期刊
URBAN ECOSYSTEMS
卷 25, 期 4, 页码 1247-1264出版社
SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11252-022-01221-y
关键词
Urbanization; Detention basin retrofits; Stormwater management; Transport capacity; Stream recovery; stream restoration
资金
- Southern California Coastal Water Research Project
- USEPA [EP-C-14-012]
- Australian Research Council (ARC) [LP0883610, LP130100295]
- Cooperative Research Centre for Water Sensitive Cities
- Melbourne Waterway Research Practice Partnership (Melbourne Water)
- Victorian Water Trust
- Victorian Urban Stormwater and Recycling Fund
- Caring for Our Country Investment Fund
- Office of Living Victoria
- Yarra Ranges Council
- Yarra Valley Water
- Australian Research Council [LP0883610] Funding Source: Australian Research Council
Stream channel erosion is a common problem in urban watersheds due to conventional stormwater management practices. Hydrologic-based restoration seeks to replicate natural flow conditions, but the success of these interventions in promoting geomorphic recovery depends on their ability to reduce sediment transport capacity. This paper compiles five years of data from three different settings to demonstrate how erosion potential can elucidate the role of stormwater interventions in facilitating geomorphic recovery.
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 interventions on the geomorphic effectiveness of the flow regime. This paper compiles ca. five years of data following stormwater-based interventions in three distinct settings in the United States and Australia to demonstrate how the E framework can elucidate the role of hydrologic restoration interventions in facilitating trajectories of geomorphic recovery (or lack thereof). In a previously developed watershed with unstable streams, substantial reductions in E in one stream coincided with a trajectory of geomorphic recovery, whereas the control stream without E-reducing interventions exhibited continued instability. Furthermore, a stream downstream of a greenfield development that optimized their stormwater control measures to match the sediment transport capacity of the predeveloped regime (E = 1) was able to maintain a recovery trajectory in a legacy-impacted setting that is otherwise highly susceptible to hydromodification. Streambed material size, channel evolution stage, and the hydrogeomorphic setting also likely affect the level of E reduction necessary to promote geomorphic recovery, with coarser-grained and over-widened streams potentially needing less reduction than finer-grained and more entrenched channels. Although available space and funding will limit the ability to fully reduce E in previously developed watersheds, these case studies underscore the value of using stormwater control measures to maximize reductions in E if geomorphic stability is a goal of stormwater interventions.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据