The Stormwater Blogs

The Blogger

Janice Kaspersen Janice Kaspersen Stormwater Editor

More from this blogger

  1. Dam Breach in Iowa
  2. Two Weeks to StormCon
  3. Mosquitoes and Malaria
  4. More Mosquitoes
  5. Storms in the Gulf
  6. Seeking StormCon Moderators
  7. Never Flooded Before
  8. Storms in the Midwest
  9. Restoring the Penobscot
  10. Hurricanes and Oil
  11. The Uninvited
  12. Half of Our Trees Are Missing
  13. A Hairy Solution
  14. Oil in the Gulf
  15. A Multitalented Plant
  16. Where It Falls
  17. Floating BMPs
  18. Regulating Copper in Brake Pads
  19. EPA Addresses Water Contaminants
  20. Getting Along With the Neighbors
  21. Local Voices in Washington
  22. Out of Sight
  23. Sentinel Species
  24. Collection System
  25. Living Underground
  26. Keeping Stormwater Onsite in LA
  27. Appealing the New Flood Maps
  28. EPA Sets Nutrient Limits for Florida
  29. Some Like It Hot
  30. Skip the Bag, Save the River
  31. Maintenance The Unglamorous Necessity
  32. Put the LID on Stormwater
  33. Federal Responsibility for Katrina Flooding
  34. Certifying Performance
  35. EPA's Construction Effluent Guidelines Released
  36. StormCon Abstracts Due December 2
  37. Reclassified
  38. Reusing Runoff
  39. More Than Just Pipes
  40. Two Announcements from EPA
  41. Separation Anxiety
  42. Federal Funding for Local Projects
  43. Undoing Progress
  44. StormCon 2010 Call for Papers
  45. A Decimal Point Makes a Difference
  46. Lovely as a Tree
  47. Stimulus Funds and Stormwater
  48. Thanks to the StormCon Session Moderators!
  49. Live From StormCon..
  50. StormCon '09 More You Should Know About
  51. Counting Beach Closures
  52. Still Growing
  53. Density Done Well
  54. A Combination Problem
  55. One Driveway at a Time
  56. Underground
  57. Making Sure Infrastructure Doesn't Become a Hazard
  58. A Beach Comes Back
  59. With a Grain of Salt
  60. Blocking Out the Storm
  61. LID in Washington State
  62. Florida Gains Land in Public-Private Partnership
  63. Stormwater Management in Plain Sight
  64. Charging More for Potential Pollutants
  65. At Home in the Watershed
  66. We Have Met the Polluter - He Is Us
  67. Mobile Car Wash Runoff
  68. Red River Rising
  69. Summer School
  70. Rain Barrels, Anyone
  71. Getting Serious About the Weather
  72. Taking the Pulse of Utilities
  73. Not Your Ordinary Utility Debate
  74. How Dangerous Is Chitosan, Really Do We Need Certification
  75. Debating Dollars
  76. Demonstrating Green
  77. Paperless Stormwater
  78. Looking for Shovel-Ready Projects
  79. Online Erosion Control Training - Let Us Know What You Think
  80. No Relief Yet for the Northwest
  81. Happy Holidays From Stormwater
  82. Remedying Retention Pond Dangers
  83. New Funding on the Way
  84. The Case of the Missing Manhole Cover
  85. StormCon '09 Abstracts Are Due December 3
  86. A New Plan in the Everglades
  87. Down the Drain
  88. Gunk in the Ocean Our Problem
  89. Save the Date December 3 Is Closer Than You Think
  90. Watershed-Based Permitting
  91. Looking Outside Our Own Backyard
  92. The Clean Watersheds Needs Survey
  93. Show Me the Money, If You Can Find It
  94. The Safety Issue
  95. StormCon '09 Call for Papers
  96. Worse Weather Or Does It Just Seem That Way
  97. Gustav a Reminder of What's Left To Do
  98. Recovering After the Storm
  99. Who Owns the Rain
  100. BMPs and the Bigger Picture
  101. How Are Your Pipes
  102. Regulations We've Got Those Covered, Too
  103. You Asked for BMPs - We've Got 'Em
  104. Simplifying Public Outreach
  105. New Terminology
  106. Buying Time and Space for the Everglades
  107. The Worst Is Over
  108. Midwest Flooding - Could This Have Happened Differently
  109. EPA's Message to Homebuilders
  110. StormCon '08 Is Less Than Two Months Away
  111. Welcome to our new Website!
  112. The State of Water Quality
view all

SW Editor's Blog

May 11th, 2009 7:18am PST

A High-Density Debate

Posted By Janice Kaspersen 1 Comment

A debate currently going on in Albemarle County, Virginia, highlights the conflicts that often occur between environmental stewardship and development, as well as the struggle to implement stormwater credits that work as they were intended. What’s happening there has implications for other areas that have been trying to control new development in the same way.

The county has long been trying to limit new development to designated growth areas, thus reducing the amount of sprawling, low-density development. This is a smart-growth principle and, among other advantages, can lead to a reduction in overall stormwater runoff. (See an article by Randel Lemoine from our October 2007 issue about a study in Grand Rapids, Michigan, showing how high-density development, despite its higher percentage of impervious area, can have less impact on a watershed than an equal number of residences spread out over a larger area.)

The Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, meanwhile, is trying to speed improvements in water quality—the area lies within the Chesapeake Bay watershed—and has proposed new stormwater management guidelines that some feel will undermine the county’s long-term efforts. The aim of the DCR guidelines is to reduce the number of pollutants entering waterways, and to that end they would allow developments to use stormwater offsets—that is, to exceed water-quality standards themselves but make up for it by purchasing offsets from other developments in the same watershed.

In addition, a new development could gain credit for the use of certain BMPs, such as permeable pavement and green roofs. While these measures may, in fact, reduce the number of stormwater pollutants, they also allow developers to meet the regulations while building low-density, rural neighborhoods—and in most cases, it will be much cheaper to take this route than to build higher-density urban developments.

You can read more about  the situation in Albemarle County here .

See Randel Lemoine’s article on high-density development here.  Read an article by Glenn Brooks—an engineer with Albemarle County—from our September 2007 issue here.

What Do You Think?

Post a Comment

brambow

May 12th, 2009 6:28 AM PT

High density development only offers a reduction in stormwater runoff as compared to the same number of houses in spread out, low-desnity development. The problem is that, unless land is preserved, high-density developments are built next to each other. Then all you have is high-density sprawl, which is not at all beneficial for the watershed.

Post a Comment

Not a subscriber? Sign Up
 
 
*  
 




 

Get Stormwater E-mail Updates!

Get weekly news and updates through our Stormwater e-mail newsletter!