound Partnership has identified stormwater runoff as the primary source of toxic chemicals entering the environment, and the cause of hydrologic changes in urban water bodies, diminishing freshwater habitat that contribute to the health of the Puget Sound and salmon populations. Puget Sound was once home to abundant salmon. Only 22 of 37 Chinook populations remain, and they are now at less than 10% of their historic numbers. The decline of salmon is closely related to the general decline of the Puget Sound, and can be attributed to the rapid urban growth over the last several decades. The State of Washington and local governments have created watershed based salmon recovery groups, which have developed plans to recovery Chinook salmon populations. The original plans were finalized but only about 10% of the plans were implemented in the 10 years that the plans intended to be fully implemented. Salmon recovery plans focus on near shore and in-stream habitat conditions and do not focus on the impact of stormwater that flows off the landscape into the water bodies. A coordinated eco-system wide effort is needed to support salmon recovery and the recovery of Puget Sound. Currently there is no such plan for stormwater management. THE ARCHITECTURE OF STORMWATER REGULATIONS Historical stormwater management controls were inadequate, as can be seen by the condition of water bodies in urban watersheds throughout Washington. Controls include treating/removing pollution from runoff and collecting and slowly releasing runoff so that it doesn t scour habitat in small water bodies (known as flow control among stormwater experts). Additional stormwater controls are needed to correct a legacy of massive hydrologic disturbance and pollution from urban areas. The vast majority of developed/urban areas is not equipped with runoff treatment or flow controls. Page 3 of 7

4 The NPDES stormwater permit ties new stormwater controls to new development and redevelopment. Controls are designed to improve conditions and include new low impact development requirements, but since they are tied to development projects, they do not specifically target areas of ecological importance. The rate of redevelopment dictates the rate in which we will see an urban area outfitted with current stormwater controls. It will likely take years to have an urban watershed fully equipped with the stormwater controls to support healthy urban water bodies. This is inefficient and ineffective from an environmental standpoint. There is no plan for stormwater systems that support future growth, no plan for a regional stormwater system across the region, and no plan for recovering local urban water bodies. We don t have a plan for when and how many urban water bodies will be restored to good health by the multibillion dollar investment in stormwater systems that we will make in the next years. This is not a regulatory issue, the NPDES permit allows for flexibility and allows local governments to be more strategic, but regional stormwater plans have never been used. Each local government is unique and the water bodies they contribute stormwater to are unique. The stormwater infrastructure regulations are not unique, instead they use a one size fits all approach that is implemented with development and redevelopment actions. Local governments are implementing what the regulations require instead of asking important questions about effectiveness and efficiency. It s important to note that development should pay for its share of the solution to the health of urban water bodies, and that responsibility should continue forward into the future. Federal, State, and local governments also have a financial obligation to correct the legacy of damage to urban water bodies. In the past, project development and land management decisions have been approved project-by-project, jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction and regulation-by-regulation. This singular approach does not identify the significant cumulative impacts to watershed functions and processes when viewed as small, seemingly harmless, projects. However, local governments that approve development actions are financially liable for the cumulative effect of development actions on urban water bodies. WATERSHED PLANNING APPROACH, RETROFIT PLANNING One solution is to take a watershed approach to recovering urban water bodies. In the past, project development and land management decisions have often been approved project-by-project, jurisdictionby-jurisdiction and regulation-by-regulation. This singular approach does not identify the significant cumulative impacts to watershed functions and processes when viewed as small, projects with minimal impact. The NPDES permit has initiated water planning as a permit requirement for large population counties in Western Washington, the cities that drain to the water bodies were also required by the permit to develop watershed plans. Page 4 of 7

5 The NPDES permit also required large cities and counties to plan for retrofits. The requirement is vague but does require permitted local governments to develop a process to select retrofits. The NPDES requirements does not dictate stormwater retrofit planning to recover water bodies. What happens when, instead, you look at things from a watershed perspective? Because so many watershed functions and processes are closely interrelated, it becomes harder to look at a single project or management issue in isolation. Landscape linkages become more obvious and several issues can be dealt with together--cumulative impacts to a wider area become clearer and may be addressed in a more equitable and cost efficient manner. What if we looked to make retrofit investments into a stormwater system with the expressed intent to recovery urban water bodies? Using a watershed approach can be an effective strategy to prioritizing stream restoration efforts within a community and can be the vehicle for targeting investments in a location that will have the highest ecological lift. Adopting a broader watershed perspective encourages the development of solutions to environmental issues that can satisfy several regulatory requirements simultaneously. For example, compliance with the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, or hazardous waste and toxics cleanup. Taking an outcome based approach will also enable us to make better choices about how to plan, maintain, and construct our drainage systems so they can better meet the community's many needs. Using a watershed approach to achieve healthy urban water bodies should be a policy detailed in local comprehensive plans that are required by the Growth Management Act. Most comprehensive plans currently say don t allow urban water bodies to get worse. As mentioned previously, current conditions of urban water bodies are already poor. Comprehensive plans should aim to improve not hold the status quo. WHAT WE NEED TO DO Page 5 of 7

6 Local governments are effective at initiating and carrying out change. The State of Washington will not make a change to how environmental regulations are designed because current regulations have already been legally challenged and settled upon. The likely solution to this dilemma, to develop a better approach to stormwater investment, salmon recovery, and restoring urban water bodies, is to create a group of local governments with the sole purpose to decide if the region is satisfied with the current construct of stormwater management and restoring urban water bodies. If the answer is we desire to be more effective, more efficient, and work off a plan that recovers urban water bodies sooner than years, a conversation needs to occur with the State of Washington, environmental groups, local governments, the development community, and salmon recovery groups to discuss how the regulations can be customized to be more successful. Obviously this has not been done before and it will be challenging. If we decide as a community that it s better to continue on the trajectory we are on, we need to be clear that we have no plan, we don t have a sufficient funding source, the stormwater system will be built without planning, and our efforts to restore urban water bodies will take many decades to achieve unspecified outcomes. Politically this could be challenging, recently in the Puget Sound the cost to recovery salmon populations came into question. What did you do with the money, salmon populations continue on the decline? Salmon recovery efforts and the amount of funding dedicated to salmon recovery is dwarfed in comparison to the public and private investment in stormwater management. It s likely a similar question will be raised about stormwater infrastructure. Billions will have been spent to achieve an undefined outcome in years. TOOLS TO GET US ON A DIFFERENT TRAJECTORY When you look at things from a watershed perspective, you create the opportunity to intentionally design into the fabric of society healthy urban water bodies. Many watershed functions and processes are closely interrelated, it becomes harder to look at a single project or management issue in isolation if you look at the area that drains to a water body along with the water body s condition. Landscape linkages become more obvious and several issues can be dealt with together--cumulative impacts to a wider area become clearer and may be addressed in a more effective and cost efficient manner. Adopting a broader watershed perspective encourages the development of solutions to environmental issues that can satisfy several regulatory requirements simultaneously. For example, compliance with the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, or possible hazardous waste and toxics cleanup. Watershed plans also enable us to make better choices about how to plan, maintain, and construct our stormwater system so they can better meet the community's many needs. Watershed management solutions can only be effective with support from policymakers, elected officials, and the public. These groups are encouraged to adopt a long-term, broad-based watershed perspective. In the 1950s, King County and other local governments took a similar approach to wastewater management and designed/built a regional wastewater conveyance and treatment system. Redmond's Watershed Management Plan was adopted by its City Council and was developed in partnership with the Washington State Department of Ecology. Redmond's stormwater utility is now in the process of implementing the plan. This includes developing transparent tracking systems, detailed engineered implementation plans for select watersheds, effectiveness monitoring development, and regional collaboration on this approach. Redmond s plan is one example, but it can be used to evaluate what would make sense for other communities. King County is producing a multijurisdictional Page 6 of 7

7 watershed plan by the end of 2017, this will be useful as an example of a plan that spans multiple jurisdictions. By the end of 2017, Snohomish, Pierce, and Clark Counties will also produce single jurisdiction watershed plans to recovery water bodies. Another tool developed by Washington Department of Commerce, under funding from the National Estuaries Program/Puget Sound Partnership, is the Building Cities in the Rain Guidance. This was developed with a group of stakeholders with the purpose of providing guidance on how to prioritize urban water bodies for recovery. It was created based on the need to provide guidance to local governments that are interested in recovering urban water bodies. The design of the guidance is to prioritize water bodies that are likely to recover with investment, referred to as highest restoration water bodies. Water bodies that are impaired but we think we can invest in the near term. Near term recovery is important to the health of Puget Sound and salmon populations. The State of Washington Legislature targeted the recovery of Puget Sound by We are less than three years from 2020 when this paper was written, and we are far from seeing recovery of the Puget Sound. The salmon populations are dwindling, and poor stormwater management is a significant cause of the decline. Last, the State of Washington Department of Ecology has developed guidance called the Stormwater Control Transfer Program. This guidance allows for leveraging development investments in stormwater infrastructure to recover water bodies. The guidance establishes approval requirements, rules, required intent, and technical detail about leveraging development investment in stormwater infrastructure into watersheds that drain to highest restoration water bodies. This allows for the decoupling of development driven stormwater improvements. It s important to note that the guidance does not allow any water body to get worse and only allows the improvement to stormwater impacts (flow control specifically) into highest restoration watersheds. Page 7 of 7