Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Journal of Hydrology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhydrol
Research papers
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 22 April 2016
Received in revised form 15 September
2016
Accepted 18 September 2016
Available online 19 September 2016
This manuscript was handled by Tim R.
McVicar, Editor-in-Chief, with the assistance
of Dawen Yang, Associate Editor
Keywords:
Water budget
Green infrastructure
Evapotranspiration
Stormwater
SWMM
a b s t r a c t
This paper presents a study of the potential for green infrastructure (GI) to restore the predevelopment
hydrologic cycle in a semi-arid urban catchment. Simulations of stormwater runoff from a 0.11-km2
urban catchment in Salt Lake City, Utah, USA for predeveloped (Natural Hydrology, NH), developed
(Baseline, BL), and developed with GI (Green Infrastructure, GI) conditions were executed for a oneyear period. The study was repeated for a relatively dry year, wet year, and an average year based on precipitation amounts in the year. Bioretention and green roofs were chosen for the GI plan. Results showed
that the water budget of the catchment with the GI plan implemented more closely matches the NH
water budget compared to the BL scenario, for all three years (dry, wet, average). The BL and GI scenarios
showed more significant modifications to the water budget than what has been found by studies in
humid climates. Compared to the BL condition, GI annually reduces surface runoff by 35%, 45%, and
43% and restores evapotranspiration by 18%, 19%, and 25% for the dry, average, wet years, respectively.
Based on the introduced water budget restoration coefficient (WBRC), the water budget of the study
catchment was restored by the GI plan to 90%, 90%, and 82% of the predevelopment state in the dry, average, and wet years, respectively. By comparing the WBRC estimated for other studies, it is further inferred
that the water budget is more significantly affected by development and GI restoration in semi-arid than
humid climates, but the differences lessen as the precipitation amount increases.
2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Urbanization alters the water budget due to the removal of
native vegetation, alteration and compaction of soils, building of
impervious surfaces, changes in water use, and introduction of
water diversions (Whitford et al., 2001; Pauleit et al., 2005;
Shuster et al., 2005; Claessens et al., 2006; Powell et al., 2008;
Scalenghe and Marsan, 2009; Jacobson, 2011; Guan et al., 2016;
Yao et al., 2016). Such changes lead to a complicated mixture of
modifications to the hydrologic cycle across a range of spatial
scales. Surface runoff in most watersheds is observed to increase
with urbanization (Rose and Peters, 2001; Weng, 2001; Lee and
Heaney, 2003; Haase, 2009; Boggs and Sun, 2011; Zhang et al.,
2013; Wu, 2015), while changes to other water budget components have been reported to typically be reduced, such as precipitation (Rosenfeld, 2000; Shepherd, 2006; Kaufmann et al., 2007;
Hand and Shepherd, 2009), groundwater recharge (Lerner, 1990,
2002; Foster et al., 1994; Rose and Peters, 2001; Zhang and
Kennedy, 2006; He et al., 2009; Jeppesen et al., 2011; He and
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: youcan.feng@gmail.com (Y. Feng).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.09.044
0022-1694/ 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Hogue, 2012; Hibbs and Sharp, 2012; Barron et al., 2013), baseflow
(Brun and Band, 2000; White and Greer, 2006; Jacobson, 2011; Nie
et al., 2011), and evapotranspiration (ET) (Oke, 1979; Grimmond
and Oke, 1986; Balling and Brazel, 1987; Dow and DeWalle,
2000a; Rose and Peters, 2001; Dimoudi and Nikolopoulou, 2003;
Gober et al., 2009; Haase, 2009; Jeppesen et al., 2011; Ramier
et al., 2011; Shields and Tague, 2012; Wijesekara et al., 2012;
Barron et al., 2013; Bijoor et al., 2014; Gwenzi and Nyamadzawo,
2014). However, the magnitude and direction of the water budget
component modifications are difficult to predict given the complexities of the urban system (Burian and Pomeroy, 2010).
Such alterations to the hydrologic cycle can negatively impact
the urban ecosystem and downstream areas. Increased runoff, for
example, is directly connected to a wide array of environmental
stressors (Hasse and Lathrop, 2003), such as flood risk (Liu et al.,
2006; Haase, 2009; Du et al., 2012; Rutland and Dukes, 2012;
Wijesekara et al., 2012), sediment erosion and transport (Nie
et al., 2011), stream quality degradation (Interlandi and Crockett,
2003; Foley et al., 2005; Astaraie-Imani et al., 2012; Zgheib et al.,
2012), aquifer pollution (Lerner and Barrett, 1996; Chisala and
Lerner, 2008; Hibbs and Sharp, 2012), waterborne diseases
(Vrsmarty et al., 2000; Narain, 2012), acidification of water
bodies (Kelly et al., 2011; Xiao et al., 2012), and aquatic species loss
(Gillies et al., 2003). To respond to these changes and uncertainties,
quantifying urban impacts on spatiotemporal water budget
responses remains an area of great need, especially in the planning
and design that guide the configuration and operation of stormwater management systems in cities.
To develop plans to mitigate the adverse ecosystem impacts
due to urbanization, a new international trend of pursuing the goal
of near-natural stormwater management has emerged (Gbel
et al., 2004; Gbel and Coldewey, 2013). The concept of nearnatural aims to replicate the quasi-natural local water balance so
as to preserve the local ecosystems integrity (Kebler et al., 2012;
Walsh et al., 2016). This trend is consistent with the efforts of using
green infrastructure (GI) to restore the predevelopment hydrologic
cycle, promoted by the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) (USEPA, 2000), and aligns with sustainable design
goals incorporated into the EnvisionTM sustainable infrastructure
rating system (Envision) (http://sustainableinfrastructure.org/, last
accessed on July 2nd, 2016) and the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system (http://www.usgbc.org/
leed, last accessed on July 2nd, 2016).
For stormwater management, GI is designed to reduce the
quantity and improve the quality of runoff by adding storage (often
pervious) with the capacity to capture, evapotranspire, and infiltrate stormwater. Compared to predevelopment landscapes, the
vertical storage capacity of GI in cities compensates for the lost
area of natural surface storage. By expanding storage in the vertical
direction and incorporating water conservation, GI seeks to efficiently (in terms of land area) achieve stormwater runoff management and environmental benefits of natural landscapes. Most GIrelated studies and applications have focused on runoff (Booth
et al., 2004; Culbertson and Hutchinson, 2004; Simpson, 2007;
Brown et al., 2009; Li et al., 2009; Alfredo et al., 2010; Burian
and Pomeroy, 2010; Fassman and Blackbourn, 2010; Voyde et al.,
2010a; DeBusk et al., 2011; Petrucci et al., 2013; Trinh and Chui,
2013; Ellis and Viavattene, 2014; Loperfido et al., 2014;
Zahmatkesh et al., 2014; Ambrose and Winfrey, 2015; Jarden
et al., 2016; Guan et al., 2015a, 2015b; Wella-Hewage et al.,
2016) and groundwater recharge (Shuster et al., 2007; Moglia
et al., 2010; Kidmose et al., 2015). A critical, yet often overlooked,
water budget component addressed by GI is ET, because (1) ET controls the amount of available water for percolation (Ellis, 2013),
and therefore affects runoff volumes and peak rates (Boggs and
Sun, 2011; Sun et al., 2013; Walsh et al., 2016; Wong and Jim,
2015; Yang et al., 2016); (2) ET affects the urban heat island
(UHI) intensity (Sailor, 1995; Alexandri and Jones, 2008; USEPA,
2008; Gober et al., 2009, 2012; Shashua-Bar et al., 2009;
Krayenhoff and Voogt, 2010), and in turn the cooling costs and
related energy consumption (Barrio, 1998; Kumar and Kaushik,
2005; Lazzarin et al., 2005; Levallius, 2005; Getter and Rowe,
2006; Takebayashi and Moriyama, 2007; Alexandri and Jones,
2008; Mitchell et al., 2008; USEPA, 2008; Fioretti et al., 2010;
Gartland, 2010; Ouldboukhitine et al., 2011; Saadatian et al.,
2013); (3) ET from green roofs generates cool air, which may give
rise to strengthened street canyon flow and improved air quality
near roads (Baik et al., 2012); (4) green spaces (increasing ET) provide space for plants and increase carbon sinks, especially in arid
regions (Sun et al., 2011), and improves biodiversity (Currie,
1991); and (5) ET enhances atmospheric moisture, which may lead
to enhanced precipitation under certain circumstances (e.g., semiarid climates) (Eltahir, 1998; Schr et al., 1999; Shepherd and
Burian, 2003; Koster et al., 2004; Burian and Shepherd, 2005;
Jung et al., 2010; Seneviratne et al., 2010; Aragao, 2012;
Spracklen et al., 2012; Taylor et al., 2012).
In accordance with the concept of integrated ecosystem management/stewardship (Falkenmark and Rockstrm, 2004; Chapin
745
2. Methods
2.1. Modeling framework
EPA SWMM 5.0.022 was selected as the modeling platform for
this study, as it is able to simulate a water budget for both natural
and urban environments, and it is one of the few models with the
flexibility to simulate multiple types of GI (Elliott and Trowsdale,
2007). The bioretention unit in EPA SWMM 5.0.022 was used to
model both bioretention systems and green roofs for this study.
The bioretention model in SWMM is composed of surface, soil,
storage, and drainage layers. The storage layer was assumed to represent the drainage mat layer for green roofs. For both bioretention
and green roofs, the layers were parameterized with appropriate
hydraulic properties following guidance in the SWMM Users Manual (https://www.epa.gov/water-research/storm-water-management-model-swmm#downloads, last accessed on July 2nd,
2016). Compared to GI, landscape elements have surface and soil
layers, with the latter represented by the unsaturated layer of
the aquifer component of SWMM. The outflows from GI are specified in SWMM to drain onto landscapes or into storm drains.
The Penman-Monteith equation (Monteith, 1965) was used to
estimate potential ET (PET) rates, following the standard practice
(Kingston et al., 2009; Sherwood and Fu, 2014; Thompson et al.,
2014). Parameters like albedo and surface resistances were set to
represent the different GI and land surface covers (Feng and
Burian, 2016). The water stress coefficient was set to convert PET
rates to actual ET (ETa) rates using the equation from the Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Paper 56
(FAO-56) (Allen et al., 1998; DiGiovanni et al., 2013). The moisture
balance simulated by SWMM was used to calculate the water
stress coefficient (Feng and Burian, 2016). Hourly PET and ETa rates
of six types of land covers including ponding water, bioretention,
green roofs, turf landscapes, deciduous trees, and coniferous trees
were estimated separately.
746
age thickness of the local valley fill aquifer was estimated as 823 m
(Arnow and Mattick, 1968).
ET contribution from the deep groundwater was not considered
in this study. To confirm this, a simulation was executed with deep
percolation in SWMM and it was shown that this would generate a
very small (1.07 mm) difference in ETa for the predevelopment
condition for the year 2014 (simulated by EPA SWMM 5.1.007).
This is equivalent to 0.22% of the total annual precipitation; thus,
it was assumed negligible in the study.
Meteorological data collected at 5-min intervals from two
weather stations operated by the Department of Atmospheric
Science at the University of Utah were downloaded for this study
from the Mesowest website (http://mesowest.utah.edu/, accessed
on 03/17/2015). The Mountain Met (MTMET) weather station
(40450 6000 N, 111490 4200 W) located within the study catchment
was used to represent meteorological conditions from July 3,
2012, to December 31, 2014. Meteorological data before that period (starting in 2011) was obtained from the nearby William
Browning Building (WBB) weather station (40450 5800 N,
111500 5100 W), which is 1.66 km from the MTMET station. Except
the precipitation, other raw data were summed up to hourly
amounts.
Spatial distribution and fractions of current land cover within
the watershed were determined by manually interpreting 1-footresolution orthophotography images downloaded from Utah Automated Geographic Reference Center (AGRC, http://gis.utah.gov/,
accessed 06/08/2015) and verified by site visits. The average building height in the catchment was estimated at 10.66 m based on
1 m and 1.25 m horizontal spatial resolution airborne Lidar data
(collected in 2006) acquired from Utah AGRC (http://gis.utah.gov/
, accessed 06/08/2015). Similarly, the average heights of the deciduous and coniferous trees were estimated as 12.70 m and 14.35 m,
respectively. The height information was used to convert wind
speed measurements to the canopy levels corresponding to green
roofs and trees, based on a logarithmic profile (Allen et al., 1998).
A storm drainage system serves the catchment and directs runoff into Red Butte Creek. The drainage catchment was delineated
and subdivided based on terrain, locations of storm drain inlets,
and other local features (e.g., curb and gutters). Several site visits
were made to identify the locations of storm drain inlets and outfalls. A 2150 Area Velocity Flow Module (Teledyne Isco, USA) was
installed in May 2014 in the storm drain at the outlet of the catchment to measure the flow rate in one-minute increments.
The SWMM model corresponding to the baseline (developed)
condition was manually calibrated for five rain events measured
in May 2014 (Fig. 2). Width, slope, imperviousness percentages,
Mannings roughness coefficients, depression storage, and infiltration parameters (Green-Ampt method) of subcatchments, and size,
length, and slope of stormwater pipelines were adjusted during the
calibration. The coefficients of determination (R2) for the five calibration events ranged from 0.371 to 0.876, while the root of mean
square errors (RMSE) ranged from 2.57 L/s to 10.56 L/s (Fig. 2). The
accuracy of the calibrated model meets the required level for this
study to evaluate the changes of the water budget due to GI
applications.
2.3. Scenarios
Three scenarios were simulated: baseline (BL), green infrastructure (GI), and natural hydrology (NH). In the NH scenario, the
catchment was modeled as being covered with native grasslands
like wheatgrass and bluegrass (Ehleringer et al., 1992), as the open
meadow is the dominant landscape at the foothill environment
next to the study catchment. Green roofs and bioretention were
implemented in the catchment for the GI scenario. The numbers
and the sizes of green roofs and bioretention were determined by
designing them to reduce the 1-year stormwater runoff volume
by 80%, which corresponds to an amount consistent with goals
for stormwater quality management plans (Horner et al., 2004;
Sullivan et al., 2010). SWMM simulations were executed with
green roofs and bioretention iteratively added to the BL scenario
until 80% runoff reduction was achieved. The green roofs were
placed on flat roofs and bioretention was placed on open ground
areas. These units were configured to match the existing designs
and recommendations for the climate of SLC (Houdeshel et al.,
2012; Houdeshel and Pomeroy, 2014).
The bioretention units were parameterized in SWMM to match
instrumented test units on the University of Utah campus (Orr,
747
2013) with a 0.6 m soil layer (porosity: 0.43, field capacity: 0.21,
conductivity: 38.83 mm/h) and a 0.6 m gravel layer (void ratio:
0.6). Bottoms were lined with underdrains with a 15 mm/h drain
rate. Green roofs were modeled to mimic an existing green roof
on the Marriott Library on the University of Utah campus, which
has a 254 mm medium layer (porosity: 0.58, field capacity: 0.48,
conductivity: 81.28 mm/h) and a 25.4 mm drainage mat (void
ratio: 0.6) (Feng, 2016). Green roof underdrains were assumed to
have the same drainage rate as the bioretention units.
The hydrologic performance of GI may greatly depend on the
local weather conditions (Nawaz et al., 2015). Three years were
selected for the simulations used in this study, based on the availability of the data and the relative magnitudes compared to the
annual average precipitation (409 mm). It is difficult to find three
years having total precipitation depths perfectly distributed
around the annual average while not having missing weather
observations at the study site. Therefore, in spite of the precipitation depth being close to the annual average, 2012 (371 mm)
was assumed to represent a dry year for this study. Although the
precipitation depth of 2014 is higher than the annual average
(482 mm), it was assumed to be the average year for this study.
And 2011 (688 mm) was assumed to be the wet year for this study
(Fig. 3). Initial soil moisture was assumed to be zero for all three
scenarios to exclude its influence on the comparison. SWMM
simulations were independently executed for the calendar years
(January 1 to December 31) for each of these three years at a
748
3. Results
3.1. Annual water budgets
Across all three studied years, the BL scenario always had the
largest stormwater discharge volume (Fig. 4). Specifically, the surface runoff increased from 41 mm in the NH scenario to 112 mm in
the BL scenario (171%) in the dry year, from 20 mm in the NH scenario to 104 mm in the BL scenario (416%) in the average year, and
from 30 mm to 152 mm (412%) in the wet year. The GI scenario,
however, had a closer surface discharge amount to the NH scenario, where surface discharge is the sum of surface runoff and the discharge portion from the underdrains of GI units directed into the
stormwater drainage system. Compared to the NH scenario, the
surface discharge of GI scenario increased by 31 mm (76%) in the
dry year, 37 mm (182%) in the average year, and 56 mm (191%)
in the wet year. Compared to the BL scenario, GI reduced surface
runoff by 39 mm (35%) in the dry year, 47 mm (45%) in the average
year, and 66 mm (43%) in the wet year.
ETa was the dominant component of the water budget, as it
accounted for 6063%, 7175%, and 8295% of the water budget
for the BL, GI, and NH scenarios, respectively (Fig. 4). The BL scenario had the lowest ETa amounts compared to the other two scenarios (Fig. 4), as expected. Specifically, ETa decreased from
315 mm in the NH scenario to 232 mm in the BL scenario (26%)
in the dry year, from 396 mm in the NH scenario to 287 mm in
the BL scenario (28%) in the average year, and from 650 mm to
416 mm (36%) in the wet year. The GI scenario, had closer ETa
amounts compared to NH scenario, with ETa being lower than
the NH scenario by 40 mm (13%) in the dry year, 54 mm (14%) in
the average year, and 130 mm (20%) in the wet year. Compared
to the BL scenario, GI restored annual ETa amounts by 43 mm
(18%), 55 mm (19%), and 104 mm (25%) for the dry, average, and
wet years, respectively.
Overall, development raised surface runoff annually by 171%,
416%, and 412% in dry, average and wet years, and reduced ETa
amounts by 26%, 28%, and 36%, respectively. GI reduced annual
surface runoff by 35%, 45%, and 43% and restored annual ETa
amounts by 18%, 19%, and 25% in the dry, average, and wet years,
respectively, compared to the BL scenario.
After retention in the surface storage (surface wetting and GI
storage) and discharge as surface runoff, the remaining infiltrated
Fig. 4. Water budgets of the baseline scenario (BL), the green infrastructure
scenario (GI), and the natural hydrology scenario (NH) in dry (2012), average
(2014), and wet (2011) years. (For interpretation of the references to color in this
figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 5. Simulated monthly water budgets for the average water year (2014). The
three stacked columns of each month from left to right represent BL, GI, and NH
scenarios, respectively. (Note: percolated water volumes are too small to be seen at
the bottom of each stack for most months.)
749
Fig. 6. Daily soil moisture storage, surface storage, ETa, and surface discharge for the average precipitation year (2014).
750
Fig. 7. Hourly surface storage, soil moisture storage, and ETa rates simulated by the updated SWMM from June 17th to June 18th in the average precipitation year (2014).
Fig. 8. A comparison of ETa fractions of predeveloped site water budgets for a range of climates.
751
Fig. 9. A comparison of ETa fractions of developed site water budgets for a range of study sites/climates.
study (Trinh and Chui, 2013), in which ETa was also found to be the
greatest contributing factor for all scenarios including predevelopment, postdevelopment, and a restoration scenario using green
roofs and bioretentions, even if ETa was only measured as 5% of
its own total water balance of a plot-scale green roof. However,
the ETa fractions of the water budget in this study are mostly
higher than other studies in wetter climates. ETa accounts for
6063%, 7175%, and 8295% of the water budgets in the BL, GI,
and NH scenarios, which also matches other findings that an
increase in vegetation coverage tends to raise the ETa fraction of
the urban water budget (Yao et al., 2014; Yeakley, 2014).
4.2. Water budget changes due to development
Although multiple factors have a mixed influence in increasing
or decreasing urban ETa ratios, the overall effect of urbanization is
to typically decrease ETa amounts due to vegetation reduction. For
example, due to urbanization, ETa was estimated to drop by 31%
(compared to annual average) by a study of 51 eastern U.S. watersheds (Dow and DeWalle, 2000b), 25% (compared to predevelopment condition) by a study in Leipzig, Germany (Haase, 2009),
22% (compared to predevelopment condition) by a study in the
Mill Creek watershed in Cincinnati, OH (Chenevey, 2013), and
23% (compared to predevelopment condition) by a study in the
Qinhuai river basin, China (Hao et al., 2015). In the present study,
the BL scenario experienced a decrease of ETa by 2636% from the
NH scenario, which is slightly higher than estimates by the other
published studies.
Furthermore, the BL surface runoff in this study was 171412%
greater than the surface runoff in the NH scenario. This increase is
greater than most studies in wetter climates, like the 182% increase
found in Leipzig, Germany (Haase, 2009) and the 128% increase in
Cincinnati, Ohio (Chenevey, 2013). This may indicate that the
water budget may experience more severe changes after development in semi-arid climates than in wetter climates.
4.3. Water budget restoration by GI
The potential to restore the natural water budget depends on
the type of GI selected. Different GI types can target different parts
752
Table 1
ETa and runoff restorations created by the pervious areas changes in the average
precipitation year (2014).
Transitions
Percent of replaced
impervious area of
the total catchment
(%)
Percent of ETa
increase of the
total water
budget (%)
Percent of runoff
decrease of the
total water budget
(%)
BL -> NH
BL -> GI
54
13
23
11
17
10
WBRC 1
X
f i jf 0i f i j ;
Dry Year
Average Year
Wet Year
Villarreal et al. (2004)
Chenevey (2013)
Holman-Dodds et al. (2003)
BL
GI
NH
0.79
0.80
0.67
0.84
0.81
0.90
0.90
0.82
0.85
0.87
0.88
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
arid climate than the humid climate. After GI was applied, the
water budgets have achieved 90%, 90%, and 82% of the predevelopment state in the dry, average, and wet years, respectively.
WBRC can also be used to evaluate how far the urban water
budget can be changed away from the predevelopment condition
due to urbanization. In the BL scenario, the WBRC of this study is
all lower than other studies in wetter climates. This may further
support the inference as above that the water budget may vary
more severely after development, and GI may be more effective
to restore the water budget in the semi-arid climate compared
with humid climate. But when the precipitation is higher, the
restoration effect may become closer to the wetter climate, like
the case of the GI scenario in the wet year (Table 2).
5. Conclusion
The effect of GI in restoring the urban water budget to predeveloped conditions was explored in the semi-arid climate of Salt Lake
City, Utah. Three scenarios (BL, GI, and NH) were compared in three
types of precipitation years (dry, average, and wet). Water budget
variations among scenarios and water years were presented to
analyze the effect and mechanism of GI to restore the catchments
natural water budget.
The GI scenario was shown to produce a water budget closer to
the NH scenario than the BL scenario in all three types of precipitation years. ETa accounts for 6063%, 7175%, and 8295% of
the water budget for the BL, GI, and NH scenarios, respectively,
which are relatively higher than the ratios found by other studies
in wetter climates. Compared to the predeveloped condition, the
surface discharge of the developed condition is raised by 171%,
416%, and 412% in the dry, average, and wet years, respectively;
ETa was reduced by 26%, 28%, and 36%, correspondingly. Compared
to the developed condition, GI annually reduces surface runoff by
35%, 45%, and 43% and restores ETa amounts by 18%, 19%, and
25% for the dry, average, and wet years, respectively. The proposed
WBRC further supports the hypothesis that GI can restore the
urban water budget close to the natural hydrology. Based on the
proposed WBRC, the water budgets have been restored due to GI
applications by 14%, 13%, and 22% in the dry, average, and wet
years. After GI was applied, the water budgets have achieved
90%, 90%, and 82% of the predevelopment state in the dry, average,
and wet years, respectively.
Comparison with other studies indicates the water budget may
vary more severely after development, and GI may be more effective to restore the water budget in a semi-arid climate than more
humid climates. But when the precipitation amount becomes closer between the climate types, the restoration effect becomes less
different. The results and the WBRC developed by this study would
be useful in practice to support quantifying the stormwater credit
for the new stormwater management guidelines like Envision and
LEED.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the NSF EPSCoR grant IIA
1208732 awarded to Utah State University, as part of the State of
Utah EPSCoR Research Infrastructure Improvement Award. Additional support was provided by the Global Change and Sustainability Center at the University of Utah in collaboration with the iUTAH
EPSCoR Program. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. The
authors want to thank the Urban Water Research Group at the
University of Utah for their dedicated support to this project, and
Will McDonald for his contributions to land cover classifications
753
based on Lidar data and satellite images. The authors are also
grateful for the received insightful suggestions from anonymous
reviewers and editors.
References
Alexandri, E., Jones, P., 2008. Temperature decreases in an urban canyon due to
green walls and green roofs in diverse climates. Build. Environ. 43 (4), 480493.
Alfredo, K., Montalto, F., Goldstein, A., 2010. Observed and modeled performances of
prototype green roof test plots subjected to simulated low- and high-intensity
precipitations in a laboratory experiment. J. Hydrol. Eng. 15 (6), 444457.
Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., Smith, M., 1998. Crop Evapotranspiration
Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements FAO Irrigation and
Drainage Paper 56. FAO - Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations, Rome.
Ambrose, R.F., Winfrey, B.K., 2015. Comparison of stormwater biofiltration systems
in Southeast Australia and Southern California. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev.: Water 2
(2), 131146.
Aragao, L.E.O.C., 2012. Environmental science: the rainforests water pump. Nature
489 (7415), 217218.
Arnow, T., Mattick, R.E., 1968. Thickness of Valley Fill in the Jordan Valley East of
Great Salt Lake, Utah. 600B.
Astaraie-Imani, M., Kapelan, Z., Fu, G., Butler, D., 2012. Assessing the combined
effects of urbanisation and climate change on the river water quality in an
integrated urban wastewater system in the UK. J. Environ. Manage. 112 (0), 19.
Baik, J.-J., Kwak, K.-H., Park, S.-B., Ryu, Y.-H., 2012. Effects of building roof greening
on air quality in street canyons. Atmos. Environ. 61 (0), 4855.
Bailey, H., 1979. Semi-arid climates: their definition and distribution. Agric. Semiarid Environ. Springer, 7397.
Bair, F.E., 1992. Weather of US Cities. Gale Research Incorporated.
Balling, R.C., Brazel, S.W., 1987. The impact of rapid urbanization on pan
evaporation in Phoenix, Arizona. J. Climatol. 7 (6), 593597.
Barrio, E.P.D., 1998. Analysis of the green roofs cooling potential in buildings.
Energy Build. 27 (2), 179193.
Barron, O.V., Barr, A.D., Donn, M.J., 2013. Effect of urbanisation on the water balance
of a catchment with shallow groundwater. J. Hydrol. 485 (0), 162176.
Bijoor, N.S., Pataki, D.E., Haver, D., Famiglietti, J.S., 2014. A comparative study of the
water budgets of lawns under three management scenarios. Urban Ecosyst. 17
(4), 10951117.
Boggs, J.L., Sun, G., 2011. Urbanization alters watershed hydrology in the Piedmont
of North Carolina. Ecohydrology 4 (2), 256264.
Booth, D.B. et al., 2004. Reviving urban streams: land use, hydrology, biology, and
human behavior. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 40 (5), 13511364.
Brown, R., Hunt, W., Davis, A., Traver, R., Olszewski, J., 2009. Bioretention/
bioinfiltration performance in the mid-Atlantic. In: Proceedings of the World
Environmental and Water Resources Congress, pp. 904913.
Brun, S.E., Band, L.E., 2000. Simulating runoff behavior in an urbanizing watershed.
Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 24 (1), 522.
Burian, S.J., Pomeroy, C.A., 2010. Urban impacts on the water cycle and potential
green infrastructure implications. In: Aitkenhead-Peterson, J., Volder, A. (Eds.),
Urban Ecosystem Ecology. American Society of Agronomy, pp. 277296.
Burian, S.J., Shepherd, J.M., 2005. Effect of urbanization on the diurnal rainfall
pattern in Houston. Hydrol. Process. 19 (5), 10891103.
Burns, M.J., Fletcher, T.D., Walsh, C.J., Ladson, A.R., Hatt, B.E., 2012. Hydrologic
shortcomings of conventional urban stormwater management and
opportunities for reform. Landscape Urban Plan. 105 (3), 230240.
Chapin III, F.S., Kofinas, G.P., Folke, C., Chapin, M.C., 2009. Principles of Ecosystem
Stewardship: Resilience-Based Natural Resource Management in a Changing
World. Springer Science & Business Media.
Chenevey, B., 2013. Development and Its Impact on the Water Balance of an Urban
Watershed M.S. Thesis. University of Cincinnati.
Chisala, B., Lerner, D., 2008. Distribution of sewer exfiltration to urban groundwater.
Proc. ICE-Water Manage. 161 (6), 333341.
Claessens, L., Hopkinson, C., Rastetter, E., Vallino, J., 2006. Effect of historical
changes in land use and climate on the water budget of an urbanizing
watershed. Water Resour. Res. 42 (3).
Culbertson, T.L., Hutchinson, S.L., 2004. Assessing Bioretention Cell Function in a
Midwest Continental Climate, 2004 ASAE Annual Meeting. American Society of
Agricultural and Biological Engineers, St. Joseph, Michigan, Ontario, Canada.
Currie, D.J., 1991. Energy and large-scale patterns of animal- and plant-species
richness. Am. Nat. 137 (1), 2749.
DeBusk, K., Hunt, W., Line, D., 2011. Bioretention outflow: does it mimic nonurban
watershed shallow interflow? J. Hydrol. Eng. 16 (3), 274279.
DiGiovanni, K., Montalto, F., Gaffin, S., Rosenzweig, C., 2013. Applicability of
classical predictive equations for the estimation of evapotranspiration from
urban green spaces: green roof results. J. Hydrol. Eng. 18 (1), 99107.
Dimoudi, A., Nikolopoulou, M., 2003. Vegetation in the urban environment:
microclimatic analysis and benefits. Energy Build. 35 (1), 6976.
Dow, C.L., DeWalle, D.R., 2000a. Trends in evaporation and Bowen Ratio on
urbanizing watersheds in eastern United States. Water Resour. Res. 36 (7),
18351843.
Dow, C.L., DeWalle, D.R., 2000b. Trends in evaporation and Bowen ratio on
urbanizing watersheds in eastern United States. Water Resour. Res. 36 (7),
18351843.
754
Du, J. et al., 2012. Assessing the effects of urbanization on annual runoff and flood
events using an integrated hydrological modeling system for Qinhuai River
basin, China. J. Hydrol. 464465 (0), 127139.
Ehleringer, J.R., Negus, N.C., Arnow, L.A., Arnow, T., McNulty, I.B., 1992. Red Butte
Canyon Research Natural Area: history, flora, geology, climate, and ecology. RED
52 (2).
Elliott, A.H., Trowsdale, S.A., 2007. A review of models for low impact urban
stormwater drainage. Environ. Modell. Softw. 22 (3), 394405.
Ellis, J.B., 2013. Sustainable surface water management and green infrastructure in
UK urban catchment planning. J. Environ. Plan. Manage. 56 (1), 2441.
Ellis, J.B., Viavattene, C., 2014. Sustainable urban drainage system modeling for
managing urban surface water flood risk. CLEAN Soil, Air, Water 42 (2), 153
159.
Eltahir, E.A.B., 1998. A soil moisturerainfall feedback mechanism: 1. Theory and
observations. Water Resour. Res. 34 (4), 765776.
Eubank, M.E., Brough, R.C., 1979. Mark Eubanks Utah Weather. Weatherbank.
Falkenmark, M., Rockstrm, J., 2004. Balancing Water for Humans and Nature: The
New Approach in Ecohydrology. Earthscan.
Fassman, E., Blackbourn, S., 2010. Urban runoff mitigation by a permeable
pavement system over impermeable soils. J. Hydrol. Eng. 15 (6), 475485.
Feng, Y., 2016. Potential of Stormwater Green Infrastructure to Recreate the Natural
Water Budget of a Semiarid Urban Catchment Doctoral Dissertation. The
University of Utah.
Feng, Y., Burian, S., 2016. Improving evapotranspiration mechanisms in the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agencys Storm Water Management Model. J. Hydrol.
Eng. 21 (10). http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/%28ASCE%29HE.19435584.0001419.
Fioretti, R., Palla, A., Lanza, L.G., Principi, P., 2010. Green roof energy and water
related performance in the Mediterranean climate. Build. Environ. 45 (8), 1890
1904.
Fletcher, T.D., Andrieu, H., Hamel, P., 2013. Understanding, management and
modelling of urban hydrology and its consequences for receiving waters: a state
of the art. Adv. Water Resour. 51 (0), 261279.
Foley, J.A. et al., 2005. Global consequences of land use. Science 309 (5734), 570
574.
Foster, S.S.D., Morris, B.L., Lawrence, A.R., 1994. 3. Effects of urbanization on
groundwater recharge. In: Wilkinson, W.B. (Ed.), Groundwater Problems in
Urban Areas, pp. 4363.
Gartland, L., 2010. Heat Islands: Understanding and Mitigating Heat in Urban Areas.
Routledge.
Getter, K.L., Rowe, D.B., 2006. The role of extensive green roofs in sustainable
development. HortScience 41 (5), 12761285.
Gillies, R.R., Brim Box, J., Symanzik, J., Rodemaker, E.J., 2003. Effects of urbanization
on the aquatic fauna of the Line Creek watershed, Atlantaa satellite
perspective. Remote Sens. Environ. 86 (3), 411422.
Gbel, P., Coldewey, W.G., 2013. Concept for near-natural storm water control in
urban areas. Environ. Earth Sci. 70 (5), 19451950.
Gbel, P. et al., 2004. Near-natural stormwater management and its effects on the
water budget and groundwater surface in urban areas taking account of the
hydrogeological conditions. J. Hydrol. 299 (34), 267283.
Gober, P. et al., 2009. Using watered landscapes to manipulate urban heat island
effects: how much water will it take to cool Phoenix? J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 76 (1),
109121.
Gober, P. et al., 2012. Tradeoffs between water conservation and temperature
amelioration in Phoenix and Portland: implications for urban sustainability.
Urban Geogr. 33 (7), 10301054.
Grimmond, C.S.B., Oke, T.R., 1986. Urban water balance: 2. Results from a suburb of
Vancouver, British Columbia. Water Resour. Res. 22 (10), 14041412.
Guan, M., Sillanp, N., Koivusalo, H., 2015a. Modelling and assessment of
hydrological changes in a developing urban catchment. Hydrol. Process. 29
(13), 28802894.
Guan, M., Sillanp, N., Koivusalo, H., 2015b. Assessment of LID practices for
restoring pre-development runoff regime in an urbanized catchment in
southern Finland. Water Sci. Technol. 71 (10), 14851491.
Guan, M., Sillanp, N., Koivusalo, H., 2016. Storm runoff response to rainfall
pattern, magnitude and urbanization in a developing urban catchment. Hydrol.
Process. 30 (4), 543557.
Gwenzi, W., Nyamadzawo, G., 2014. Hydrological impacts of urbanization and
urban roof water harvesting in water-limited catchments: a review. Environ.
Process. 1 (4), 573593.
Haase, D., 2009. Effects of urbanisation on the water balance a long-term
trajectory. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 29 (4), 211219.
Hand, L.M., Shepherd, J.M., 2009. An investigation of warm-season spatial rainfall
variability in Oklahoma City: possible linkages to urbanization and prevailing
wind. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol. 48 (2), 251269.
Hao, L. et al., 2015. Urbanization dramatically altered the water balances of a paddy
field-dominated basin in southern China. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 19 (7), 3319
3331.
Hasse, J.E., Lathrop, R.G., 2003. Land resource impact indicators of urban sprawl.
Appl. Geogr. 23 (23), 159175.
He, B., Wang, Y., Takase, K., Mouri, G., Razafindrabe, B.N., 2009. Estimating land use
impacts on regional scale urban water balance and groundwater recharge.
Water Resour. Manage 23 (9), 18631873.
He, M., Hogue, T., 2012. Integrating hydrologic modeling and land use projections
for evaluation of hydrologic response and regional water supply impacts in
semi-arid environments. Environ. Earth Sci. 65 (6), 16711685.
Hibbs, B.J., Sharp, J.M., 2012. Hydrogeological impacts of urbanization. Environ. Eng.
Geosci. 18 (1), 324.
Holman-Dodds, J.K., Bradley, A.A., Potter, K.W., 2003. Evaluation of hydrologic
benefits of infiltration based urban storm water management. J. Am. Water
Resour. Assoc. 39 (1), 205215.
Horner, R.R., Lim, H., Burges, S.J., 2004. Hydrologic Monitoring of the Seattle UltraUrban Stormwater Management Projects: Summary of the 20002003 Water
Years. Water Resources Series Technical Report, 181.
Houdeshel, C.D., Pomeroy, C.A., Hultine, K.R., 2012. Bioretention design for xeric
climates based on ecological principles. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 48 (6),
11781190.
Houdeshel, D., Pomeroy, C., 2014. Storm-water bioinfiltration as no-irrigation
landscaping alternative in semiarid climates. J. Irrig. Drainage Eng. 140 (2),
06013004.
Interlandi, S.J., Crockett, C.S., 2003. Recent water quality trends in the Schuylkill
River, Pennsylvania, USA: a preliminary assessment of the relative influences of
climate, river discharge and suburban development. Water Res. 37 (8), 1737
1748.
Jacobson, C.R., 2011. Identification and quantification of the hydrological impacts of
imperviousness in urban catchments: a review. J. Environ. Manage. 92 (6),
14381448.
Jarden, K.M., Jefferson, A.J., Grieser, J.M., 2016. Assessing the effects of catchmentscale urban green infrastructure retrofits on hydrograph characteristics. Hydrol.
Process. 10 (15), 15361550. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hyp.
10736/abstract.
Jeppesen, J., Christensen, S., Ladekarl, U.L., 2011. Modelling the historical water
cycle of the Copenhagen area 18502003. J. Hydrol. 404 (34), 117129.
Jung, M. et al., 2010. Recent decline in the global land evapotranspiration trend due
to limited moisture supply. Nature 467, 951954.
Kaufmann, R.K. et al., 2007. Climate response to rapid urban growth: evidence of a
human-induced precipitation deficit. J. Clim. 20 (10), 22992306.
Kelly, R.P. et al., 2011. Mitigating local causes of ocean acidification with existing
laws. Science 332 (6033), 10361037.
Keler, S., Meyer, B., Seeling, S., Tressel, E., Krein, A., 2012. Influence of near-tonature stormwater management on the local water balance using the example
of an urban development area. Water Environ. Res. 84 (5), 441451.
Kidmose, J., Troldborg, L., Refsgaard, J.C., Bischoff, N., 2015. Coupling of a distributed
hydrological model with an urban storm water model for impact analysis of
forced infiltration. J. Hydrol. 525, 506520.
Kingston, D.G., Todd, M.C., Taylor, R.G., Thompson, J.R., Arnell, N.W., 2009.
Uncertainty in the estimation of potential evapotranspiration under climate
change. Geophys. Res. Lett. 36 (20), L20403.
Koster, R.D. et al., 2004. Regions of strong coupling between soil moisture and
precipitation. Science 305 (5687), 11381140.
Krayenhoff, E.S., Voogt, J.A., 2010. Impacts of urban albedo increase on local air
temperature at daily-annual time scales: model results and synthesis of
previous work. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol. 49 (8), 16341648.
Krebs, G., Kuoppamki, K., Kokkonen, T., Koivusalo, H., 2016. Simulation of green
roof test bed runoff. Hydrol. Process. 30 (2), 250262.
Kumar, R., Kaushik, S.C., 2005. Performance evaluation of green roof and shading for
thermal protection of buildings. Build. Environ. 40 (11), 15051511.
Lazzarin, R.M., Castellotti, F., Busato, F., 2005. Experimental measurements and
numerical modelling of a green roof. Energy Build. 37 (12), 12601267.
Lee, J., Heaney, J., 2003. Estimation of urban imperviousness and its impacts on
storm water systems. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage. 129 (5), 419426.
Lerner, D.N., 1990. Groundwater recharge in urban areas. Atmos. Environ. Part B:
Urban Atmos. 24 (1), 2933.
Lerner, D.N., 2002. Identifying and quantifying urban recharge: a review. HYJO 10
(1), 143152.
Lerner, D.N., Barrett, M.H., 1996. Urban groundwater issues in the United Kingdom.
HYJO 4 (1), 8089.
Levallius, J., 2005. Green Roofs on Municipal Buildings in Lund: Modeling Potential
Environmental Benefits. Lund University, Sweden.
Li, H., Sharkey, L., Hunt, W., Davis, A., 2009. Mitigation of impervious surface
hydrology using bioretention in North Carolina and Maryland. J. Hydrol. Eng. 14
(4), 407415.
Liu, Y.B., Gebremeskel, S., De Smedt, F., Hoffmann, L., Pfister, L., 2006. Predicting
storm runoff from different land-use classes using a geographical information
system-based distributed model. Hydrol. Process. 20 (3), 533548.
Loperfido, J.V., Noe, G.B., Jarnagin, S.T., Hogan, D.M., 2014. Effects of distributed and
centralized stormwater best management practices and land cover on urban
stream hydrology at the catchment scale. J. Hydrol. 519 (Part C(0)), 25842595.
Mariotti, A., Struglia, M.V., Zeng, N., Lau, K.M., 2002. The hydrological cycle in the
Mediterranean region and implications for the water budget of the
Mediterranean Sea. J. Clim. 15 (13), 16741690.
Merrell, D.J., 2013. A Two-Dimensional Storm Drain Model for Cyber-Infrastructures
for Water Resources M.S. Thesis. Brigham Young University.
Mitchell, V.G., Cleugh, H.A., Grimmond, C.S.B., Xu, J., 2008. Linking urban water
balance and energy balance models to analyse urban design options. Hydrol.
Process. 22 (16), 28912900.
Moglia, M., Perez, P., Burn, S., 2010. Modelling an urban water system on the edge of
chaos. Environ. Modell. Softw. 25 (12), 15281538.
Monteith, J.L., 1965. Evaporation and environment. In: Fogg, G.E. (Ed.), Symposium
of the Society for Experimental Biology, The State and Movement of Water in
Living Organisms. Academic Press, Inc., NY, Swansea, pp. 205234.
Narain, S., 2012. Sanitation for all. Nature 486 (7402), 185.
755
Sun, T., Bou-Zeid, E., Wang, Z.-H., Zerba, E., Ni, G.-H., 2013. Hydrometeorological
determinants of green roof performance via a vertically-resolved model for heat
and water transport. Build. Environ. 60, 211224.
Takebayashi, H., Moriyama, M., 2007. Surface heat budget on green roof and high
reflection roof for mitigation of urban heat island. Build. Environ. 42 (8), 2971
2979.
Taylor, C.M., de Jeu, R.A.M., Guichard, F., Harris, P.P., Dorigo, W.A., 2012. Afternoon
rain more likely over drier soils. Nature 489 (7416), 423426.
Thompson, J.R., Green, A.J., Kingston, D.G., 2014. Potential evapotranspirationrelated uncertainty in climate change impacts on river flow: an assessment for
the Mekong River basin. J. Hydrol. 510 (0), 259279.
Trinh, D.H., Chui, T.F.M., 2013. Assessing the hydrologic restoration of an urbanized
area via an integrated distributed hydrological model. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 17
(12), 47894801.
U.S. Geological Survey, 2015. Groundwater Watch at Site 404531111510101.
USEPA, 2000. Stormwater Phase II Final Rule Fact Sheet.
USEPA, 2008. Reducing Urban Heat Islands: Compendium of Strategies.
Villarreal, E.L., Semadeni-Davies, A., Bengtsson, L., 2004. Inner city stormwater
control using a combination of best management practices. Ecol. Eng. 22 (45),
279298.
Vrsmarty, C.J., Green, P., Salisbury, J., Lammers, R.B., 2000. Global water
resources: vulnerability from climate change and population growth. Science
289 (5477), 284288.
Voyde, E., Fassman, E., Simcock, R., 2010a. Hydrology of an extensive living roof
under sub-tropical climate conditions in Auckland, New Zealand. J. Hydrol. 394
(34), 384395.
Voyde, E., Fassman, E., Simcock, R., Wells, J., 2010b. Quantifying evapotranspiration
rates for New Zealand green roofs. Hydrol. Eng. 15 (6), 395403.
Walsh, C.J. et al., 2016. Principles for urban stormwater management to protect
stream ecosystems. Freshwater Sci. 35 (1), 398411. http://www.journals.
uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/685284.
Wella-Hewage, C.S., Alankarage Hewa, G., Pezzaniti, D., 2016. Can water sensitive
urban design systems help to preserve natural channel-forming flow regimes in
an urbanised catchment? Water Sci. Technol. 73 (1), 7887.
Weng, Q., 2001. Modeling urban growth effects on surface runoff with the
integration of remote sensing and GIS. Environ. Manage. 28 (6), 737748.
White, M.D., Greer, K.A., 2006. The effects of watershed urbanization on the stream
hydrology and riparian vegetation of Los Peasquitos Creek, California.
Landscape Urban Plan. 74 (2), 125138.
Whitford, V., Ennos, A.R., Handley, J.F., 2001. City form and natural process
indicators for the ecological performance of urban areas and their application to
Merseyside, UK. Landscape Urban Plan. 57 (2), 91103.
Wijesekara, G.N. et al., 2012. Assessing the impact of future land-use changes on
hydrological processes in the Elbow River watershed in southern Alberta,
Canada. J. Hydrol. 412413 (0), 220232.
Wong, G.K.L., Jim, C.Y., 2015. Identifying keystone meteorological factors of greenroof stormwater retention to inform design and planning. Landscape Urban
Plan. 143, 173182.
Wu, H., 2015. Protecting Stream Ecosystem Health in the Face of Rapid Urbanization
and Climate Change Ph.D. Dissertation. The University of Oregon.
Xiao, F., Simcik, M.F., Gulliver, J.S., 2012. Perfluoroalkyl acids in urban stormwater
runoff: influence of land use. Water Res. 46 (20), 66016608.
Yang, J., Wang, Z.-H., Georgescu, M., Chen, F., Tewari, M., 2016. Assessing the impact
of enhanced hydrological processes on urban hydrometeorology with
application to two cities in contrasting climates. J. Hydrometeorol. 17 (4),
10311047.
Yao, L., Wei, W., Chen, L., 2016. How does imperviousness impact the urban rainfallrunoff process under various storm cases? Ecol. Ind. 60, 893905.
Yao, Y. et al., 2014. Estimation of the terrestrial water budget over northern China
by merging multiple datasets. J. Hydrol. 519 (Part A), 5068.
Yeakley, J.A., 2014. Urban Hydrology in the Pacific Northwest, Wild Salmonids in
the Urbanizing Pacific Northwest. Springer, pp. 5974.
Zahmatkesh, Z., Burian, S., Karamouz, M., Tavakol-Davani, H., Goharian, E., 2014.
Low-impact development practices to mitigate climate change effects on urban
stormwater runoff: case study of New York City. J. Irrig. Drainage Eng. 141 (1),
04014043.
Zgheib, S., Moilleron, R., Chebbo, G., 2012. Priority pollutants in urban stormwater:
Part 1 case of separate storm sewers. Water Res. 46 (20), 66836692.
Zhang, L., Kennedy, C., 2006. Determination of sustainable yield in urban
groundwater systems: Beijing, China. J. Hydrol. Eng. 11 (1), 2128.
Zhang, X., Zhang, X., Hu, S., Liu, T., Li, G., 2013. Runoff and sediment modeling in a
peri-urban artificial landscape: case study of Olympic Forest Park in Beijing. J.
Hydrol. 485 (0), 126138.