Using Smart Growth

Techniques as Stormwat

er Best

Management

Practices

Stormwater Best 

Management Practices 

Using Smart Growth Techniques as 
About the Image on the Cover 

The cover illustration depicts development that might occur as a result of the recently updated West Hyattsville (Maryland) Transit Oriented 

Development Overlay Zone. This area is served by the Metrorail (subway) and is home to the West Hyattsville Green Line station. The elements of the 

plan include many common features of transit oriented development (TOD): a compact footprint, development intensity focused on the station area, a 

rich mix of uses and housing types, and a variety of transportation options. These features, as illustrated in this publication, also have benefits related to 

preventing and managing stormwater, in particular, when considered at the watershed, neighborhood, and site levels simultaneously. The compact 

design can accommodate a higher intensity of development on a smaller footprint. This format, oriented toward transit and pedestrian travel, also 

lessens the imperviousness related to automobile-only travel. By accommodating a higher intensity of development in this preferred area, demand that 

might go elsewhere in the undeveloped parts of the watershed is absorbed. 

The West Hyattsville TOD Plan goes further to address water and stormwater throughout the planning area. There is a heavy emphasis on open space, 

active parks, and integrated stormwater management. In developing the plan, use of natural drainage patterns and habitat restoration were coupled with 

development of parks, fields, and trails. 

Image courtesy of PB PlaceMaking and the Maryland National Capital Parks and Planning Commission - Prince George’s County Planning Department. 
Acknowledgements 

The principal author, Lisa Nisenson from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) 

Development, Community and Environment Division, acknowledges the contributions and 

insights of the following people: Barbara Yuhas, International City/County Managers 

Association; Ben Stupka, Michigan Environmental Council; Bill Spikowski, Spikowski 

Planning Associates; Cheryl Kollin, American Forests; Chet Arnold, the University of 

Connecticut, Non-Point Source Education for Municipal Officials; Don Chen, Smart Growth 

America; Dreux Watermolen, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources; Frank Sagona, 

Southeastern Watershed Forum; Dan Emerine, International City/County Managers 

Association; Diana Keena, City of Emeryville (California); G.B. Arrington, PB Placemaking; 

George Hawkins, New Jersey Future; Harry Dodson, Dodson Associates Limited; James 

Hencke, PB Placemaking; Jeff Tumlin, Nelson/Nygaard Consulting; John Jacob, Texas Sea 

Grant Program; Kathy Blaha, Trust for Public Land; Linda Domizio, Massachusetts 

Department of Environmental Protection; Michael Bateman, Stormwater360; Milt Rhodes, 

Dover-Kohl Partners; Rebecca Finn, City of Elm Grove (Wisconsin); Rob Stueteville, New 

Urban News; Steve Tracy, Local Government Commission; Tom Davenport, EPA Region 5; and 

Tom Low, Duany-Plater Zyberk. 

In addition, contributors and reviewers from the EPA team: Geoff Anderson, Chris Forinash, 

Kevin Nelson, Lee Sobel, Lynn Richards, Jamal Kadri, Jenny Molloy, Kol Peterson, Rod 

Frederick, Robert Goo, Nikos Singelis, Ryan Albert, and Sylvia Malm. 

ICF Consulting produced an initial draft of this document under EPA contract 2W0921NBLX 

for the Development, Community, and Environment Division; Office of Policy, Economics and 

Innovation. Eastern Research Group edited and designed the report. 

To request additional copies of this report, contact EPA’s National Service Center for 

Environmental Publications at (800) 490-9198 or e-mail at ncepimal@one.net and ask for 

publication number EPA 231-B-05-002. To access this report online, visit <www.epa.gov/ 

smartgrowth> or <www.smartgrowth.org>. 

Table of Contents 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7


SECTION 1: WHY STORMWATER? THE NEXUS BETWEEN LAND


DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS AND WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11


Summary of How Stormwater Runoff Is Regulated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12


Connecting Stormwater Management and Smart Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15


Smart Growth Techniques as Best Management Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20


SECTION 2: SPECIFIC SMART GROWTH TECHNIQUES AS STORMWATER


BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25


1. Regional Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27


2. Infill Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37


3. Redevelopment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48


4. Development Districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51


5. Tree and Canopy Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61


6. Parking Policies to Reduce Number of Spaces Needed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64


7. “Fix It First”Infrastructure Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71


8. Smart Growth Street Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75


9. Stormwater Utilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81


SECTION 3: RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .89


SECTION 4: NEW JERSEY—A CASE STUDY IN WEAVING STORMWATER AND


SMART GROWTH POLICIES TOGETHER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .99


Goals for Smart Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .99


Goals for Water and Stormwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .100


Specific Policies that Meet Both Water 


and Smart Growth Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .100


ACRONYMS & GLOSSARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .105

Image: PB PlaceMaking, Stull and Lee 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 7 

Communities around the country are 

adopting smart growth strategies to 

reach environmental, community, 

and economic goals. The environmental 

goals include water benefits that accrue 

when development strategies use compact 

development forms, a mix of uses, better use 

of existing infrastructure, and preservation of 

critical environmental areas. While the water 

quality and stormwater benefits of smart 

growth are widely acknowledged, there has 

been little explicit regulatory recognition of 

these benefits to date. 

Regulations under the National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 

stormwater program offer a structure for 

considering the water quality benefits associated with smart growth techniques. 

Compliance with federal, state, and local 

stormwater programs revolves around the 

use of “best management practices” (BMPs) 

to manage stormwater. Given the water 

benefits of smart growth at the site, 

EXECUTIVE


SUMMARY


neighborhood, and watershed levels, many 

smart growth techniques and policies are 

emerging as BMPs. 

The goal of this document is to help communities that have adopted smart growth policies and plans recognize the water benefits of 

those smart growth techniques and suggest 

ways to integrate those policies into 

stormwater planning and compliance. Taking 

credit for the work a community is already 

doing can be a low-cost and practical 

approach to meeting water quality goals and 

regulatory commitments. 

This document is related to a series of 

primers on smart growth. In 1999 and 2001, 

the International City/County Managers 

Association (ICMA) and the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

released two primers that each listed 100 

smart growth policies. In 2004, EPA released 

Protecting Water Resources with Smart Growth, 

which presented 75 policies directly related 
8 Executive Summary 

to water resources. This document also complements the EPA’s National Management 

Measures to Control Nonpoint Source 

Pollution from Urban Areas (2005). 

Who Can Use This Report? 

Stormwater and Water Quality 

Professionals: This document is written to 

help water professionals understand urban 

planning documents to determine where 

stormwater improvements might already be 

included. This document can also be helpful 

to consultants who are helping communities 

develop comprehensive stormwater and 

planning documents, outreach programs, and 

compliance tracking. 

Communities Regulated Under Phases I & II 

of the NPDES Stormwater Program: More 

than 6,000 communities are now required to 

develop stormwater management plans to 

comply with the NPDES requirements. As 

NPDES permits issued since 1990 under 

Phase I come up for renewal, this document 

offers innovative measures for further 

improving stormwater management through 

redevelopment, infill, urban parks, and green 

building techniques. Communities under 

Phase II are likely to be developing their 

stormwater management plans, guidance 

materials, and ordinances. 

Local Land Use and Transportation 

Planners: Just as stormwater engineers are 

taking on more of an urban planning role, 

land use and transportation planners should 

consider the practice of stormwater control in 

ways that go beyond pipes, ponds, and gutters. This document introduces the concept 

of joint land use, transportation, and water 

planning as a way of providing water quality 

protection and satisfying regulatory commitments for compliance with local stormwater 

management plans and NPDES permits. 

Zoning Administrators: Language in many 

federal and state model stormwater ordinances call for the development of “ordinances or other regulatory mechanisms” for 

implementation of new stormwater rules. 

Phot

Most stormwater that is 

o: NRCS 

collected from curbs and 

gutters flows untreated 

into local waterways. 

Smart growth seeks to 

limit the number of outfalls in a watershed with 

compact development. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 9 

The elements related to stormwater ordinances are likely to address the same aspects 

of project design as zoning codes, for example, setbacks, street widths, landscaping and 

parking requirements. Zoning administrators 

should be involved in the development of 

stormwater ordinances so that conflicts do 

not arise among codes. 

City and County Managers: The stormwater 

requirements have focused attention on 

improving communications across various 

departments, from public works to transportation to subdivision planning. As new 

and revised stormwater rules are written at 

the local level, NPDES implementation has 

revealed the importance of pulling together 

traditionally autonomous departments to 

determine where separate departmental policies might pose barriers to efficient planning, 

investment, and environmental protection. 

City and county managers are often in a 

unique position to bridge planning and 

budgets and broker solutions where requirements developed by one department run 

counter to new smart growth plans. 

Developers: Developers, particularly those 

building within urbanized areas affected by 

NPDES stormwater rules, are facing new 

requirements for water quality and quantity. 

This document will help developers assess 

their smart growth projects, improve the 

stormwater handling on site, and define how 

their projects meet stormwater goals and the 

site, neighborhood, and regional level. 

Smart Growth Practitioners: Whether you 

are with a nonprofit organization, a local 

government office, or in private practice, 

your skills in reviewing and writing comprehensive environmental plans and policies can 

play a role in shaping joint smart growth and 

stormwater plans. Emerging stormwater programs offer a framework for constructive 

involvement. 

Talking About Compact Development – Homebuilders 

In 2005, the National Association of Homebuilders (NAHB) released talking points on compact 

development. They note that compact forms can include cluster development, higher-density 

development, mixed-used projects and traditional neighborhood developments. The 

Association encourages builders to review local ordinances to see where rules on set backs, 

infrastructure, street widths and the approval processes pose barriers or opportunities for compact development. In particular, the talking points mention alternative stormwater approaches 

to help support a more compact development form. 

See <www.nahb.org/generic.aspx?sectionID=628&genericContentID=17373>. 
Image: PB PlaceMaking, Stull and Lee 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 11 

SECTION 1 

Why Stormwater? The Nexus Between Land Development 

Patterns and Water Quality and Quantity 

S

ince 1972, implementation of 

the Clean Water Act (CWA) has shown 

success in controlling water pollution 

from point sources such as municipal wastewater treatment plants and industrial discharges. This progress is overshadowed, 

however, by the emergence of nonpoint 

source pollution as a main contributor to 

water quality problems. 

Nonpoint source (NPS) pollution comes 

from many diffuse sources. NPS pollution 

originates when rainfall or snowmelt moves 

over and through the ground. As the runoff 

moves, it picks up and carries away natural 

and human-made pollutants, finally 

depositing them into lakes, rivers, wetlands, 

coastal waters, and even underground 

sources of drinking water. 

These pollutants include: 

■ Excess fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides from agricultural lands and residential areas. 

■ Oil, grease, and toxic chemicals from 

urban runoff. 

■ Sediment from improperly managed construction sites, crop and forest lands, 

and eroding stream banks. 

■ Bacteria and nutrients from livestock, 

pet wastes, wildlife, and faulty septic 

systems. 

■ A myriad of other pollutants originating 

with a side variety of land based 

activities. 

■ Atmospheric deposition and hydromodification are also sources of nonpoint 

source pollution.1

For urban and urbanizing areas, these problems can largely be traced to activities that 

occur on the land. Whether the problem arises from lawn care chemicals, or motor oil and 

toxic metals from parking lots and streets, 

stormwater plays a large role in transporting 

pollutants to streams, drinking water sources, 

and other receiving water bodies. 
12 SECTION 1: Why Stormwater? 

While land development necessarily involves 

creation of impervious surfaces, how and 

where development takes place can influence 

the ultimate degree of environmental impact 

from the streets, rooftops, and yards. Where 

development has occurred on forest and 

undeveloped land, critical areas for infiltration and aquifer recharge that soaked up rainwater prior to development now export 

runoff to lower lying areas and local receiving 

water bodies. Water flowing over pavement 

absorbs heat, which impacts waterways that 

support cold water species. It also flows 

faster, thus delivering water in pulses. The 

faster flows can scour stream banks and 

accelerate erosion, while increased temperatures can spur excessive algal growth. The 

higher rate of vegetative growth can interfere 

with a variety of ecological, industrial and 

water filtration processes. Conventional construction practices have relied on mass clearing and grading. This practice compacts the 

soil surface and further prevents infiltration, 

even on lots overlain with turf. Thus, the 

generation of stormwater volume, as well as 

the pollutant load carried in that volume, is 

very much tied to how and where land is 

developed. 

Preserving open 

space, farmland 

and critical environmental areas 

is one of the 10 

smart growth 

principals. 

Summary of How 

Stormwater Runoff Is 

Regulated 

In 1972, Congress amended the Federal 

Water Pollution Control Act (subsequently 

referred to as the Clean Water Act) to control 

the discharges of pollutants to waters of the 

United States from point sources. Initial 

efforts to improve water quality using the 

National Pollution Discharge Elimination 

System (NPDES) focused primarily on 

reducing pollutants from industrial process 

wastewater and municipal sewage discharges. 

These sources were easily identified as 

responsible for poor—often drastically 

degraded—water quality conditions. 

As pollution control measures for industrial 

process wastewater and municipal sewage 

were implemented and refined, it became 

increasingly evident that more diffuse 

sources of water pollution were also significant causes of water quality impairment. 

Specifically, stormwater runoff was found to 

cause serious pollution problems. As a result 

Congress added section 402(p) of the Clean 

Water Act, which established a comprehensive, two-phase approach to stormwater control using the NPDES program. 

In 1990 EPA issued the Phase I stormwater 

rule (55 FR 47990; November 16, 1990) 

requiring NPDES permits for operators of 

municipal separate storm sewer systems 

(MS4s) serving populations greater than 

100,000 and for runoff associated with 

industrial activity, including runoff from construction sites 5 acres and larger. In 1999 

EPA issued the Phase II stormwater rule (64 

FR 68722; December 8, 1999) that expanded 

the requirements to small MS4s in urban 

areas and to construction sites between 1 

and 5 acres in size. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 13 

EPA has delegated NPDES permitting 

authority to all but five states, several territories, the District of Columbia, federal facilities in four states, and federal tribes. 

NPDES permits are reissued every five years 

to allow for modifications to meet changing 

conditions both with the discharge and with 

discharge standards and regulations. There 

are two standard types of NPDES permits: 1) 

An individual permit is issued to a single 

discharger, with customized requirements 

for that particular discharge. All Phase I 

MS4 permits are individual permits. 

2) General permits are usually statewide 

permits with requirements that apply to all 

discharges of a particular type or category. 

Most Phase II MS4 permits are general permits and require each permittee to develop a 

stormwater management plan that details 

how stormwater discharges from that 

particular MS4 will be controlled. Though 

they are not framed identically, the stormwater management requirements for Phase I 

and Phase II MS4s are very similar. The recommendations in this publication are applicable to all communities subject to the 

stormwater regulations. 

Evaluations of Phase I have shown that BMP 

maintenance continues to be a problem.2 

Both structural BMPs (e.g., sand filters) and 

nonstructural BMPs (e.g., swales) require 

periodic maintenance and care, which should 

be budgeted for and scheduled. As you read 

this document, think about the long-term 

maintenance program for smart growth techniques as BMPs to ensure that stormwater 

benefits are supported over time. 

To learn more, visit EPA’s stormwater program site at <www.epa.gov/npdes>. 

What Is an MS4? 

A municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) is a conveyance or system of conveyances (e.g., 

roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man-made 

channels, storm drains) that are: 

■ Owned or operated by a state, city, town, borough, county, parish, district, association, or 

other public body (created by or pursuant to state law) having jurisdiction over disposal of 

sewage, industrial wastes, stormwater, or other wastes, including special districts under state 

law such as a sewer district, flood control district, or drainage districts, or similar entity, or an 

Indian tribe or an authorized Indian tribal organization, or a designated and approved management agency under section 208 of the Clean Water Act that discharges to waters of the 

United States. 

■ Designed or used for collecting or conveying stormwater. 

■ Not a combined sewer. 

■ Not part of a publicly owned treatment works.


Though not explicit, many larger institutions, such as hospitals, universities, military bases,


and school districts fall under the definition, and thus must develop stormwater manage­


ment plans. If these institutions have been involved with local smart growth efforts, check


with them to see if there are smart growth elements in their stormwater management plan.

14 SECTION 1: Why Stormwater? 

Elements of a NPDES Stormwater Permit – What Stakeholders Should Look For 

States and municipalities are responsible for developing a suite 

of information under the NPDES stormwater program. As you 

look for the documents that will govern stormwater rules and 

policies, be aware that there are several permit types within the 

NPDES stormwater program, including industrial, multi-sector, 

and construction permits. While these are important permits for 

environmental protection, the MS4 NPDES stormwater permits 

are the focus of this document. Section 2 includes guidance on 

what to specifically look for within these materials. 

At the Federal Level: 

EPA has issued many guidance documents to assist states and 

localities. These publications include: 

■ Sample and General Permits 

■ Fact Sheets and Outreach Materials 

■ Permit Applications and Forms 

■ Policy and Guidance Documents 

■ Program Status Reports 

■ A Menu of Best Management Practices 

■ Technical and Issue Papers 

■ Case Studies 

■ See <http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/ 

stormwater/swphases.cfm>. 

For information, go the link on “Publications.” 

At the State Level: 

Under the NPDES program, delegated states are required to 

develop and implement stormwater management plans to 

reduce pollutant loadings to the maximum extent practicable. 

Delegated states oversee both Phase I and Phase II of the 

stormwater program, so plans may be listed as medium and 

large MS4s (Phase I) and small MS4s (Phase II). The Web site 

<www.stormwaterauthority.org> lists links to each state’s MS4 

stormwater program. The elements to look for include the following: 

■ A state permit: Most states have developed a General MS4 

permit, which establishes minimum requirements for permit coverage. Some states have also developed alternatives 

to the general permit, such as watershed permitting, to 

allow for customization and innovation. The permit lists the 

elements required to obtain permit coverage, which typically include: time tables; the minimum components of a 

stormwater management plan; and legal language defining 

responsibilities, enforcement, and penalties. 

■ Guidance documents: These documents are developed to 

assist localities as they write their stormwater management 

plans and develop menus of BMPs. 

■ State requirements: Many states have additional requirements to address special environmental needs; for example, 

special resource waters, water quality control in cold climates, 

or merging NPDES stormwater permitting with total maximum daily loads (TMDLs). 

■ Forms and maps 

At the Local Level: 

Check with your local environmental management or public 

works department to see if your locality has obtained NPDES 

permit coverage, or whether it is in the process of obtaining 

coverage. Although state requirements vary, most MS4s are 

required to submit the following documents: 

■ A Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) or Stormwater 

Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPP): For localities covered 

under Phase II, there are six minimum control measures. The 

SWMP should include strategies and BMPs for those 

measures: 

◗ Outreach


◗ Education


◗ Construction


◗ Post-Construction 


◗ Illicit Discharges Elimination 


◗ Pollution Prevention


Under the new rules, MS4s need to include measurable 

goals, and show how the SWMP relates to water quality 

goals. The minimum measures listed above were not part of 

the original permit structure for Phase I permits, though the 

general tasks were required. In reissuing stormwater permits, many permitting authorities are modifying the permits to more closely dovetail Phase I and Phase II 

requirements to make it easier for these communities to 

work together. 

■ Stormwater Ordinances: Most states require that MS4s 

develop ordinances or other regulatory mechanisms to 

implement stormwater management controls. As you read 

draft language for ordinances, be prepared to compare the 

proposed legal language with language in your local smart 

growth codes and alert stormwater managers to 

inconsistencies. 

■ Schedules for public meetings, regulation development, 

milestones and training. 

For more detailed information on water regulations and the 

Clean Water Act, see the River Network’s “Understanding the 

Clean Water Act” at <www.cleanwateract.org>. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 15 

Connecting Stormwater 

Management and Smart 

Growth 

Not so long ago, the predominant philosophy of stormwater control focused on flood 

control and directing water off an individual 

piece of property as quickly as possible. As 

towns grew, curbs, gutters, trenches, and 

pipes assisted the land use and stormwater 

planner alike in meeting this goal. While this 

turned out to be a successful strategy for 

individual properties, the additive effects of 

runoff from these individual properties on a 

watershed scale contributed to flooding and 

water quality problems. This has led water 

quality professionals to rethink stormwater 

control. 

As a result, water professionals began to look 

at development site plans for opportunities 

to lessen the volume of stormwater generated 

from individual development projects. Better 

site design practices, such as low impact 

development, emerged as mechanisms to 

retain a site’s natural hydrology and infiltrate 

stormwater within the boundaries of the 

development project. The conservation 

development movement was established—in 

particular, for new residential subdivisions. 

These new subdivisions sparked debate over 

the overall environmental attributes of conservation development projects, however. 

Observers noted that, while these developments offer water-handling benefits on site, 

they can contribute to wider land disturbance activities, transportation impacts, and 

other quality problems related to the growth 

that follows housing subdivisions. At the 

same time, urban developers increasingly 

Photo: EPA encountered resistance to infill and redevelopment projects based on predictions of 

additional stormwater-related impacts to 

urban streams. These discussions revealed 

the need for a more comprehensive view of 

the water quality impacts related to development, one that also considers a broader 

watershed context. 

This new view poses challenges to how states 

and localities approach stormwater control, 

whether the topic is measuring performance 

or issuing permits. Typically, the performance of stormwater control is assessed site by 

site, or project by project in the site plan 

approval process for subdivisions or commercial districts. Thus, a conservation subdivision might rate high for stormwater 

management based on certain performance 

criteria, even when it brings unanticipated 

growth to sensitive reaches of a watershed. 

Likewise, a new apartment building and 

retail complex might get a low rating for creating impervious surface on an urban lot, 

even though the project absorbed development demand that would have gone to a 

“greenfield” site on a much larger footprint. 

In both these examples, a complex set of 

environmental considerations relate to the 

project’s impact at the site, in the neighborhood, and at the watershed level. 

This supermarket in West 

Palm Beach Florida was 

part of a downtown redevelopment project. The 

store, which brings everyday uses closer to in-town 

residential areas, is a 

smaller format and is 

accessible by several 

modes of transportation. 
16 SECTION 1: Why Stormwater? 

How Does Density Relate to Runoff? The Site Level 

These three scenarios show how different housing densities on one acre can affect not only total runoff, but also runoff per house. 

Although the higher-density scenarios generate more stormwater per acre, they generate less total stormwater runoff and less 

stormwater runoff per house. Since most watershed growth is expected to be in the range of several thousand houses, not four or 

eight, the estimation of runoff based on per unit of housing is important. In addition, this illustration looks only at the lot and 

impervious cover related to the house footprint and driveway. 

Impervious cover = 

20 percent 

Total runoff (18,700 ft3/yr x 

8 acres) = 149,600 ft3/yr 

Runoff/house = 

18,700 ft3/yr 

Scenario A 

1 house/acre 

Impervious cover = 

38 percent 

Total runoff (24,800 ft3/yr x 

2 acres) = 49,600 ft3/yr 

Runoff/house = 

6,200 ft3/yr 

Scenario B 

4 houses/acre 

Impervious cover = 

65 percent 

Total runoff = 39,600 ft3/yr Runoff/house = 

4,950 ft3/yr 

Scenario C 

8 houses/acre 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 17 

How Does Density Relate to Runoff? The Watershed Level 

Housing density also affects the number of acres required to accommodate growth. At the site level, most regional 

and watershed managers are facing household growth estimates of several thousand units. By limiting housing production to one unit/acre, growth pressures do not cease, but rather growth goes elsewhere in the watershed, or 

expands to additional watersheds. Here, the higher-density scenarios consume fewer watersheds to accommodate 

the same number of houses. A fuller discussion of density and build-out is presented in EPA’s 2005 document 

Protecting Water Resources with Higher-Density Development. 

At one house per acre, 

80,000 houses require 

80,000 acres, or 8 watersheds, translating to: 

80,000 acres x 1 house x 

18,700 ft3 /yr of runoff 

1.496 billion ft3 /yr of 

stormwater runoff 

8 watersheds at 20 

percent impervious 

cover 

At four houses per acre, 

80,000 houses require 

20,000 acres, or 2 watersheds, translating to: 

20,000 acres x 4 houses x 

6,200 ft3 /yr of runoff 

496 million ft3 /yr of 

stormwater runoff 

2 watersheds at 38 

percent impervious 

cover 

At eight houses per acre, 

80,000 houses require 

10,000 acres, or 1 watershed, translating to: 

10,000 acres x 8 houses x 

4,950 ft3 /yr of runoff 

396 million ft3 /yr of 

stormwater runoff 

1 watershed at 65 

percent impervious cover 

Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C 
18 SECTION 1: Why Stormwater? 

Many states and communities are using 

smart growth planning as a way to deal with 

the complex analysis for future growth and 

development. Smart growth is best 

described as a set of 10 principles, presented in Table 1. 

While better stormwater management is not 

explicit in the 10 principles of smart growth, 

the water quality benefits are, quite literally, 

built in. These benefits typically emerge from 

policies that integrate local and regional 

decisions on transportation, housing, natural 

resources, and jobs. The interrelated benefits 

of smart growth are highlighted throughout 

this document and include: 

■ Compact Project and Community 

Design: One of the more powerful strategies for reducing the footprint of development, and hence the stormwater impacts, 

is to focus on compact development. For 

existing communities, policies to encourage infill and redevelopment can result in 

a smaller development footprint within 

the region. For new communities, compact designs that mix uses and cluster 

development help to accommodate development demand in a smaller area. 

Reducing the footprint of individual 

buildings can also be a strategy, though 

there are circumstances that call for 

greater lot coverage in districts where a 

higher development intensity is needed 

(for example, near transit stations). The 

compact form can also lend itself to more 

environmentally friendly transportation 

options, such as walking and biking. 

■ Street Design and Transportation 

Options: Well designed, compact communities are served by a highly connected 

street and trail system designed for multiple modes of transportation. The pattern 

need not be a grid, and in some areas, 

topography and environmentally sensitive 

areas will influence where roads go. 

Providing connections is the key to allow 

walking or bike trips, or to or to allow a 

“park once” trip for combining errands, 

recreation, and/or commuting. A compact 

district also provides for more efficient 

use (and reuse) of existing infrastructure. 

■ Mix of Uses: Another element that can 

contribute to decreasing the amount of 

stormwater generation lies in the development mix. By pulling a mix of jobs, housing, and commercial activities closer 

Table1: Smart Growth Principles 

1. Create a range of housing opportunities and choices. 

2. Create walkable neighborhoods. 

3. Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration. 

4. Foster distinctive, attractive places with a strong sense of place. 

5. Make development decisions predictable, fair, and cost effective. 

6. Mix land use. 

7. Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical environmental areas. 

8. Provide a variety of transportation choices of smart growth. 

9. Strengthen and direct development toward existing communities. 

10. Take advantage of compact building design. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 19 

together, not only do you increase the ■ Better Models for New Development: 

transportation options for a community, Where development continues to take 

but the requirements for transportation place in undeveloped areas, smart growth 

and infrastructure also change. The need to designs can be used to improve the enviaccommodate fewer auto trips supports a ronmental aspects of that new growth 

reduction in standard parking require- compared to conventional, separated 

ments. A mix of daytime and nighttime designs. While conservation design princiuses, or weekday and weekend uses, ples are important, smart growth developincreases the chance that parking spaces ment incorporates connections to jobs, 

can be shared among businesses. schools, and other existing economic cen­

■ Use of Already-Developed Land: Most lit- ters. A mix of housing types can alleviate 

erature on conservation development is the pressure to build affordable housing 

focused on clustered housing in greenfield on more distant parcels of land. New 

residential projects; however, reuse of town models such as Traditional 

existing impervious surfaces can be Neighborhood Design or New Urbanist 

regarded as a powerful form of conservacommunities are advanced, in particular 

tion development. First, redevelopment for transportation improvements. When 

conserves land by absorbing demand that combined with traditional water quality 

could go into undeveloped parts of the BMPs, the connected, compact, and effiwatershed. Second, there is typically no cient neighborhood designs can amplify 

net increase in runoff since impervious the water quality benefits. 

cover is essentially replaced by impervious cover. When low impact techniques 

and creative landscape design accompany 

a redevelopment project, the water quality 

performance at the watershed and site 

level is enhanced. Finally, there are less 

obvious factors associated with redevelopment that drive stormwater outcomes. In 

older parts of cities and towns, the development standards used for the original 

development were likely to have called for 

fewer parking spaces, a zoning mix, less 

roadway and less dispersed infrastructure. 

Thus, a new 10-unit building on the 

urban edge will likely have more related 

impervious surface than a 10-unit redevelopment project, even if the two have the 

same building footprint. 

Photo:. EPA 

This mixed use center in Gainesville, 

Florida is served by 

a parking lot constructed of pavers, 

which helps support the street 

trees. The trees also 

provide shade for 

outdoor seating 

nearby. 
20 SECTION 1: Why Stormwater? 

Smart Growth Techniques as 

Best Management Practices 

What do states and localities need to do to 

qualify smart growth policies as stormwater 

BMPs under stormwater permitting programs? Permitting authorities around the 

country are already introducing smart 

growth concepts into their guidance documents and permits. Some of the general concepts include: 

■ Coupling smart growth planning with site 

design criteria to further improve the 

watershed-wide benefits of the growth 

and redevelopment plans. 

■ Implementing watershed-wide or regional 

policies to consider simultaneously areas 

for growth and those for conservation. 

■ Better designs for reducing the impervious 

surfaces associated with development, 

such as compact street designs and lower 

parking requirements. 

Notable examples include the following: 

New Jersey has developed a successful strategy for considering both smart growth and 

stormwater in its state water quality and 

growth plans. In seeking to meet the dual 

goals of reducing runoff and replenishing 

aquifers, the state has developed policies to 

Supplying workforce housing 

closer to job and 

activity centers 

often helps relieve 

development 

pressure to build 

more affordable 

housing further 

out. 

Photo: EPA 

encourage growth in targeted areas while 

protecting environmentally sensitive areas 

and open space. The state’s regulations are 

divided into requirements for runoff 

control and requirements for infiltration. 

Redevelopment and infill in designated 

urban areas are exempt from the stormwater 

infiltration rules. The reasons supporting the 

policy are: (1) recharge regulations can pose 

a regulatory barrier to redevelopment, (2) 

the regulations can be impractical in highly 

urbanized areas and (3) recharge is not 

always desirable in areas with environmentally compromised soils. 

In California, the Santa Clara Valley Urban 

Runoff Pollution Prevention Program’s 

(SCVURPPP’s) 2001 Phase I permit renewal 

recognized that there could be cost-effective 

opportunities to implement stormwater control during the land use approval process. In 

particular, SCVURPPP noted several smart 

growth options, including neo-traditional 

street design standards and more effective 

use of existing parking spaces. The permit 

goes further, noting that certain development 

projects, such as transit villages, are likely to 

be exempt from several requirements because 

they are typically built in areas already covered with impervious surfaces.3 

The SCVURPPP permit lists numerous criteria 

for onsite stormwater control requirements, 

but also include flexibility by allowing its 

permitees to document where standard criteria would be impractical, where compensatory 

mitigation would be allowed, and where localities could use alternative strategies to better 

match stormwater control techniques to the 

local condition. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 21 

San Jose, California, is one of the co-permitees under the SCVURPPP program. The city 

sought to incorporate the new guidance from 

the 2001 permit into its local stormwater 

ordinance and into its smart growth initiative, the San Jose 2020 Plan. 

The two main areas that allow consideration 

of smart growth include: 

■ Finding of Impracticality: San Jose structured its policy to take advantage of the 

SCVURPPP permit’s flexibility, as noted 

above. Under the permit, deviations from 

the standard requirements could be established through a finding of impracticality. 

San Jose’s policy includes some of the more 

common reasons for a finding of impracticality, such as soil type, but also recognized 

that the natural onsite measures for infiltration and runoff control can be impractical in built-out, urban areas. 

■ Flexibility: If there is a finding of impracticality, the San Jose policy allows several 

alternatives to the permit’s standards that 

recognize the water benefits of smart 

growth projects. The city established a category of smart growth projects that exhibit 

water benefits by virtue of the development 

of the site itself, the nature of the site 

design, and its location in the watershed. 

Smart growth projects are defined by the city 

to be: 

a. 	Significant redevelopment within the 

urban core; 

b. Low-income, moderate income, or senior 

housing development project, meeting 

one of the criteria listed in other sections 

of the city’s code; and/or 

c. Brownfields projects. 

While affordable housing may seem like an 

unconventional BMP, the city recognized the 

demand for low-income and senior housing 

would not go away, but likely relocate in 

remote regions where jobs and services were 

not as likely to be close at hand. 

Incentivizing construction through redevelopment thus became not only a housing 

strategy, but a watershed one as well. 

Another California city, Poway, has defined 

BMPs to include redevelopment and development projects that improve stormwater performance as compared to conventional 

designs. The ordinance reads: 

“Site design BMP” means any project design 

feature that reduces the creation or severity 

of potential pollutant sources or reduces the 

alteration of the project site’s natural flow 

regime. Redevelopment projects that are 

undertaken to remove pollutant sources 

(such as existing surface parking lots and 

other impervious surfaces) or to reduce the 

need for new roads and other impervious 

surfaces (as compared to conventional or 

low-density new development) by incorporating higher densities and/or mixed land 

uses into the project design, are also considered site design BMPs. 

(Ord. 569 § 2, 2002) See <www.codepub 

lishing.com/ca/poway/Poway16/Poway16101. 

html#16.101.200>. 

In Texas, the North Central Texas Council of 

Governments (NCTCOG) is helping its local 

MS4s by identifying useful techniques for 

stormwater control. NCTCOG’s guidance 

also directs readers to the various local regulations or ordinances that control how and 
22 SECTION 1: Why Stormwater? 

North Central Texas Council of Governments Guidance


Minimize Impervious Surfaces 

Impervious surfaces are roads, parking lots, driveways, and rooftops that do not allow infiltration 

of stormwater into the ground. The increase in 

stormwater runoff, along with the pollutants the 

runoff picks up from impervious surfaces, cause 

major problems for our waterways. Narrower 

streets and smaller parking lots benefit the environment and can make a development more 

attractive as well. 

■ Develop residential street standards for the 

minimum required pavement width needed 

to support travel lanes, on-street parking, and 

emergency vehicle access. Street 

Specifications, Subdivision Ordinance 

■ Consider limiting on-street parking to one 

side of the street. Street Specifications, 

Subdivision Ordinance 

■ Incorporate sunken landscaped islands in the 

middle of cul-de-sac turnarounds. Street 

Specifications, Drainage Manual 

■ Minimize street length by concentrating 

development in the least sensitive areas of 

site. Zoning Ordinance 

where impervious surfaces, such as parking 

lots or driveways, are located. (See box.) 

The NCTCOG examples show that many of 

the most promising techniques for effectively 

managing runoff are often included in existing 

regulations and guidance traditionally associated with land development and transportation regulations, not stormwater control. In 

addition, the examples show that flexibility is 

needed, since not all regulations work equally 

well in all contexts. The North Carolina Smart 

Growth Alliance has pointed this out as well. 

In comments to the North Carolina Division 

of Water Quality on proposed stormwater 

rules, the Alliance notes that language in the 

■ Reduce parking lot size by lowering the number of parking spaces (minimum and maximum ratios) and by sharing parking among 

adjacent businesses. Zoning Ordinance, 

Development/Engineering Standards 

■ Reduce parking requirements for developments in proximity to public transportation. 

Zoning Ordinance 

■ Provide incentives or opportunities for structured parking rather than surface parking. 

Zoning Ordinance 

■ Use pavers or porous pavement in parking 

overflow areas. Development/Engineering 

Standards 

■ Reduce frontage requirements in residential 

areas to reduce road length. Zoning 

Ordinance 

■ Reduce the rooftop area of buildings by constructing multiple level structures where feasible. Zoning Ordinance4 

state’s 2003 proposal to establish impervious 

surface limitations on a site-by-site basis 

would have the effect of making sprawl-type 

developments easier to build, while making it 

more difficult to develop compact, walkable 

communities.5 Blanket regulations that appear 

to make sense at the individual lot level can 

often have the unintended outcome of promoting development in areas of watersheds 

unable to handle new growth. 

So, how do stormwater managers and their 

planning counterparts choose strategies and 

BMPs that serve the interrelated goals of 

watershed protection and successful growth 

and development? Matching the BMP (or 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 23 

Table 2: Best Management Practices and Development Context 

BMP Strategies Urban/High Density Settings Suburban/ 

Urbanizing Areas 

Rural and 

Conservation Areas 

Strategies for individual buildings 

and building sites 

Bio-infiltration cells, rooftop rain 

capture and storage, green roofs, 

downspout disconnection in 

older residential neighborhoods, 

programs to reduce lawn compaction, stormwater inlet 

improvements 

Disconnecting downspouts, 

green roofs, programs to reduce 

lawn compaction, bio-infiltration 

cells, rooftop rain capture and 

storage 

Green roofs, housing and site 

designs that minimize soil disruption 

Low impact development (LID) or 

better site design strategies 

Ultra-urban LID strategies: highperforming landscape areas, 

retrofitting urban parks for 

stormwater management, microdentention areas, urban forestry 

and tree canopy, green retrofits 

for streets 

Swales, infiltration trenches, 

micro-detention for infill projects, 

some conservation design, retrofitting of parking lots for 

stormwater control or infill, tree 

canopy, green retrofits for streets. 

Depending on location, larger 

scale infiltration. 

Large scale LID: forest protection, 

source water protection, water 

protection overlay zoning, conservation, aquifer protection, 

stormwater wetlands 

Infrastructure Better use of gray infrastructure: 

repair and expansion of existing 

pipes, installation of stormwater 

treatment, fix it first policies, 

improve street and facilities 

maintenance 

Priority funding areas to direct 

development, better street 

design, infrastructure planning to 

incentivize smart growth development, improve street and facilities maintenance 

Smart growth planning for rural 

communities using onsite systems 

Structural BMPs Commercially available stormwater control devices, urban 

drainage basins, repair of traditional gray infrastructure 

Rain barrels, bio-infiltration techniques, constructed wetlands 

Design strategies Transit districts, parking reduction, infill, improved use of curbside parking and rights of way, 

brownfields, urban stream cleanup and buffers, receiving areas for 

transfer of development rights 

Infill, greyfields redevelopment, 

parking reduction, policies to foster 

a connected street system, open 

space and conservation design and 

rural planning, some impervious 

surface restrictions, stream restoration and buffers, targeted receiving 

areas for transfer of development, 

planned unit developments 

Regional planning, use of antidegradation provision of Clean 

Water Act, sending areas for 

transfer of development, watershed wide impervious surface 

limits, water protection overlay 

zoning districts 

Watershed-wide or regional 

strategies 

Transfer of development rights, 

waterfront restoration, participation in regional stormwater management planning/infrastructure 

Regional park and open space 

planning, linking new transit 

investments to regional system, 

participation in regional stormwater management planning/infrastructure 

Regional planning, use of antidegradation provision of Clean 

Water Act, sending areas for transfer of development, watershed 

wide impervious surface limits, 

water protection overlay zoning 

districts, water supply planning 

and land acquisition 
24 SECTION 1: Why Stormwater? 

combination of BMPs) to the development 

context is important. Some BMPs, such as 

green roofs, will work in almost any setting. 

Infiltration requirements pose challenges in 

urban areas, however, where legacy pollutants 

remain and/or where land costs are high. They 

also pose challenges in the development of 

new town centers or other compact districts 

that are constructed in greenfields. 

Table 2 illustrates a breakdown of BMPs with 

respect to setting. It is not intended to serve 

as a fixed menu, but rather to provide a 

framework for refining the match of conventional stormwater BMPs to the development 

context. In fact, some of the measures that 

seem most fitting in suburban and rural 

areas, like stormwater wetlands, often have a 

role in ultra-urban settings. The Elizabeth 

River Project in Virginia is working with 

stakeholders to bring constructed wetlands 

and riparian buffers to urban areas and military facilities in the Portsmith/Norfolk area 

of the Chesapeake Bay. 

Finally, and most importantly, BMPs are 

rarely used in isolation, but rather are strategically combined to achieve water quality 

goals and address target pollutants of concern. For example, a city may install a first 

line of BMPs to filter large debris, while a 

series of infiltration and filtering techniques 

are used to allow sediment to settle, improve 

infiltration, and reduce runoff. For smart 

growth techniques as BMPs, there are also 

strategic combinations of policies that serve 

to increase the environmental performance of 

development projects. For example, a plan 

for transit-oriented development may require 

that the mix of uses and density be coupled 

with better parking strategies so that walking 

and automobile travel are equally attractive. 

The ability to develop effective combinations 

of BMPs is among the most important features in developing joint stormwater and 

smart growth plans. 

1	 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1994. EPA-841-F94-005. http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/qa.html 

2	 Kosco, John, Wes Gunter, and James Collins. Lessons 

learned from in-field evaluations of Phase I Municipal 

Stormwater Programs. Presentation prepared for the 2003 

National Conference on Urban Stormwater. Chicago, 

Illinois, February 17-20, 2003. 

www.epa.gov/owow/nps/natlstormwater03/19Kosco.pdf 

3 http://www.scvurppp-w2k.com/pdfs/other/ 

NPDES_Permit_C3New_Finalodrtransltr.PDF 

4	 Stormwater Management in North Central Texas. Post-construction runoff control, EPA recommendations. 

www.dfwstormwater.com/Storm_Water_BMPs/ 

post-construct.asp#rec 

5	 North Carolina Smart Growth Alliance. May 16, 2003. 

Comments to the Division of Water Quality, Re: Proposed 

NPDES Phase II Stormwater Rules. 

www.ncsmartgrowth.org/archive/stormwater%205%2016%2003.html 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 25 

SECTION 2 

Specific Smart Growth Techniques as 

Stormwater Best Management Practices 

The purpose of this section is to present common smart growth techniques, their water quality attributes 

and how to present them within local, state, 

or federal stormwater requirements. The 

NPDES stormwater requirements—in particular the Post-Construction Minimum 

Measure—have focused attention on how 

development projects, both individually and 

collectively, impact a watershed after projects 

are built. This section is geared toward the 

post-construction measure under Phase II, 

though any city or county renewing a permit 

under Phase I can use them. Additionally, 

cities, counties, and townships that are not 

regulated, but that are proactively developing 

stormwater, flooding, or watershed plans, 

can use the information to meet water quality goals. 

The following list contains smart growth 

techniques that have been adopted by state, 

regional, and local governments for a variety 

of benefits, including environmental quality. 

This section will look at each of these techniques in depth, though this list is not 

exhaustive. 

1. Regional planning 

2. Infill development 

3. Redevelopment policies 

4. Special development districts (e.g., transit 

oriented development and brownfields 

redevelopment) 

5. Tree and canopy programs 

6. Parking policies to reduce the number of 

spaces needed or the footprint of the lot 

7. “Fix It First” policies 

8. Smart growth street designs 

9. Stormwater utilities 
26 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Each subsection provides information and ■ Provide examples where the technique 

examples that:	 has been adopted, or is in the development stage. 

■ Define the smart growth technique. 

■ Provide suggestions on “Measurable 

■ Give an overview of who to talk to about Goals,” a requirement for all BMPs. 

the techniques and relating it to storm­

■ Give “points to consider” in adopting the water. technique as a stormwater management 

■ Define the stormwater benefits and pro- strategy. vide tips on how to list the technique in 

your plan. 

■ Provide, if available, estimates of the costs 

associated with the technique. 

Outreach, Public Education, and Public Participation 

Most smart growth initiatives include outreach to stakeholders, processes to integrate 

comments on plans, and schedules for gathering input. Stormwater managers should 

reach out to their counterparts in planning, zoning, transportation, and growth management departments to see where their established processes can integrate successful 

stormwater management. Ask the planning department or city/county manager if the following types of meetings are planned and whether they are open to a module or segment 

on growth and stormwater: 

■ Planning charrettes 

■ Visioning exercises 

■ Planning sessions on alternative growth scenarios 

■ Smart growth training sessions 

■ Transportation alternatives meetings with the public 

■ Watershed meetings 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 27 

1. Regional Planning 

Definition 

Regional planning is the process of considering community development options across a 

particular area that can include several political jurisdictions. For the purposes of 

stormwater quantity and quality, a watershed 

can be thought of as a region. If smart 

growth is a cornerstone of your stormwater 

planning efforts, regional planning is critical. 

A watershed or regional effort can facilitate 

discussions that reduce impacts by directing 

growth while preserving critical areas. EPA 

encourages watershed planning as a way to 

comprehensively prevent and control water 

quality and quantity impairments. 

Local governments are encountering a complex, and growing, array of requirements to 

meet various state and federal rules, as well 

as growing public demand for “quality of 

life” benefits such as open space, transportation options, and amenities at the neighborhood level. The planning requirements can 

include transportation at a regional level, 

growth management plans, source water protection plans, economic development planning, emergency response and evacuation 

plans, and updated floodplain mapping. 

Many elements of the various planning exercises are similar and rely on the same data 

sets, such as population projections and GIS 

mapping of natural resources. 

For water quality, regional cooperation and 

planning is crucial for aligning smart growth 

and water quality approaches such as: 

■ Minimizing imperviousness at the watershed level by targeting and redirecting 

development 

■ Identifying and preserving critical ecological areas and contiguous open space areas 

■ Making maximum use of existing infrastructure and previously developed sites Photo,: Local Government Commission

Effective stakeholder participation is a cornerstone of 

both stormwater and 

regional planning. 
28 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Regional Visioning and Scenario Planning 

Plans by Dodson Associates, Ltd.; Illustrations by Jack 

Werner 

Illustration 1 Illustration 2 Illustration 3 

Kane County/Gilberts Present Day Kane County/Gilberts Build Out Under Kane County/Gilberts Build Out Under 

Conventional Planning and Smart Growth Planning and 

Development Development 

This series of illustrations was developed for the Chicago Regional Environmental Planning Project to 

show development alternatives at the western edge of the Chicago suburbs in Kane County. This agricultural area is characterized by poorly drained soils and the presence of the Fox River, which was once 

viewed as a natural boundary for growth. Illustration 1 shows the emergence of some housing in the 

background. 

Kane County expects growth to emerge with the further expansion of housing, roadways and their use. 

Office and research are the prime industries that are expected to expand into the area first. Housing and 

retail are expected to follow. Illustration 2 shows that current planning trends would dictate separated 

land uses, large set-backs, and individual parking lots. The stormwater runoff from the large parcels and 

parking lots would eventually impact the streambed illustrated in the foreground. 

Illustration 3 shows an alternative future using smart growth practices. The industrial uses are placed in 

the background closer to existing infrastructure and development. Housing developments are connected to services and retail. Illustration 3 envisions a county plan where certain areas are preserved for agriculture and drainage while accommodating growth in village centers. For more information, see the 

Environmental Law and Policy’s “Visions” report at <www.elpc.org/trans/visions/visions.htm>. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 29 

Who Do I Talk to About 

Regional Plans? 

If your state has developed smart growth 

planning requirements, contact the state 

department of planning or community 

affairs. The Metropolitan Planning 

Organization (MPO) has the responsibility to 

develop master transportation plans. 

Subsection 8 (Smart Growth Street Designs, 

page 75) goes into more detail about planning for roads and transportation infrastructure. Your local Council of Governments 

(sometimes referred to as a COG) might also 

have information on planning efforts that 

span several jurisdictions. Although these 

may not be water plans per se, the population forecasting, maps showing undevelopable parcels, and vacant properties can all 

be helpful in developing a comprehensive 

stormwater management plan. 

If your community is under the Phase II rules, 

and you are located near larger cities and/or 

counties covered by Phase I, determine if you 

can team up with them in developing plans. 

Since these communities are more than 10 

years into planning and implementation, do 

not hesitate to contact the stormwater managers or public works department to see where 

you can share or expand upon plans and programs. Your area may also have other regional 

agreements that can be used to initiate 

stormwater plans, such as agreements on infrastructure or flooding prevention. 

The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 

(CZMA) and subsequent amendments have 

established a program for states and territories to voluntarily develop comprehensive 

programs to protect and manage coastal 

resources (including the Great Lakes). To 

receive federal approval and implementation 

funding, recipients are required to demonstrate that they have programs, including 

enforceable policies, that are sufficiently 

comprehensive and specific to regulate and 

resolve conflicts among land uses, water 

uses, and coastal development. There are 

currently 29 federally approved state and 

territorial programs. These plans may have 

elements and funding in place, and may 

include smart growth practices that can help 

develop elements of a stormwater management plan. For a link to state programs go 

to <http://coastalmanagement.noaa.gov/ 

czm/>. 

EPA’s Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and 

Watersheds hosts a Web site called “Surf 

Your Watershed.” This site allows users to 

enter their zip code, local stream name, or 

locality to find information about their 

watershed, as well as planning efforts and 

relevant watershed organizations. Visit 

<www.epa.gov/surf>. 

Stormwater Benefits 

Regional efforts to encourage development in 

strategic areas are one of the strongest 

approaches to coordinating growth and 

resource protection in a watershed. Regional 

efforts are often needed to effectively coordinate local approaches to development and 

achieve better watershed-wide results. 

Communities should determine areas where 

they want growth to occur and areas they 

want to preserve. When such areas are clearly defined and articulated within a region, 
30 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

New Jersey Highlands: Regional Planning for Water and 

Growth 

The 800,000+-acre New Jersey Highlands Region covers more than 1,250 square miles and 88 municipalities in seven counties (Bergen, Hunterdon, Morris, Passaic, Somerset, Sussex and Warren). The 

Highlands Region is an essential source of drinking water for half of the residents of New Jersey. In 

2004, the Highlands Water Preservation and Planning Act (The Act) was adopted to balance the management of water resources and growth. 

The Highlands Act documents the geographical boundary of the Highlands region and establishes both 

the Highlands preservation area and the Highlands planning area. The Highlands Act requires the New 

Jersey Department of Environmental Protection to establish regulations to limit land disturbance in 

preservation areas, while creating a regional master plan to direct growth to desired areas within the 

region. To carry out the Act, the Highlands Water Protection and Planning Council was formed and 

charged with preparing the regional master by June 2006. While the focus of the regional plan is seen 

as land preservation for water quality and supply, the council was also charged with including elements 

to encourage appropriate development, redevelopment and economic growth for areas so designated. 

In the Planning Area, municipal compliance with the Plan is voluntary. The Act provides incentives for 

conformance to the Regional Master Plan, however. The incentives include planning grants to assist in 

preparing local master plans and land use ordinances, technical assistance, tax stabilization funding for 

funding decreases accorded by participating in the plan, enforcement of the regional Master Plan and 

legal assistance to meet challenges to new master plans and zoning. 

The council established several categories for grants, including grants to participate in Municipal 

Partnership Pilot Programs, Zoning and Parcel Analysis, Wastewater Capacity Analysis, and Affordable 

Housing. In 2005, Washington Borough was awarded a Municipal Partnership Pilot Program grant, 

which will be used to plan for three distinct areas: town center redevelopment, historic preservation, 

and stream corridor preservation (to include stormwater management). For more information on the 

New Jersey Highlands Council, visit <www.highlands.state.nj.us/index.html>. 

For more information on the state of New Jersey’s innovative state planning, see New Jersey’s Web site 

on the Highlands Act, <www.state.nj.us/dep/highlands/faq_info.htm>. 

development is encouraged on land with less 

ecological value, such as previously developed areas (as described in subsequent chapters for redevelopment, brownfields, 

greyfields, and vacant properties). Land with 

higher ecological value, such as aquifer 

recharges areas, wetlands, marshes, and 

riparian corridors, is then preserved or otherwise set aside for ecological services. 

A 2004 study conducted by researchers at 

Texas A&M University evaluated development in a watershed in the greater Houston 

Texas area. The study tracked development 

trends over a 50-year period to evaluate 

watershed performance—in particular, as it 

relates to flooding. The study evaluated common indicators of development (e.g., impervious cover) and how various land 

development scenarios during that time 

period might have altered water flows and 

flooding. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 31 

The study found that the impervious cover 

alone was an inadequate indicator, but when 

considered with other indicators, such as 

indicators of development dispersal, these 

measures together proved to be a better predictor of flooding. In assessing total developed area, the researchers looked not at 

estimates of impervious surface area per lot, 

but rather whether the lot had any development at all. 

The researchers also evaluated off-site development features such as roads and highways. 

Over a 50 year period, the researchers 

mapped total developed areas, with special 

attention to roadway lengths, and the ratio of 

commercial and residential units. The risk of 

flooding increased exponentially once the 

percentage of developed properties in the 

watershed reached 25 percent. From a 

regional perspective, the authors suggest that 

the percentage of impervious surface cannot 

be used as an indicator independent of other 

factors such as the configuration of infrastructure, development form, and a total proportion of properties that have been 

developed.6 

In evaluating the environmental performance 

of successful smart growth planning on a 

regional basis, some localities and states are 

using build-out and capacity analyses to predict the condition of water resources once 

developable parcels are developed. Build-out 

analyses can be conducted based on existing 

land use regulations, or according to conventional development practices that could 

shape future proposals. The goal is to compare a smart growth development plan or 

project to a conventional model under status 

quo zoning, and compare the stormwater 

benefits. 

For example, many communities are updating floodplain maps. Suppose a review identifies 1,000 acres of sensitive land critical for 

water filtration, absorption, and flood prevention. As a result of the review, the local government alters scenarios in planning 

documents to upzone land in the floodplain 

for development. The city and county confer, 

and as a result, the two jurisdictions revise 

planning and zoning documents to redirect 

growth to an area of the watershed that is 

more appropriate for development. In this 

case, the stormwater benefits are not only 

environmental in nature, but also avert the 

costs associated with property damage from 

flooding. Thus, the benefits extend beyond 

typical environmental measures of water 

quality and quantity to economic factors 

as well. 

Typical Costs 

The costs of regional planning are related to 

administration and research, and vary significantly depending on the resources already 

available in your community. Before estimating the costs of developing or fine-tuning an 

existing plan, it is helpful to understand the 

elements of the plan, the data needed to 

develop the various plans, the shape of the 

final product, and details on how the plan 

will be implemented. 

The costs associated with aligning multiple 

plans are typically driven by staff or consultant time. The Southeastern Watershed 

Forum estimates, as a rule of thumb, that 

analysis, review, and coordination takes two 

to three staff working over one year to 

18 months. 
32 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Once your community has decided to hire a 

consultant, the next step involves developing 

a Request for Proposals (RFP) or a Request 

for Qualifications (RFQ). The University of 

Wisconsin has developed a concise guidance 

document on the process of hiring a consultant. One step in the process can be issuing an 

RFQ to get a manageable pool of the most 

qualified consultants. As you draft your RFP 

or RFQ, keep in mind some of the unique 

challenges that will arise in drafting a joint 

stormwater and smart growth planning 

process, a comprehensive plan, and an implementation course. For example, you might 

want to have consultants review the comprehensive plan and NPDES permit (or permit 

renewal) and ask where there are barriers and 

flexibility. In addition, aligning multiple plans 

might reveal conflicting land use, transportation, and resource protection scenarios. Ask 

consultants how they would resolve these 

issues—in particular, where several jurisdictions are involved. Finally, ask them what elements of your strategic or smart growth plan 

can be borrowed for water quality and 

stormwater planning. These additional steps 

might add to the scope of work and budget; 

however, reviews of existing plans might 

reveal that work needed for comprehensive 

stormwater planning has already been completed. See <http://cecommerce.uwex. 

edu/pdfs/G3751.pdf> for more information. 

Measurable Goals 

The NPDES municipal stormwater program 

requires Phase II MS4s to include measurable 

goals in their program for each BMP. 

Increasingly, cities covered under Phase I 

MS4 permits are beginning to include measurable goals to track their performance in 

meeting water quality goals. Participation in 

a regional planning effort can be one way to 

track measurable goals, as can specific activities and steps outlined in a regional planning 

process. Information on counting participation in a regional group for meeting the 

requirements of the six minimum measures 

is described in the rest of this subsection, as 

are examples of specific activities that can 

count in the post-construction minimum 

measure. 

Adoption of a regional master plan or watershed plan, as well as supporting policies and 

ordinances, are good candidates by which to 

measure progress in managing stormwater. 

These activities can also be documented to 

meet requirements on public education and 

outreach on stormwater impacts, as well as 

public involvement/participation. The key is 

to make sure you can track progress and 

relate the success back to the water quality 

goals in your regional stormwater management plan. For example, if a parcel of land 

identified for a regional park system is also 

contained in your regional aquifer protection 

plan, coordinate the acquisition and park 

design to meet stormwater and recreation 

goals. Include the acquisition in your monitoring and BMP maintenance plans as well. 

In addition, efforts to coalesce common 

items among plans can be included in a 

stormwater management plan (e.g., merging 

plans to repair streets and sidewalks to spur 

redevelopment on a regional transportation 

corridor can be coupled with installation of 

microdetention areas between the curb and 

sidewalk). This effort can also help align 

capital spending decisions and be included 

in meeting regional stormwater goals to 

direct development. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 33 

Arlington, Virginia’s high-density approach 

around the Rosslyn and Court House subway stations directs a large amount of 

growth to a small footprint. The county 

allows for high densities around stations, 

with a formula that tapers development 

intensity down to existing neighborhoods. 

This area, which stretches three miles from 

the Potomac River to the Ballston station, 

will ultimately absorb 8 million square feet 

of development on 2 square miles of land. 

This smaller footprint not only has regional 

stormwater benefits, but also has resulted 

in higher transit use and traffic counts that 

are far less than originally projected. 

Photo: Arlington County, Virginia 

Many areas across the country have identi- and other tools at 

fied specific plots of land to acquire. Buying <www.epa.gov/greenkit/2tools.htm>. 

parcels that have water-handling characteristics can provide a region with specific, meas- For meeting the post-construction minimum 

urable targets within a stormwater control measure, regional organizations 

management plan. might be called upon to develop model ordinances or individual policies to carry out 

For post-construction measures, the build- regional plans. For example, the transfer of 

out analyses mentioned previously can be development rights is a tool used across the 

used to establish a baseline for setting meas- country to direct development away from 

urable goals. Most states or regions develop environmentally sensitive lands while shiftbuild-out scenarios to assess how much ing the development to areas targeted for 

developable land is available, whether the growth. This type of program might require 

existing or planned infrastructure is likely to setting measurable goals in a series. For 

meet the needs of a built-out region, and to example, in the first four years, the measuradevelop alternative planning scenarios. Most ble goals might include (1) a formal agreebuild-out analyses look at sewage capacity, ment among participating jurisdictions, (2) a 

source water, and water supply. With slight final comprehensive plan for the receiving 

modifications, the build-out analysis can be area (3) a completed legal framework to 

used to also assess impervious surface cover- administer trades and (4) software to track 

age within a watershed and areas with the the number of trades. Given the complexity 

potential to effectively handle growth. If your of each component, there are likely to be 

city or county (or a regional organization) is detailed sub-goals spelled out as well. To 

developing build-out analyses, see if you can have a long-term effect on stormwater, your 

add a stormwater component so that alterna- community should be prepared to count the 

tive scenarios chosen include stormwater numbers of transfers, not just the existence 

runoff parameters as well. EPA hosts a Web of a program. 

site with information on build-out analyses 
34 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Many regional organizations rely on voluntary participation in regional planning. As 

such, regional growth and/or watershed 

plans offer incentives (see the box on page 

30, New Jersey Highlands, for more information). In addition to taking advantage of the 

incentives, make sure to also count the steps 

taken for the regional plan into your Phase I 

or Phase II municipal NPDES permit. 

Examples 

Within New Jersey, the Regional Planning 

Partnership (RPP) has developed tools to 

compare smart growth versus conventional 

development impacts, including stormwater 

runoff. The partnership has developed a 

sketch tool called Goal Oriented Zoning. In 

2003, RPP developed a comparison for 

Delaware River Basin communities. This 

analysis compared four scenarios and set an 

overall watershed impervious cover goal at 

10 percent. From there, RPP developed different development scenarios based on the 

10 percent coverage goal to compare watershed-wide impacts. The exercise also served 

to show graphically what build-out is 

allowed under current zoning. While the use 

of the tool was meant to focus on zoning and 

transportation issues, RPP was able to 

include several environmental indicators, 

which could be further explored with air and 

water quality-specific models on other scales. 

For more information, visit <www. 

planningpartners.org/services.html>. 

The Association of New Jersey 

Environmental Commissions (ANJEC) has 

issued a series of reports to assist its member 

communities with tools needed to comply 

with New Jersey’s planning laws. These 

reports include information on conducting 

build-out and capacity plans, increasing the 

supply of affordable housing and implementing master plans. Its “Smart Growth Survival 

Kits” contain information on the data needed, methods available, and additional contacts. Though New Jersey–specific, the 

information can be useful for other states. 

Visit <www.anjec.org> and click on “Smart 

Growth Survival Kit.” 

In 2005, the Southwestern Regional Planning 

Council, covering the southwest counties in 

the state of Connecticut, released its regional 

planning strategy. The goals of the regional 

plan focus on transportation, housing, and 

directing development to areas with existing 

infrastructure and investment. For more 

information on implementation and other 

related objectives, visit <www.swrpa.org/ 

projects/regplan2005.htm#project_team>. 

To assist the regulated municipalities in the 

Syracuse Urban Area in complying with 

Phase II stormwater regulations, the Central 

New York Regional Planning Board (CNY 

RPDB) has launched a unified, regional assistance program. Its Web site, which was 

developed specifically for decisionmakers, 

includes several layers of maps, including 

MS4 boundaries, watershed boundaries, and 

political boundaries. The CNY RPDB is also 

providing unified assistance in the areas of 

public education, outreach and participation, 

municipal training, research assistance, and 

efforts to secure funding for compliance. For 

more information, visit 

<www.cnyrpdb.org/stormwater-phase2/>. 

The 1996 Amendments to the Safe Drinking 

Water Act resulted in a focus to protect 

drinking water sources to complement the 

original goal of removing contaminants from 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 35 

drinking water. To meet the new requirements, states must ensure that each water 

system has a Source Water Assessment. Once 

the assessments are complete, states and 

localities work on action plans to address 

any issues found in the assessment. Source 

Water Assessments must include four basic 

elements: 

■ A delineation (or mapping) of the source 

water assessment area. 

■ An inventory of actual and potential 

sources of contamination in the delineated 

area. 

■ An analysis of the susceptibility of the 

water supply to those contamination 

sources. 

■ A mechanism for sharing the results widely with the public. 

While the traditional sources of contaminants arise from agriculture or industrial 

uses, more and more communities are concerned about the cumulative effects of development and runoff on source water. 

If you are developing a regional or comprehensive plan, check to see if there is a source 

water protection plan or ordinance in your 

area. A link to state programs can be found at 

<www.epa.gov/safewater/source/ 

contacts.html>. In addition, the Trust for 

Public Land has issued a report called 

Protecting the Source, which contains information on joint land and water planning. Visit 

<www.tpl.org/tier3_cd.cfm?content_item_id= 

1337&folder_id=195>. 

Points to Consider 

In many parts of the country, local government boundaries have served more to foster 

competition than cooperation. Growth pressures, economic conditions, and the underlying structure for assessing taxes all put 

pressure on the local funding base. In addition, there are few incentives to plan across 

boundaries, much less develop interlocal 

agreements involving tax sharing, growth, or 

annexation laws. Nonetheless, some areas 

faced with mounting water-related problems 

are finding that shared solutions among 

counties and cities offer efficient options. 

Newspaper headlines on flooding, beach closures, and emergency water restrictions are 

motivating discussions on how to analyze 

problems and forge solutions that transcend 

boundaries. EPA has recognized the importance of watersheds as an effective organizing 

unit. A good resource for approaching interlocal agreements is the Joint Center for 

Sustainable Communities. The center represents an important collaboration between the 

National Association of Counties (NACo) 

and the U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM). 

Its web site is <www.naco.org>. 

Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems (also 

referred as septic systems, package plants, or 

cluster systems) pose challenges to local governments trying to manage growth in rural 

counties, vacation areas with second homes, or 

in fringe areas where water infrastructure cannot be extended. In the past, soil percolation 

rates, drainage fields, and overall perceptions 

of septic tanks were limiting factors to widespread use. New technologies, growing 

demand for housing in rural areas, and changing perceptions have reduced barriers to their 

use, however. According to EPA’s 2002 Onsite 
36 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual, nearly 

one-third of new housing construction is 

served by onsite wastewater treatment 

systems.7 The University of Rhode Island’s 

Cooperative Extension Agency has released a 

new handbook entitled A Creative 

Combination: Merging Alternative Wastewater 

Treatment with Smart Growth. The aim of the 

handbook is to help local governments address 

growth and wastewater handling at the same 

time. In addition, the handbook addresses the 

important role of management, oversight, and 

enforcement in areas where a large percentage 

of households use onsite systems to treat 

wastewater. For more information, visit 

<www.uri.edu/ce/wq/mtp/PDFs/manuals/ 

Creative%20Combination%203-10.pdf>. 

As noted in this section, regional planning 

can result in decisions that direct growth to 

certain areas of the watershed. These identified growth centers might be in existing 

communities, or in undeveloped areas. 

Efficiently handling growth in these areas 

eventually leads to discussions on density. 

Commonly held views on density among 

stormwater engineers and environmental 

advocates tend to equate density with imperviousness, which is then equated with poor 

water quality outcomes. Stormwater ordinances that discourage “connected impervious surfaces” might run counter to smart 

growth plans that call for a compact, but 

connected, street development form. Even 

where localities understand the need to 

direct density, there may be discussions 

about requiring automatic “offsets” of open 

space tied to redevelopment decisions. While 

some communities will establish programs to 

connect infill development with land conservation, a blanket, inflexible requirement to 

obtain land might, in the end, stifle a region’s 

ability to meet both growth and water goals. 

To address the issue, EPA has issued a report 

called Protecting Water Resources with HigherDensity Development. 8 

Comparing the environmental impacts of 

various development options can require an 

extensive amount of baseline data and 

resources to analyze the various build-out 

scenarios. The baseline data needed include 

an inventory of natural resource lands, an 

inventory of developable lands, an inventory 

of undevelopable land in both private and 

private hands, and comprehensive zoning 

maps. Even where these data are available 

and show opportunities for redevelopment 

and reuse of vacant properties, further work 

might be needed to determine which properties are market-ready and which are contaminated, or where ownership is uncertain. In 

some communities, incomplete data may be 

a huge constraint. In these situations, communities might want to canvass state, university, and conservation district offices to see 

where GIS work has been conducted. 

A community that does not have all of the 

information listed above might want to begin 

work in a targeted area. For example, if your 

state is updating transportation plans, a city or 

county may want to update local zoning maps 

to support the redevelopment of parcels in 

proximity to the study area. Information from 

this type of review can be used to assess development potential, transportation impacts, and 

scenarios of how that same level of development might look if built elsewhere in an undeveloped portion of the watershed. A carrying 

capacity report can then evaluate the stormwater generated by each scenario. The targeted 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 37 

Photo: www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden 

Main Street Programs have been successful in directing development to older downtowns. 

review can reveal not only environmental 

information, but also economic barriers and 

transportation investments that need to be 

addressed before growth is redirected. 

If you are a Phase II community and decide 

to team up with Phase I community, keep in 

mind that some of the requirements for 

Phase I can be more restrictive than Phase II. 

Some Phase I communities use numeric 

goals for BMPs or might have implemented 

rigorous water quality monitoring schedules. 

The additional requirements may be offset by 

the efficiencies of using an established program, however. 

Finally, regional or watershed plans, like any 

other plan, are only meaningful if implemented. When identifying measurable goals, 

be sure to distinguish where development of 

a plan is a suitable short-term outcome and 

which actual policy changes are needed to 

ensure the long-term environmental outcomes desired. 

2. Infill Development 

Definition 

For purposes of this document, infill is 

defined as development that occurs on previously undeveloped lots within existing developed areas (the following section on 

redevelopment covers development that 

occurs on previously developed lots). Infill 

development takes advantage of built-out 

areas that are already served by a variety of 

transportation modes and by infrastructure. 

Infill development also accommodates development that might otherwise occur on 

greenfields sites. EPA’s model permit for 

Phase II <www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/ 

modpermit.pdf> states that communities can 

use policies that promote infill development 

and development in areas with existing infrastructure to meet the post-construction minimum control measure. This section describes 

how infill development is typically regulated, 

how infill is treated within smart growth 

plans, and special points to consider for infill 

and stormwater control. Much of the information presented here is also relevant for 

Subsections 3 (Redevelopment) and 4 

(Development Districts) as well. 

Who Do I Talk to 

About Infill Plans? 

Decisions about where to develop are influenced by numerous factors. While the final 

decision nearly always is left to the local 

jurisdiction, regions and states also influence 

the decisions of both developers and the 

localities through incentives and policies. 

This subsection therefore addresses policies 

at all three levels of government. 
38 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Green roofs can help 

manage stormwater 

for infill development 

projects. 

Photo: University of Connecticut Cooperative Extension System 

Local Jurisdictions: To understand who to 

talk to and where to find the land use plans 

that guide infill development, it is helpful 

to understand the two ways that localities 

manage development activities. The most 

common method in urbanized and urbanizing areas is through zoning, which places 

limits on the use, type, size, and design of 

allowed development. Zoning can be either 

“by-right,” meaning that developers can 

build any development provided it meets 

zoning standards, or conditional, meaning 

that developers must seek approval for specific proposals. Within zoning codes, there 

are standards, called “bulk regulations,” 

that govern the maximum size of structures 

on a lot and how the building is located on 

the site (e.g., lot coverage, setbacks, parking, floor area ratio, and landscaping 

requirements). Localities often use a variance process where deviations from the 

standards are deemed acceptable. 

A second method of steering development is 

through use of incentives. Local jurisdictions 

seeking specific types of development might 

give financial or other incentives to developers willing to build within desired parameters. 

Zoning and incentive programs are typically 

drafted by the planning and/or building 

departments of a city and codified in city land 

use and zoning ordinances. If you are in a 

smaller municipality without zoning, the city 

or county engineer might be the best person 

to explain development rules, since building 

standards—not zoning—guide where development can be located and how it is built. 

Some larger cities have separate entities to 

encourage redevelopment, so personnel in the 

economic development division are likely to 

have the best understanding of whether there 

are special business development zones, special tax zones, and maps showing the boundaries of these areas. 

If you are unfamiliar with the terminology 

used for zoning and comprehensive planning, 

visit the Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources Web site, which posts a list of general land use terms to help natural resource 

professionals. See <http://dnr.wi.gov/org/ 

es/science/landuse/education/GPZ.htm>. 

Regions: Metropolitan planning organizations 

(MPOs) are inter-governmental institutions 

formed to handle transportation planning in 

areas with a population of 50,000 or more. 

They also have the responsibility of allocating 

transportation funding for areas with populations greater that 250,000. MPOs might seek 

to better match development and transportation investments through educational tools; 

for example, maps showing 20-year growth 

projections. Some MPOs are involved in water 

and stormwater planning. To find out if your 

area is served by an MPO, contact your planning staff, or go to <www.ampo.org>, which 

lists member MPOs. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 39 

States: A number of states have passed 

statewide smart growth legislation, recognizing that, while development decisions are 

made locally, state policies often guide the 

decisionmaking process through financial 

incentives and policy decisions. 

Responsibility for statewide smart growth 

policies generally lies in a statewide smart 

growth office or planning office, or in a 

department of consumer or environmental 

affairs. In states that do not have a formal 

statewide plan, there may be separate policies that seek to streamline policies on 

growth. States that have embarked on growth 

management efforts might also have developed baseline data on natural resource lands 

and larger infrastructure programs. Contact 

the state office to see if you can make use of 

the GIS mapping or other data for making 

decisions on directing growth and infill. If 

your state has passed legislation, enabling 

legislation or programs to promote infill as a 

smart growth policy, but your locality has 

not adopted them, you might want to work 

with your zoning or economic development 

director to take advantage of the program for 

water and growth goals. 

Stormwater Benefits 

Infill can reduce potential runoff by ensuring 

that growth does not create additional impervious surfaces on the developed fringe and in 

environmentally sensitive areas. The impacts 

of such development can be considerable. 

Growth on the undeveloped fringe results in 

less groundwater flow into streams and less 

aquifer recharge as water runs over the surface. The 20 regions with the greatest 

amounts of land development over the period 1982 to 1997 now lose between 300 bilPhoto: www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden 

Infill development can 

help a community 

grow over time. For 

example, a row of “liner 

shops” can be added to 

surround a surface or 

structured parking lot. 

This adds development 

intensity, reduces the 

overall amount of parking required for the district as a whole, and 

improves the pedestrian environment. 

lions and 690 billion gallons of water annually that would otherwise have been captured 

in groundwater supplies through natural percolation.9 

A modeling study conducted by Purdue 

University estimated that placing a hypothetical low-density development at the Chicago 

fringe area would produce 10 times more 

runoff than a mixed-use development in the 

urban core.10 In Virginia, a Chesapeake Bay 

Foundation study found that clustered development across the state would convert 75 

percent less land, create 42 percent less 

impervious cover, and produce 41 percent 

less runoff.11 

In addition, infill development can make use 

of existing infrastructure. Guiding development to existing areas also increases the economic activity and tax base needed to 

support the maintenance, repair, and/or 

expansion of the water infrastructure in 

place. This investment can help repair areas 

prone to sewer overflows, or enhance treatment facilities in order to meet more stringent water quality standards. 
40 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

The following measures are the types of regulations and programs that are used to promote infill, and thus facilitate stormwater 

improvements. In your permit application or 

plan for Post-Construction Minimum 

Control Measures, you can list these out separately, or include them under a general 

measure such as “infill policies.” 

Setbacks: Setback requirements can be one of 

the most important factors shaping the built 

environment—and hence impervious cover— 

in your community. Conventional codes often 

call for minimum setbacks: for example, 

requiring a building to be at least 50 feet from 

the street or adjacent properties. Smart growth 

codes often use maximum setbacks, which 

stipulate a maximum distance a building may 

be situated from the street or sidewalk. A 

maximum setback brings the building closer 

to the street and sidewalk, promoting a more 

interesting and efficient pedestrian environment. Alternatively, your smart growth code 

may stipulate a “build to” line. This requires 

that the building footprint meet a certain line 

along or within the property, such as up to the 

edge of a sidewalk. Check with your zoning, 

planning, or public works office to see if your 

community has minimum setbacks, or if it 

has made modifications to allow for maximum setbacks. The convention of setting 

minimum distances from the roadway can 

result in excess impervious cover and be ripe 

for reform to obtain stormwater benefits. 

Setback requirements can be found under 

individual zoning codes or apply to entire 

districts. 

Mixed Use Zoning: Mixed use zoning allows 

(or sometimes requires) buildings with different uses (e.g., residential, office, retail) in 

the same area or in the same building. This 

mix allows for a greater intensity of development on a more compact scale, which 

reduces the amount of land needed on a per 

unit basis. Mixing uses also supports a range 

of transportation options and facilitates 

shared parking, thereby reducing the amount 

of surface needed for roads and parking lots. 

Smart Growth Lot Sizes: In some areas, zoning codes and subdivision standards have 

been rewritten to allow for greater density and 

more efficient use of the land. Instead of 

requiring a minimum of a quarter acre per residential lot, as many current codes do, new 

smart growth codes allow smaller lots. This 

practice consumes less land per unit. The 

smaller lot sizes can also be instrumental to 

drawing development to smaller or oddly 

shaped infill lots within an older city. Large 

lots not only consume more land, but the 

lawns covering those lots handle less 

stormwater than undisturbed land. Under 

typical subdivision construction practices, sod 

is laid over highly compacted soil, so that 

water does not percolate. Where mass grading 

is a typical practice, the compaction of the 

underlying soil further reduces the potential 

for infiltration. Lawns treated with fertilizers 

and chemicals further add to stormwater 

problems, particularly if treatment occurs 

right before a rain event. Smart growth can 

minimize some of these impacts. When looking for language governing lot sizes, the zoning code may refer to “maximum lot sizes,” or 

be presented as zoning categories, such as R-8 

(or eight residential units per acre). 

Density Bonuses: Density bonuses are used to 

provide incentives for developers who agree to 

integrate desired features into development 

projects. There can be stormwater benefits to 

increasing the development density in existing 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 41 

communities (e.g., less land consumption, 

more efficient use of existing impervious surfaces such as roads and sidewalks). One can 

also provide density bonuses to developers 

who agree to treat stormwater on site or who 

agree to replace older infrastructure serving 

the project. A density bonus may be used to 

reduce the footprint of the building by allowing the development intensity to be expressed 

through height. Density bonuses are typically 

part of a larger planning process that determines how much incentive is needed, what 

the amount of the bonus will be, enforcement 

to ensure both parties adhere to the arrangement, and other planning needs that accompany the added density (e.g. parking, fire 

protection). Density bonuses are typically listed in the zoning code or plans, or in footnotes 

to the plan. 

Financial Incentives: Common incentives 

include the use of tax-increment financing, 

tax and economic incentives for redevelopment, and promotion of cost-of-service utility 

fees (instead of average cost pricing, which 

can subsidize dispersed development at a cost 

to higher density development). Tax increment financing (TIF) is a system whereby 

property taxes in a particular district are 

frozen at a certain level; when property values rise, the additional tax that would have 

been paid is instead directed back into redevelopment projects in the district. TIFs are 

built on the concept that new value will be 

created, and that the future value can be used 

to finance the initial investment. 

Typical Costs 

Both conventional development and infill 

involve costs to the public sector, because 

any new development requires public services or upgrades. Most research, however, finds 

that in the long run, there are fewer public 

costs to provide services to infill and redevelopment, because existing infrastructure is 

used or repairs or upgrades were needed 

whether infill took place or not.12 

Measurable Goals 

An initial goal might be to direct some percentage of growth into areas that are already 

developed, or to initiate a selected number of 

policies to encourage infill development. To 

ensure measurability, your community can 

establish a system to track building permits 

within an area designated for infill. In addition, your community can institute a priority 

system for infill and redevelopment projects 

that further improves stormwater management with features such as green building 

techniques. A longer-term goal might be to 

increase the overall density of developed 

areas and preserve open spaces from development. A locality may want to do a “code 

checkup” every so often to make sure that Photo: EPA 

Landscaping can be 

used to handle 

stormwater in tight 

infill projects. While 

native plants are 

often recommended, 

there may be other 

factors to include in 

plant selection, such 

as maintenance, 

canopy, root depth, 

and water uptake. 
42 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

the requirements for infill are not more ­

onerous than those established for new 

development on greenfields sites. 

Examples 

The state of Washington has developed a 

Phase II application that explicitly lists infill 

development as an option for fulfilling the 

post-construction minimum control measure. 

To view the Department of Ecology’s permit 

application, go to: <www.ecy.wa.gov/ 

programs/wq/stormwater/phase_2/ 

Phase%20II%20Application.pdf> (see page 

14 within the document for the language on 

infill development). 

Clark County, Washington, adopted an 

infill ordinance in fall 2002. Its infill guidelines are applicable only in certain residential zoning districts for lots under 2.5 acres 

that adjoin existing development and can be 

served by existing infrastructure. The ordinance allows for two tiers of infill development. Tier 1 allows only detached 

single-family housing, but lot sizes can be 

smaller than existing zoning. Tier 2 allows 

attached and detached single-family housing, as well as duplexes and multi-family 

housing. Developers may also receive density bonuses. Infill projects are exempt from 

stormwater regulations if they create less 

than 5,000 square feet of new impervious 

surface. For more information on the infill 

ordinance and Clark County’s comprehensive plan, visit <www.co.clark.wa.us/ 

longrangeplan/review/index.html>. 

In its state model stormwater ordinance, 

New Jersey has identified areas slated for 

redevelopment and infill. Rather than devote 

resources to establishing new boundaries for 

water policy documents, the state used definitions that already exist for economic planning. Thus, parcels in areas designated as 

“Urban Redevelopment Zones,” such as 

“Urban Enterprise Zones” and “Urban 

Coordination Council Empowerment 

Neighborhoods,” are exempt from infiltration 

requirements. By using the existing designations, the office overseeing stormwater 

efforts need not devote resources to drawing 

new boundaries. In addition, the use of economic development boundaries helps to tie 

environmental protection to economic development efforts. For more information, see 

<www.njstormwater.org> and go to the 

Tier A model permit. 

Austin, Texas, has established a variety of 

water policies for its Desired Development 

Zones (DDZs) and Water Protection Zones 

(DWPZs). In the past, the city provided reimbursement for certain water and wastewater 

facilities over a three-year period. Under 

updated smart growth policies, major water 

and wastewater facilities located in the DDZ 

will be reimbursed in a single payment. 

Within the DWPZ, reimbursement for wastewater facilities will be discontinued, and the 

reimbursement schedule for water facilities 

will increase from three years to four. For 

more information on Austin’s smart growth 

incentives page, see <www.ci.austin.tx.us/ 

smartgrowth/incentives.htm>. 

Some states have adopted priority funding 

areas (PFAs), which are areas designated for 

growth and, as such, gain priority for grants, 

infrastructure, and transportation investments. In creating these zones, the states 

typically inventory how funding is allocated, 

and create (or adjust) the funding formulas 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 43 

Incorporating Infill into Stormwater Regulations: 

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has 

developed technical materials and guidance for the 

post-construction minimum measure under Phase II, 

which address new development, redevelopment, and 

infill separately. 

Definitions 

The definitions help establish the development and 

regulatory context. 

■ “New development” occurs on undeveloped area 

including cropland and other vegetated areas. 

■ “Redevelopment” describes an area where impervious surfaces (e.g., buildings, parking lots, and 

roads) already exist. 

■ “Infill area” describes undeveloped land in existing 

sewer service areas that is surrounded by developed land or man-made features where development cannot occur. 

The Post-Construction Rules 

The rules focus on three aspects of stormwater-related 

impacts: 1) total suspended solids (TSS), 2) infiltration, 

and 3) peak runoff rates. 

TSS refers to a measure of the amount of solids in 

the wastewater—in this case stormwater. TSS is a 

way to determine water “cloudiness,” which has 

implications for the biological functions of aquatic 

species. To assess TSS, water samples are passed 

through a filter, and the amount of material captured is measured relative to the amount of water 

filtered. 

Wisconsin’s requirements for the percent reduction of 

TSS are measured from a “typical development pattern 

with no controls” or “no BMP” baseline and are tiered 

as follows. For new development, an 80 percent reduction from “no control.” For redevelopment, a 40 percent reduction from “no control.” 

For infill, the requirements are: 

■ Less than 5 acres and developed prior to October 

2014, a 40 percent reduction from “no control” 

■ Otherwise an 80 percent reduction from “no 

control” 

■ The 5-acre in-fill threshold is based on undeveloped 

area available (not amount of land disturbed). 

For the infiltration standards, redevelopment sites are 

exempt. Otherwise, new residential development projects are required to infiltrate at least 90 percent of the 

water falling on the site and non-residential development infiltration volumes are required to be at least 

60 percent. 

Peak runoff rates (or peak discharge rates) refer to the 

maximum volume flow rate passing a particular location during a storm event. Peak discharge is typically 

increased with increased development as more water 

is collected and conveyed across impervious surfaces. 

For example water from two adjacent parking lots is 

collected and flows to a common gutter. This additive 

volume gathers energy as it flows downhill toward a 

discharge pipe. This increased volume can scour riverbanks and increase the risk for flooding. Peak discharge is typically expressed in units of volume/time 

(e.g., ft3/sec). Within Wisconsin’s rules, the peak discharge for post-construction conditions are to be 

reduced to the pre-development conditions for the 

two-year, 24-hour storm (though some local ordinances may vary). 

The peak discharge standards do not apply to: 

■ Sites classified as redevelopment 

■ Infill development less than 5 acres 

For more information on Wisconsin’s post-construction 

requirements, presented as PowerPoint presentations, 

visit <www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/water/wm/ 

nps/stormwater/post-constr>. 
44 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Courtyards and landscaped areas are 

common features of site plans. Small 

modifications in drainage and plant 

selection can improve the water handling performance of infill projects. 

to support development in these targeted 

areas. Maryland’s Smart Growth Initiative, 

passed in 1997, directs state infrastructure 

funds into PFAs. The initiative identified 

areas automatically included, and also 

allowed counties to designate certain areas 

within their boundaries as PFAs. Under this 

policy, local jurisdictions may allow development in non-PFAs, but must fund all infrastructure improvements locally. Phase II 

communities located in a PFA should make 

sure local stormwater policies complement 

the state plan. For example, a complementary plan would make sure that (1) comprehensive plans, zoning codes, and standards 

are in place to foster infill, (2) local funding 

investments match the state’s commitment, 

including sewers, stormwater, and transportation, and (3) permitting processes do 

not pose barriers to infill. 

Rather than require stormwater handling for 

each individual project, the city of San Diego 

adopted a policy in 2002 to allow infill 

developers to share in the cost of stormwater 

abatement. The Standard Urban Stormwater 

Mitigation Plan allows developers to contribute to stormwater mitigation that serves 

the entire drainage basin. Engineers estimate 

that individual developments projects can 

achieve savings of up to $40,000 by participating in a shared stormwater control program. For more detailed information on the 

Localized Equivalent Area Drainage program, 

(LEAD) visit <www.sannet.gov/stormwater> 

and type “Localized Equivalent Area 

Drainage” into the site’s search engine. 

Some of the best advocates for infill are 

developers themselves. The Center for 

Watershed Protection has two programs, 

Builders for the Bay and the Site Design 

Roundtable, which gather information from 

developers on the best ways to build 

stormwater-friendly developments. For more 

information, visit <www.cwp.org>. 

Points to Consider 

Lots slated for infill can be the last open 

spaces in a built-out community. In some 

instances, they may be the remaining open 

lots that handle urban stormwater. There is 

Photo: City of Portland, Washington 
45 Protecting Water Resources with Smart Growth 

no one method for determining whether 

these lots should be kept open for stormwater control or developed. The local development context is a critical consideration that 

comes into play. Green spaces and parks 

serve a multitude of purposes in urban areas 

for aesthetic purposes, recreation, and 

environmental benefits. 

Some lots may not be critical for natural 

handling of stormwater, but may be in an 

area with waterways that are already compromised by development-related stormwater runoff. In this case, there are an 

increasing number of green building techniques and low impact development (LID) 

options for onsite stormwater control. 

Developers and their landscape architects 

should look at common urban development 

features, such as courtyards, small water features, and tree planting areas for stormwater 

control. Since these features are likely to 

already be included in site plans, small 

design modifications to handle runoff can 

improve your project’s performance. The 

Center for Watershed Protection has developed several documents under its “Smart 

Sites” initiative, which can be found at 

<www.cwp.org/smartsites.pdf>. 

As discussed elsewhere in this subsection, 

investments from infill development may be 

able to support improved stormwater handling by way of gray infrastructure. 

Localities should look at infrastructure 

financing plans, and how they can be used 

to attract infill investments. A mitigation 

plan for development projects can lessen 

stormwater impacts related to infill. 

Maryland’s Guide to BMP Selection and 

Location includes tables of BMPs and in 

which setting they perform best. See 

<www.mde.state.md.us/assets/ 

document/chapter4.pdf>. 

Finally, even where there is strong consensus among the stormwater engineer and 

other planning departments on strategies 

for infill, local residents may oppose any 

new development project in their community. In a growing number of circumstances, 

the arguments are based on increased 

stormwater runoff. Several organizations 

have developed tools to help design better 

infill projects and develop community consensus early on. In addition, the low impact 

and site design options listed in this document may help developers, community 

members, and zoning officials understand 

the options for handling infill development 

in a way that also protects the local environment. The Greenbelt Alliance in 

California <www.greenbelt.org> has produced Smarter Infill and Smart Growth 

America <www.smartgrowthamerica.org> 

has released Choosing Our Community’s 

Future. 
46 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Language to Look for in Ordinances 

It is important to keep in mind that the language 

in your city or county’s stormwater ordinances 

and guidance will be part of a regulatory and 

legal framework in the same manner that zoning 

ordinances are. Thus, the particular wording can 

have implications for whether the stormwater 

policies will work in concert with, or against, your 

smart growth policies. Most communities will 

have to balance the need for language that is 

legally binding, flexible, and designed to deliver 

stormwater benefits to the maximum extent 

practicable. 

Language Fostering Creation 

of Joint Smart Growth and 

Stormwater Policies 

Language specifying that post-development 

hydrology match the pre-development 

hydrology: Language to this effect may foster 

redevelopment. Because the pre-development 

state of the parcel was already developed, a redevelopment project with the same lot coverage 

will essentially have no effect. When you write 

your ordinance, however, you may want to avoid 

confusion by specifying that the pre-development condition refers to the site immediately 

prior to redevelopment. 

Language classifying a smart growth technique as a BMP: This language will verify that 

your smart growth policies are recognized as 

stormwater practices. Note that your guidance or 

ordinance may also require maintenance and 

operation for the BMPs. For example, if your “Fix It 

First” policy is adopted by reference as a stormwater BMP, the BMP maintenance requirements are 

also likely to apply. If you have established a BMP 

maintenance fund, this could establish a new 

source of funding for priority repairs. 

Adding “prevention” of stormwater to your 

ordinance’s purpose or goals section: 

Stormwater BMPs have traditionally been 

designed for mitigation; that is, to lessen 

stormwater once it is generated. Adding 

stormwater prevention to your goals, however, 

can help support the prioritization of redevelopment, compact development plans, and “Fix It 

First” programs. 

Language that includes smart growth policy 

techniques in the definitions: The “Definitions” 

section of your ordinance is an important feature. 

The legal definition will establish how narrow or 

broad your options can be, or even what measures can be classified as BMPs. In addition, having 

smart growth policy terms in the definition can 

assist you in cross-referencing other plans, which 

can save time and resources. For example, many 

cities are exempting projects in dense, urban 

areas from infiltration requirements. Rather than 

delineate new areas, some cities are using established districts, such as “Business Improvement 

Districts” or “core downtown” or boundaries set in 

economic development plans. Adopting these 

districts into the “Definitions” section of your 

stormwater plan automatically delineates where 

policies apply. Even if the policy is not fully used 

in the ordinance or guidance during the first fiveyear permit, establishing the definition can serve 

as a placeholder as your community works out 

the full details. 

Language that refers to design manuals: 

Because the stormwater management aspects of a 

development project can be comprised of many 

interrelated elements, ordinances often refer to 

design manuals. The reference to a manual will 

allow localities to develop and maintain manuals 

that reflect their smart growth programs. You may 

want to see where a local manual and/or ordinance on “traditional neighborhood design” or 

“Main Street Redevelopment District” can be customized to add stormwater management criteria 

for hydraulic sizing and performance standards. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 47 

Language Hindering Creation of 

Joint Smart Growth and 

Stormwater Policies 

Language specifying that post-development 

hydrology match the pre-development hydrology: This language, which can help incentivize 

redevelopment as noted above, can block infill on 

undeveloped sites or smart growth on greenfields 

sites. Make sure there is flexibility within your 

stormwater and urban design plans so that the 

requirement for maintaining natural hydrology 

delivers projects that work in all contexts within a 

watershed. 

Language requiring that BMPs replicate natural 

systems or non-structural natural BMPs: This 

might be a desired strategy in rural areas or those 

with pristine water resources. If this is a strict statement that covers all development projects in your 

city, county, or township, however, your community might face difficulties in directing growth to 

areas specifically targeted for a higher intensity of 

development. In addition, some strategies for replicating natural systems require large areas of land 

for infiltration or filtration of pollutants, which 

might consume land needed in a traditional town 

center or new urbanist plan to create a compact, 

walkable town center. Make sure there is flexibility 

so that there are options for stormwater management that are context-sensitive. 

Language that classifies the intensity of control 

based on “housing units per acre”: Most land use 

plans classify the intensity of residential development based on housing units per acre. This system 

is based on zoning conventions that tend to separate uses, and hence, can disperse development. 

Stormwater regulations based on units per acre 

will not only reinforce this system, but are likely to 

miss the importance of looking at water impacts 

on a “per unit” basis. Many watershed managers 

are faced with growth estimates over the next 

decade that range from several hundred households, to thousands of new households. Looking 

solely at “housing units per acre” on given acreage 

within a watershed may produce an unrealistically 

low picture of the planning and investment needed. Looking at impacts on a “per unit” basis may 

help communities—in particular, growing communities—fully assess water impacts of expected 

growth in total number of households in the 

watershed. 

Language to tie priority funding to adoption 

of a model ordinance: Many states are developing model ordinances for local communities as a 

way to reduce the resources needed to develop 

and implement NPDES permit programs. These 

model ordinances are, by their nature, written to 

a minimum level of compliance, and written 

broadly as to be applicable in many different 

environmental settings. As an alternative to a 

model ordinance, states are also allowing communities to develop innovative alternative plans. 

When priority funding is given for adoption of the 

model ordinance, there is less incentive for a community to choose options for developing innovative and multi-objective plans. In addition, many 

communities will likely choose an option that is 

as simple and spelled-out as possible. By developing specialized manuals for Traditional 

Neighborhood Design and redevelopment areas, 

localities have a ready-to-use option for smart 

growth. Localities and state should look for ways 

to make a variety of options attractive through 

technical assistance and/or funding priorities. 

Impervious coverage limitations: Many state and 

local permits have incorporated impervious surface limitations (or lot coverage limitations) based 

on studies that show that a watershed begins to 

deteriorate when 7 to 10 percent of the watershed 

is covered by impervious surface. This concept has 

been translated to the site level through ordinances that limit coverage of rooftops and parking 

to no more than 10 to 20 percent of the site. While 

this may be an effective strategy in some circumstances (for example, to protect pristine waters), in 

others, this type of ordinance serves to spread out 

development even more. Larger lots are needed 

for all development projects, which serves to 

extend the distances among uses. This, in turn, 

requires longer stretches of roadway and more 

water and sewer infrastructure per unit of development. 
48 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

3. Redevelopment 

Definition 

Redevelopment is development of a site that 

has been previously developed and is typically covered with impervious or compacted 

surface. For purposes of this subsection, the 

reader can assume that the lot is covered 

with compacted or impervious surface and 

has minimal to no value in handling 

stormwater. These projects can include 

development of vacant buildings, lots where 

a building has been torn down and replaced 

with gravel parking lots, or older malls. 

Who Do I Talk to About 

Redevelopment Plans? 

In most instances, redevelopment is left to 

market forces. Developers and real estate 

investors seek out available property and 

either redevelop by-right or petition for a 

variance or rezoning. In other jurisdictions, 

special entities are formed to foster redevelopment. There are often barriers to redevelopment, including complex approval 

processes and the perception from lenders 

that the deal will pose more risk than new 

development projects. 

Thus the best resources for learning about 

redevelopment plans can be private sector 

organizations, or public/private partnerships. 

Economic entities, such as redevelopment 

authorities, “Main Street” programs and 

brownfields offices, often work to line up 

financing, zoning reforms, shared parking 

arrangements, and other incentives to overcome the barriers and perceptions that suppress market interest. Talk to your economic 

development director, chamber of commerce, 

or city manager to see if there are established 

redevelopment districts that can be added to 

your stormwater management plans. If you 

are the head of a redevelopment agency, talk 

to local experts on land development to 

develop scenarios of watershed growth. In 

this way, you can present not only the economic benefits of redevelopment, but also 

the regional water benefits that can accrue 

from successful implementation of your 

Main Street or brownfields program. 

As a stakeholder in the stormwater process, 

you may also want to consult with commercial real estate brokers to investigate why a 

commercial district, mall, or older downtown 

is underperforming, and what steps are likely 

to revive interest. 

Examples of programs that you can ask 

about include: 

Vacant Property Reform: According to the 

National Vacant Properties Campaign, vacant 

and abandoned properties occupy about 15 

percent of the area of a typical large city— 

more than 12,000 acres on average. Vacant 

property reforms are designed to encourage 

the redevelopment of vacant properties, 

allowing the utilization of existing buildings 

in potentially desirable urban and suburban 

locations. For more information, see 

<www.vacantproperties.org>. The 

International City/County Managers 

Association has researched and reported on 

successful local efforts to bring vacant commercial and residential properties back into 

use. For more information, see 

<www.icma.org/vacantproperties>. 

Greyfields: Greyfields are a subcategory of 

vacant or underperforming properties. 

Greyfields are large, previously developed 

properties, such as older shopping malls and 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 49 

warehouses. These sites tend to be large and 

well-served by transportation and stormwater infrastructure. These properties differ 

from brownfields in that they are not contaminated or perceived to be contaminated. 

To see if your community is working on a 

redevelopment strategy for old malls or other 

greyfield sites, contact the department of 

economic development or the local chamber 

of commerce. This strategy may include 

mixed-use rezoning, enhancing transportation on the site, and/or redevelopment incentives. Because these sites are so large and are 

not contaminated, you may be able to negotiate for better control of stormwater on site, 

and thus increase the stormwater benefits of 

the redevelopment project. The Congress for 

the New Urbanism published Greyfields into 

Goldfields, which presents information on 

common reasons behind the decline in malls 

and large properties and development 

options for reusing the sites. See 

<www.cnu.org/cnu_reports/ 

Executive_summary.pdf>. 

Renovation Codes: Renovation, or rehabilitation, codes are commonly developed to 

replace inflexible building codes with a set of 

coordinated standards for renovation and 

rehabilitation in older areas. For example, 

renovation of an old downtown might be 

prohibitively expensive, or impossible under 

building codes created for new development. 

Renovation codes meet safety objectives 

while setting workable standards for renovation. Renovation codes also help towns revitalize the economy of their downtowns, 

while relieving development pressure on 

greenfield sites (and thus retaining the 

stormwater benefits of open space). The 

United States Department of Housing and 

Urban Development published a report, 

Smart Codes in Your Community: A Guide to 

Building Rehabilitation Codes, describing various redevelopment codes and examples of 

rehabilitation codes from across the country. 

See <http://www.huduser.org/publications/ 

destech/smartcodes.html>. If your community or state offers support for renovation and 

rehabilitation, also check to see if historic tax 

credits are allowed, and count this toward 

your stormwater credit for redevelopment. 

Check with your historic preservation office 

or local nonprofits that deal with historic 

preservation. 

Typical Costs 

The costs of redevelopment are distributed 

among several stakeholders. For a city or 

county, fostering redevelopment can include 

(1) the costs of redevelopment planning and 

stakeholder outreach, (2) the costs of any 

incentives provided, (3) upgrading and repair 

of existing street and water infrastructure, and 

(4) staff time if specific programs have been 

established. These costs, however, cannot be 

appraised without looking at the costs associated with vacant or underused commercial 

and residential properties. The Vacant 

Properties campaign has compiled information on these costs and are available at 

<www.vacantproperties.org>. 

For developers, redevelopment projects in 

already-developed areas are typically more 

complex, and thus can be more expensive. 

These developers must work with existing 

street and circulation patterns, building configurations, and zoning and regulatory codes, 

many of which are decades or even centuries 

old. Developers look at the time and cost 

involved to see if projects “pencil out” economically. Local incentives and regulations 

play into cost, including stormwater management. Review your smart growth plan (and 

state programs) to see if funding mecha­
50 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

nisms, open space and park funds, tax incentives, or permit review incentives are available. When packaged strategically, these 

incentives may serve not only as economic 

development incentives, but stormwater program incentives as well. 

Measurable Goals 

Since redevelopment projects are discrete 

and are typically tracked through permits, 

stormwater managers may be able to use 

databases that are already in use. Since many 

stormwater consultants are establishing 

tracking software, work with them to establish new fields to track the impervious surface reused through redevelopment. One 

example of a measurable goal would be to 

create an inventory of vacant properties and 

set goals for redeveloping them. 

As noted in the previous section, you may 

also be able to track the amount of impervious surface avoided through your redevelopment programs. This approach would 

translate how the square footage, building 

footprint, parking and associated infrastructure would compare under conventional 

development standards elsewhere in the 

watershed. As a first step, the stormwater or 

planning office would need to estimate (1) 

where the development might go were it not 

for redevelopment programs, (2) the average 

parameters for conventional development 

(e.g., likely number of parking spaces, new 

road and access designs), and (3) any other 

secondary impacts that might come from 

new growth. 

Examples 

Comparing build-out scenarios was used to 

assess the transportation and water and air 

quality impacts of Atlantic Station, a brownfields redevelopment project in Atlanta.13 

The site design for Atlantic Station, located 

on a former steel factory, includes several 

stormwater improvements. The developer, 

Jacoby Development Inc., built stormwater 

handling features on the site, upgraded the 

storm and sanitary sewer network for the 

project, and addressed groundwater contamination. 

As part of EPA’s analysis, the Agency compared how the same intensity of development would perform if built according to 

conventional development standards in 

other parts of the Atlantic metropolitan 

region farther from the urban core. 

This lake, located in the central part of 

the Atlantic Station redevelopment 

project in Atlanta, Georgia, is a development amenity, but also assists in 

stormwater management. 

Photo: Paul Mulda

wer 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 51 

Compared to a greenfields site, the redevelopment scenario had lower total phosphorous and nitrogen loadings, as well as 

reduced volume. In some cases, the comparative reductions were orders of magnitude 

lower. To learn more about this project, visit 

<www.epa.gov/projectxl/atlantic/index.htm>. 

Points to Consider 

Most of the “Points to Consider” listed 

under the previous section on “Infill 

Development” also apply. As noted above, 

many cities and counties are adding onsite 

water handling requirements to all development and redevelopment projects. Even 

where there is flexibility in stormwater ordinances, cities and counties should make 

sure that the BMP requirements for all projects are established on a “level playing 

field.” Stormwater engineers and planners 

should compare the costs, the permitting 

process, and predictability of the BMPs 

required for development and redevelopment projects. For example, stormwater 

management programs that rely heavily on 

infiltration techniques might tilt the playing 

field in favor of large, dispersed projects on 

less expensive land. Typically, this land is 

located farther out in undeveloped reaches 

of the watershed, where infiltration on a 

larger scale is already taking place. Even 

with requirements for infiltration on site, 

the disturbance that takes place can be a net 

loss for the watershed. Thus, stormwater 

and watershed managers may want to assess 

the balance of requirements and incentives 

to make sure stormwater rules are not inadvertently pushing development to undeveloped land. 

4. Development Districts 

Definition 

Development districts (or in some cases special zoning districts) are created to achieve 

comprehensive planning and urban design 

objectives in a specified area. While the previous subsections reviewed policies for individual sites and smaller projects, 

development districts are characterized by a 

larger site area and the need for complex and 

coordinated rezoning, transportation, and 

planning efforts. Examples of special zoning 

districts include transit oriented zoning districts (TOD), business improvement districts 

(BIDs), new urbanist projects, traditional 

neighborhood development (TNDs), brownfields redevelopment, and “Main Street” revitalization districts. 

Who Do I Talk to About District 

Plans? 

If an area is incorporated, any such district 

would be found in the city’s zoning ordinance. 

If an area is unincorporated, county zoning 

applies. In some cases, the zoning regulations 

carefully delineate the sub-area plans or special districts and show them on a map. 

If you are in a county that does not have zoning, or has not yet reviewed zoning codes for 

redevelopment areas, your locality may have 

developed special plans for certain areas, for 

example a BID or “Main Street” redevelopment plan. Check to see if there is a document listing specific policies or planned 

zoning changes related to development or 

redevelopment in the district. Many of the 

policies listed in Subsection 2 (Infill 
52 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Development) might be listed and can be 

This path allows safe included in your SWMP. pedestrian and bike 

passage, but is also Innovations in zoning and building codes designed for access 

have emerged under a variety of names. The by emergency and 

Smart Code, TND codes, form-based codes, service vehicles. 

unified development ordinances (UDOs), 

and model development codes are examples. 

These codes may apply to the entire municipality, to new development only, or in the 

form of an overlay zone. The Congress for 

New Urbanism has collected examples of 

various code innovations at <www.cnu.org/ 

pdf/code_catalog_8-1-01.pdf>. 

Photo: www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden 

In reviewing codes with your local planning 

office or economic development department, evolved to control development-related 

make sure that the all pieces are in place to aspects such as street widths, septic requiredeliver on the smart growth benefits. For ments, and/or infrastructure planning. Some 

example a unified development ordinance subdivisions may also be governed under 

might require sidewalks on both sides of the drainage districts, which place limits on 

street; however, if state transportation and impervious surface coverage and map devellocal zoning policies result in highly separat- opment restrictions in areas of significant 

ed uses with mandated turning lanes and drainage flows. In some cases, subdivision 

wide intersections, pedestrian trips may be requirements will govern the street network 

reduced, if not eliminated. The stormwater and control the number of connections 

benefits are likewise diminished. Thus, you required between the subdivision and surmay need to consult with the zoning and rounding parcels (see Subsection 8, Smart 

planning office, together with a transporta- Growth Street Designs for more information engineer. If one set of codes supercedes tion). Consult your city or county’s engineer 

another, you may want to consult with the or planning office to see if smart growth 

city or county manager to find flexibility and policies have been added to your subdivision 

list all the benefits, including stormwater, codes. 

that come from a smart growth development Check to see if your community has formed district. 

public/private partnerships or alliances to 

Subdivision codes are a common method facilitate planning and implementation for 

incorporated and unincorporated communi- these districts. Also check with a local historties use to control development. Most subdi- ical society, the downtown business associavision codes establish how many housing tion, or the local chamber of commerce to 

units can be built by-right on undeveloped see if they are aware of special planning or 

land. Over time, subdivision codes have economic development districts. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 53 

Brownfields are properties with real or perceived contamination from prior uses and, in 

some cases, are classified as districts for the 

purposes of cleanup, financial incentives, and 

coordinated redevelopment. Larger brownfields can include former military bases, transportation facilities, and institutions. These 

large properties are often located in areas near 

existing transportation and infrastructure. The 

larger parcels pose opportunities to redesign a 

development program that includes smart 

growth features, like multi-modal street 

design, advantageous use of existing transportation routes, and open space. EPA estimates that for every acre of brownfields 

redevelopment, 4.5 acres of greenfields can be 

preserved.14 Check to see if your community 

has developed plans for brownfields identification, cleanup and/or development plans. 

There may be opportunities to design large 

scale, onsite stormwater handling in areas 

where the contamination will not be transported after redevelopment has taken place. 

Stormwater Benefits 

As noted in the previous subsections, special 

zoning districts can limit overall stormwater 

runoff by directing development away from 

greenfields at the urban fringe into existing 

urban areas. (See Subsections 2, Infill 

Development, and 3, Redevelopment, for further information on the impacts of encouraging infill.) Coordination of planning, investment, and infrastructure for a district can 

also result in a more efficient site plan. 

Development decisions are made at a larger 

coordinated scale, which can facilitate efficient street layouts, a smaller footprint for 

parking facilities, and less expensive options 

for collecting and handling stormwater for 

the district. 

In addition, mixed-use districts can support 

a wider variety of transportation options, 

which lessens the impacts of transportation 

on water quality. Auto emissions have deleterious effects through deposition of exhaust 

and accumulation of automotive related 

materials (brake linings and tire tread wear) 

that are carried into waterways through 

stormwater runoff. 

A 2004 study conducted by Asad J. Khattak 

and Daniel Rodriguez of the University of 

North Carolina, Chapel Hill, suggests that 

households in the neo-traditional development substitute driving trips with walking 

trips. The study examined differences in 

travel behavior in a matched pair of neighborhoods (one conventional and one neo-traditional) in Chapel Hill and Carrboro, North 

Carolina. The survey and study of 453 

households suggest that single-family households in the neo-traditional development 

make a similar number of total trips, but significantly fewer automobile trips, fewer 

external trips, and shorter trips than households in the conventional neighborhood, 

even after controlling for demographic characteristics of the households and for resident 

self-selection.15 One term that transportation 

professionals often use to describe trip-making within a set district is “internal capture 

rate.” When urban planners talk about a 

high internal capture rate for a proposed district, this forecast relates to a higher percentage of multi-modal and/or combined trips 

within the district. This is something 

stormwater professionals should look for 

when evaluating plans. 
54 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Paved Area per Dwelling Unit – a Comparison 

Image: Tom Low, Duany Plater-Zyberk

Image: Tom Low, Duany Plater-Zyberk 

Conventional Residential Subdivision Mixed Use, Traditional Neighborhood Design 

Vermillion is a traditional neighborhood outside Huntersville, North Carolina. The town enacted a TND ordinance to 

coordinate the approval process for TNDs. The two maps were drawn to compare the TND design and a more conventional, residential-only design. 

In the new urbanist street plan, the greater part of the paved areas is taken up by narrow 18 feet roadway widths, 

whereas the conventional plan relies on wider 30 feet streets. Although the roadway area is higher in the TND plan, the 

street component per dwelling unit is far less, as indicated in the following tables. 

Conventional Design 

■ 38 single family homes 

Street Width (feet) Street Length (feet) Street Imperviousness (ft2) 

18 275 4,950 

24 350 8,400 

30 2111 63,330 

76,680 

76,680/38 dwellings = 2,018 square feet street imperviousness/dwelling unit 

Traditional Neighborhood Design


■ 40 single family homes ■ One office building (4,400 square feet) 

■ 16 studio apartments ■ Two medium sized office buildings (30,000 square feet total) 

■ 16 live/work dwellings ■ Three smaller commercial buildings (15,000 square feet total) 

■ 74 townhouses ■ One restaurant (5,000 square feet) 

Total 146 residential dwelling units ■ One church (10,000 square feet) 

Street Width (feet) Street Length (feet) Street Imperviousness (ft2) 

18 3,270 58,860 

24 750 18,000 

30 525 15,750 

92,610 

92,610/146 dwellings = 634 square feet street imperviousness/dwelling unit 

The analysis did not look at sidewalk lengths, or the street imperviousness related to commercial buildings.

16 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 55 

Development and redevelopment plans that 

are based on districts might also allow 

stormwater officials to meet requirements 

under the Illicit Connection Minimum 

Control under Phase II. Many large redevelopment parcels are near waterways and offer 

the potential to correct stormwater and infrastructure problems. Many illicit connections 

are found in older manufacturing districts, so 

you may be able to also meet requirements to 

find and eliminate illicit discharges. 

Finally, the stormwater performance of a site 

is the result of, or enhanced by, the additive 

effect of several redevelopment policies. For 

example, in a TOD district, policies to 

require higher density development are combined with maximum setback rules and 

reduced parking requirements. All three of 

these policies work together to support transit use and higher density projects on a 

smaller development footprint. It is worth 

noting that under current practice, development districts such as office and industrial 

parks do not carry these advantages. The dispersed arrangement, large surface parking 

lots and predominance of a single use (e.g., 

office only) serve to spread development— 

and the associated impervious surfaces—out 

further. 

Typical Costs 

For the public sector, the cost of planning a 

special district and setting or revising zoning 

is the staff time required to research, adopt, 

and implement the new codes. Some communities hire consultants to help gather and 

coordinate stakeholder input, draft design 

alternatives, and create final plans. The range 

of costs varies. You may be able to tap the 

expertise of a local university or nonprofit at 

a lower cost for gathering input and narrowing the scope of items that need the specialized skills of a consultant. 

While brownfields redevelopment can be 

costly, new regulations and programs are in 

place to assist localities and developers. The 

variety of activities related to financing and 

redeveloping brownfields sites is beyond the 

scope of this publication, but you may have 

brownfields redevelopment activity underway which you can cite in your stormwater 

guidance materials. EPA has a comprehensive 

site on how to remediate, market, and develop brownfields sites at <www.epa.gov/ 

swerosps/bf/index.html>. 

Some communities may already have design 

manuals in place for transit districts, TNDs, 

or new urbanist communities. These can 

serve as a starting point for developing a 

joint smart growth/stormwater BMP manual. 

These manuals typically include detailed 

information on streets, building envelopes, 

the use mix, and transportation connections. 

Stormwater, zoning, and planning departments may be able to cost-effectively create a 

BMP manual for development districts from 

work that has already been completed. For 

example, a stormwater engineer could take 

the city’s manual on TND and insert information on siting stormwater handling facilities within the TND, on using water features 

for stormwater control, and sizing criteria for 

various BMPs and performance criteria at the 

site and neighborhood scales. 
56 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Measurable Goals 

For a jurisdiction without comprehensive LEED Neighborhood 

zoning for development districts, a short- Design 

term goal could include adoption of a special 

district ordinance. For a jurisdiction that Check with your zoning or environmental 

works department to see if your locality has already has special zoning districts in place,	 adopted the U.S. Green Building Council’s 

goals would depend on the type of ordinance (USGBC’s) scorecards. These scorecards, called 

adopted. For jurisdictions with TOD zoning, LEED (for Leadership in Environmental and 

a goal might be to raise the percentage of Energy Design), contain rating systems for 

development and redevelopment projects. new development built in already-developed USGBC is developing a new scorecard called 

areas by a certain percent over a specified LEED Neighborhood Design – or LEED ND. 

time period. If detailed information is avail- This scorecard includes not only green 

able on transit use, one can estimate the	 aspects of individual buildings, but of their 

location as well. Thus, the scorecard takes 

reduction in automobile-related deposition	 into consideration the smart growth princi­ and runoff pollution. ples based on transportation options, a mix 

of housing types, and connections to the 

As listed above, communities may also want broader community. LEED scorecards, includto estimate stormwater performance of smart ing LEED ND, include rating points for how 

growth projects not only on the site level, the project or district handles stormwater, 

and might provide a template for measuring but on the watershed or regional level as your locality’s performance under NPDES. For 

well. Redevelopment of an entirely devel- more information on the LEED scorecards, 

oped site basically results in no net increase visit <www.usgbc.org/leed/leed_main.asp>. 

in stormwater at the local level, but also 

absorbs development demand that would 

otherwise result in the addition of impervi- An example of creative stormwater financing ous cover in an undeveloped portion of the comes from Elm Grove, Wisconsin. watershed. Subsection 1, Regional Planning Flooding has been a significant problem for gives information on the methods for com­ the city—in particular, for the downtown 

paring smart growth and conventional develarea. In 2001, the city developed an econom­ opment plans. ic development plan for the downtown, with 

Examples a focus on reducing the flooding. To address 

the flooding issue, the city has developed a 

San Diego has launched a “City of Villages” stormwater mitigation plan with many eleplan to direct development via infill and ments, including restoration of concreteredevelopment to certain neighborhoods. lined creeks to their natural state, improving 

The planning update and the stormwater stormwater retention areas and redesigning 

management cross-reference the City of the city’s park with water control in mind. 

Villages infill plan as a water strategy. To see Because the flood management plan is 

more on the planning efforts, visit expected to reduce the size of the 100-year 

<www.sandiego.gov/cityofvillages>. For more floodplain, properties that are no longer in 

on the Urban Runoff Management Plan, visit the floodplain as a result of the improve­

<www.sandiego.gov/stormwater>. ments will increase in value. The town is 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 57 

creating a TIF district to capture this value, 

and invest in the targeted stormwater 

improvements. The town is also creating a 

stormwater utility because the monies raised 

through the TIF are not expected to cover the 

costs of all of the needed improvements. The 

town is coordinating the water planning with 

the revised Master Plan for its downtown, 

which will include retaining a small town 

feel, creating a pedestrian friendly environment, and incentivizing redevelopment in the 

downtown area. For more information, visit 

<www.elmgrovewi.org>. 

The Trust for Historic Preservation sponsors 

the Main Street Program to spur investment 

in older downtowns. Enterprise Zones and 

Elm Street Programs are other programs 

established to attract investment to older 

downtowns. These programs are evidence of 

growing interest in historic areas and what 

they offer, such as unique older buildings, a 

walkable layout, and economic potential. 

Stormwater professionals should look to 

these programs in their communities as a way 

to manage stormwater runoff within their 

watersheds. To learn about the specific policies and programs, visit 

<www.mainstreet.org>. 

The Mountain View, California, transit station, called The Crossings, is an example of 

how redevelopment of a greyfields site into a 

transit district can include better stormwater 

management. Prior to redevelopment, the 16­

acre site was 98 percent impervious cover 

and home to an underperforming shopping 

mall. Because the California Department of 

Transportation planned to build a commuter 

rail station immediately adjacent to the site, 

the city of Mountain View envisioned making 

the station a success through a higher density 

and mixed-use development program. As 

redevelopment occurred, planners were able 

to build in onsite handling of stormwater for 

more than 45 percent of the site. Open spaces 

designed to absorb water are complemented 

by compact building sites, a grid of narrow 

streets and a space-efficient parking plan. For 

this and other case studies, visit the Natural 

Resources Defense Council’s “Stormwater 

Strategies” at <www.nrdc.org/water/ 

pollution/storm/stoinx.asp>. 

More information on the transportation and 

land use performance of the station area in 

Mountain View can be found at 

<transitorienteddevelopment.dot.ca.gov>; 

follow the links to “The Crossings.” 

Points to Consider 

One type of special district that requires particular attention is the use of impervious surface coverage districts. Impervious surface 

zoning districts generally set maximum ratios 

on the amount of impervious surface within a 

zone or, more commonly, on a parcel. For 

example, an ordinance might state that no 

more than 20 percent of a lot may be covered 

with impervious surfaces such as rooftops, 

driveways, or accessory buildings. Often, the 

purpose behind impervious surface districts 

A mixed-use district is used at The 

Crossings, in Mountain View, California. 

Photo: EPA 
58 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

is based on studies that show watershed 

decline begins once impervious surface coverage exceeds 10 percent.17 The 10-percent figure has been applied to the individual site 

level within the watershed, suggesting that 

limiting development to lower densities that 

only cover a portion of the site will translate 

across the watershed to more pervious surfaces for stormwater control and preserved 

ecological function. 

However, application of an impervious surface district on a parcel-by-parcel basis, might 

not help meet stormwater objectives, and in 

fact, might result in worsened water quality, 

particularly on a watershed scale. The following are points to consider regarding impervious surface districts that apply only to the 

site level: 

Impervious surface ordinances consider 

only site cover, not the ultimate goal of 

reducing stormwater runoff volumes: For 

example, suppose a homeowner would like to 

build an addition to his/her house, which is 

located in an older urban area that the city 

has designated for economic redevelopment. 

The homeowner also would like to disconnect the downspouts and develop a rain garden and other features to handle all of the 

stormwater on site. An impervious surface 

code, read strictly, would prohibit that homeowner from building the addition, even 

though the homeowner would improve 

stormwater management on the lot. The 

impervious surface district has the effect of 

creating a low-density district, which may run 

counter to a community’s wish to accommodate more density in certain neighborhoods 

to make use of transit, foster redevelopment, 

or respond to market demand. 

Much of the “pervious” surface in low-density development acts like impervious surface 

for handling stormwater: Development practices can involve wholesale grading of a site, 

removal of topsoil, severe erosion during construction, compaction by heavy equipment, 

and filling of depressions. Research now 

shows that the runoff from highly compacted 

lawns is almost as high as runoff from paved 

surfaces.18 The turfgrass planted in a typical 

new residential project does little to reverse 

the impacts to the soil by construction. 

Further, turfgrasses have shallow roots that 

do not provide the same soil anchoring, water 

uptake, and other ecological processes as 

deep-rooted native grasses and plants. 

Low-density developments tend to be 

accompanied by more offsite impervious 

infrastructure: Development in a watershed is 

not simply the sum of the parcels within it. 

Rather, total impervious area in a watershed 

is the sum of site developments plus all of the 

infrastructure (e.g., water utility, transportation) supporting those sites. For example, the 

hard cover of a parking space with dimensions of 18 feet by 9 feet is not the only 

imperviousness associated with that space. 

Drive or access aisles are also typically coded 

into parking standards; a parking lot with 90­

degree parking typically is served by a 24-foot 

drive aisle that spans the length of the parking lot and ties into other access lanes. 

Additionally, many modern street codes 

require additional lanes for turning, deceleration, and service lanes. An impervious surface 

coverage district that considers only development of individual sites might miss much of 

the impervious surface that is leading to 

degradation of water quality in the entire 

watershed. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 59 

Growth is coming to the region; limiting 

density on a given site doesn’t eliminate that 

growth. Density limits are responses to— 

and attempts to manage—growth: Yet these 

limits do not, in fact, manage growth; they 

only manage the growth on the density-limited area. The rest of the growth that was going 

to come to the region still comes, but spreads 

throughout or across the watershed. 

From a water resource protection perspective, 

defining the balance of developed areas and 

open space requires a broader look at watershed management, rather than limits on a parcel-by-parcel basis. A first step is to plan for 

strategic preservation of continuous tracts of 

open space. Second, preservation of critical 

ecological areas such as riparian corridors, 

stream buffers, flood plains, and wetlands is 

needed. These parcels are of critical importance in developed areas to absorb and filter 

stormwater. Third, for land that is to be developed, smart growth strategies such as higher 

density and more compact development serve 

to disturb less land and accommodate more 

development. As mentioned elsewhere in this 

publication, redevelopment sites are particularly attractive when considering development 

and stormwater mitigation options since they 

use already-developed sites and are likely to 

use existing infrastructure. 

There is a spirited debate about the performance of impervious surface limitations and 

how they should be structured to achieve the 

intended water quality goals. One result of the 

debate is a better focus on comprehensive 

strategies needed in a watershed. 

Organizations like the Center for Watershed 

Protection <www.cwp.org> and Project 

NEMO’s research division <nemo.uconn.edu/ 

impervious_surfaces/index.htm> are finetuning the mapping, measurement, and characterization of impervious surface coverage 

and the relationship to water quality. 

If an impervious surface special district is in 

your plan, one suggestion is to make sure the 

program looks at a watershed scale and the 

individual parcel, and includes all supporting 

impervious surfaces in the watershed. 

Another strategy involves modifying or eliminating the coverage limitations for certain districts to which you want to direct growth. You 

may want to conduct a survey of imperviousness per unit of development for conventional 

and smart growth plans. Impervious surface 

limitations may make sense in one part of the 

watershed (for example in headwater areas) 

or when applied watershed wide, but only 

when carefully reviewed with other subwatershed and subareas plans where redevelopment 

and development is desired. 

If your locality has a smart growth plan, make 

sure your impervious surface zoning does not 

act as a barrier to that plan. If your plan calls 

for higher density in certain districts, such as 

TOD districts and downtown redevelopment 

areas, then your impervious surface district 

should have enough flexibility to allow such 

density. Many areas are exploring the possibility of trading systems that coordinate development and preservation efforts. Trading 

programs might be found within a total maximum daily load (TMDL) program, for trading 

of impervious surfaces on a watershed-wide 

basis, or through a “payment in lieu of” program for installing BMPs. EPA has launched 

efforts to facilitate trading as a way to improve 

water quality. To learn more about EPA policy 

and the steps involved in establishing a trading program, visit <www.epa.gov/ 

OWOW/watershed/trading.htm>. 
60 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

TMDLs, Stormwater, and Smart Growth


Across the country, more than 40 percent of 

waterways are impaired by pollutants, sediment, 

temperature (typically heat), and nutrients. These 

waterways can be stream segments, bays, estuaries, and lakes. Once a waterway is listed as an 

impaired waterbody, localities are responsible for 

developing a “budget” for how much of a pollutant load the waterbody can experience. This 

budget is referred to as a TMDL, or total maximum 

daily load. A process typically follows to identify 

major sources (e.g., agriculture, urban runoff) and 

allocate a portion of the pollutant load to each 

source. The goal of a TMDL program is to restore a 

waterway by reducing pollutant sources. Thus, 

sources often face reductions in how much pollutant they contribute. 

Stormwater can be a major contributor to impairments due to the heat, nutrients, metals, and 

other pollutants carried in runoff. Thus, reducing 

stormwater runoff in areas with impaired waterbodies is often at the center of the TMDL process. 

As discussed throughout this document, smart 

growth techniques can help prevent and/or 

reduce stormwater volume and the pollutants 

carried within the runoff. In other words, smart 

growth can offer load reductions. By encouraging designs with lower impacts, the locality has 

taken steps not only to lessen development’s 

effect related to transportation and infiltration, 

but also to provide an incremental reduction in 

the pollutant load from stormwater discharges. 

Though not required, some states and localities 

are including budgets within TMDLs for future 

growth. Communities that adopt growth management strategies that encourage smart growth 

and discourage sprawl are in a better position to 

control pollutant loadings from stormwater discharges, soil erosion, wastewater treatment systems, and many other sources of pollutants. 

Some states have expressed concern that implementation of TMDLs could impede smart growth 

strategies because TMDLs will prohibit additional 

sources, which is assumed to be a prohibition on 

redevelopment and infill for urban areas. The fear 

is that developers will be inclined to focus their 

proposals on “greenfields” on the urban fringe, 

where TMDLs are not in place. Consider, however, 

that (1) many vacant and unused properties in 

urban cores already are largely impervious as a 

result of paving and soil compaction, so putting 

new buildings on these sites is unlikely to make 

runoff outcomes worse, (2) as described elsewhere in this publication, green building and site 

design options present the potential for actually 

reducing runoff volume and pollutant loadings 

from infill and redevelopment sites, and (3) greenfields development projects commonly have their 

own stormwater requirements so that a developer of any site will need to think about appropriate 

controls. 

Photo: NRCS 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 61 

5. Tree and Canopy Programs 

Definition 

Urban forestry programs are not typically 

considered stand-alone smart growth policies; however, tree programs are increasingly 

appearing as elements of larger urban design 

plans for landscaping or aesthetic purposes. 

In addition, tree policies are evolving to 

include abatement of urban heat island 

effects, or as part of transportation plans to 

improve the pedestrian environment. There 

are different types of plans and ordinances, 

from those that protect historically significant trees to tree planting programs. Street 

tree ordinances generally cover the planting 

and removal of trees within the public rightof-way. 

These new urban forestry policies are also 

evolving to target tree canopy and shade 

cover, rather than policies that focus on 

numbers of individual trees. In other communities, trees are becoming part of the 

“public utility” as new methods are developed to measure and account for the environmental attributes of mature trees. The 

“utility” approach also recognizes that trees, 

like power lines and pipes, require maintenance and have costs associated with that 

maintenance. Whether it’s the pedestrian 

environment, aesthetics, or air quality, the 

result of an effective urban forestry policy 

translates into stormwater benefits. 

Who Do I Talk to About Tree and 

Canopy Programs? 

Tree ordinances are typically overseen by 

public works departments or departments of 

environmental quality; however, also check 

with your local extension agent. The 

International Society of Arboriculture has a 

Web site describing the development, implementation, and evaluation of tree ordinances; 

go to <www.isa-arbor.com> and type “ordinances” into the site’s search engine. Scenic 

America also lists a model tree ordinance, at 

<www.scenic.org>. American Forests’ Web 

site at <www.americanforests.org> tracks tree 

policies and ordinances, as well as innovations in technology, research, and non-regulatory methods for supporting urban forestry. 

Stormwater Benefits 

A well maintained tree canopy can provide a 

variety of environmental benefits. Trees provide erosion control and help reduce the 

costs of structural stormwater management, 

including land acquisition costs and construction of stormwater retention facilities. 

Strategically preserving or planting trees 

along urban rivers, streams, and creeks can 

reduce water temperatures. Increased temperatures affect certain native aquatic 

species, can increase nuisance algae populations, and impact commercial activities that 

rely on stable water temperatures for recreation, industrial use, or aesthetics. Tree 

canopy intercepts rainwater, which provides 

for gradual release of rainwater into streams, 

thereby preventing flooding, filtering toxins 

and impurities, and extending water availability into dry months when it is most 

needed. 

Examples from selected cities include: 

■ At a south Miami residential study site 

the existing tree canopy reduces 

stormwater runoff by 15 percent.19 
62 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs Photo: w

w

w.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden 

On-street parking can be coupled with tree wells in a 

downtown setting. 

■ In Milwaukee, the existing tree canopy 

cover reduces stormwater flow by up to 

22 percent and provides the city an estimated $15.4 million in benefits. On average, trees in Milwaukee sample sites 

reduced total stormwater runoff volume 

by 5.5 percent and reduce peak flow by 

9.4 percent. At the residential study site, 

the 42 percent existing tree canopy 

reduces stormwater runoff by 22 percent. 

If all trees in the Milwaukee study were 

removed, the additional stormwater flow 

would be enough to require the construction of an estimated 357,083 cubic feet of 

retention capacity valued at approximately 

$15.4 million. 

For information on other environmental benefits from trees, visit 

<www.treesatlanta.org>. 

Typical Costs 

Tree programs and ordinances have costs 

mainly associated with development, implementation, and enforcement. Maintenance of 

older trees can be expensive, particularly 

since the goal of your program is to nurture 

trees to maturity for maximum stormwater 

benefit. When these costs are considered as 

part of a community’s stormwater infrastructure, however, they may prove worthwhile 

when compared to other water control 

expenses. Garland, Texas, used American 

Forests’ software package CITYGreen to 

measure the cost savings associated with its 

tree canopy. Garland’s trees provide 19 million cubic feet in avoided storage (for the 

average maximum two-year 24-hour storm 

event). The city estimated that it saves $2.8 

million annually, calculating the cost of construction funding over the 30-year life of a 

facility.

20 

Measurable Goals 

Short-term goals can include the establishment of a tree program that tracks the number of trees that have been saved or the 

number of trees planted in your jurisdiction. 

As noted previously, maximum stormwater 

benefits come from tree canopy cover. Urban 

forest groups have established the environmental performance of tree cover. Software 

programs can help establish your baseline 

tree canopy and estimate the dollar value of 

the services provided to a community by its 

tree cover. Establishing a baseline and tracking cover with a software package can translate into numeric expressions of stormwater 

performance. For more information on one 

such program CITYGreen, visit 

<www.americanforests.org/ 

download.php?file=/graytogreen/ 

stormwater.pdf>. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 63 

Examples 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s U.S. 

Forest Service–Southern Region maintains 

information on trees and tree cover, including research, PowerPoint presentations, and 

model tree programs at 

<www.urbanforestrysouth.org>. 

The City of Roanoke, Virginia, used 

CITYGreen to measure cost savings associated with its tree canopy. Roanoke’s 32 percent 

tree canopy provides 64 million cubic feet in 

stormwater retention capacity, valued at $128 

million (based on construction costs estimate 

at $2 per cubic foot). Based on the study 

results, the city council passed a 40 percent 

tree canopy goal as part of the city’s comprehensive plan. 

Points to Consider 

Different trees have different absorption 

rates, growing condition needs, growth rates 

and life spans. Consult an arborist to determine which trees will suit the needs of your 

community. In the Pacific Northwest, Metro 

(Portland Oregon’s regional government) has 

published a guide to the stormwater benefits 

associated with different trees. For specific 

interception rates for different types of trees 

and analysis of the benefits of different tree 

species, see Trees for Green Streets: An 

Illustrated Guide, (order from <www.metroregion.org/article.cfm?articleid=263>). Note 

that many climates in the United States are 

too arid to support a full canopy; these areas 

can use xeriscaping and other landscaping 

means to control runoff. Additionally, deciduous trees are far less effective at capturing 

stormwater once they shed their leaves in the 

winter. 

When developing a tree ordinance, clearly 

outline your goals, methods of coordination 

and enforcement, and evaluation procedures. 

At least one tree ordinance has been successfully challenged in court as unenforceable by 

a developer because the language was too 

vague. In 1999, a Fulton County Superior 

Court Judge ruled in favor of developer 

against the city of Atlanta because a section 

of the city’s tree ordinance lacked “sufficient” 

objective standards. 

If you include urban forestry in your 

stormwater program as a BMP, think long 

term about maintenance requirements and be 

creative in finding funds for maintenance. If 

there are funds dedicated to funding all types 

of stormwater BMP maintenance, consider 

using these funds for tree pruning, tree care, 

and replacement programs. The state of 

Pennsylvania has proposed a BMP maintenance program that allows developers to pay 

a fee to cover maintenance for 10 years. For 

urban forestry programs, this can be an effective funding mechanism for getting a tree 

program started. 

Photo: NRCS 

Students at an elementary school in 

Des Moines, Iowa, 

plant a tree during 

Arbor Day celebrations. 
64 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs Photo: w

w

w.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden 

6. Parking Policies to Reduce 

Number of Spaces Needed 

Definition 

Parking lots are one of the more visible 

aspects of imperviousness within the built 

landscape, and managing stormwater 

through better parking lot design is contained in many of EPA’s guidance documents 

on improving water quality. Retrofitting 

parking lots is emerging as a popular BMP; 

however, an equally effective approach is to 

reduce the footprint associated with parking 

spaces before they are actually built. Thus a 

parking policy that updates land development standards and zoning codes to reduce 

the parking footprint is a BMP. 

This subsection looks at two broad techniques 

for reducing the amount of imperviousness 

associated with parking: 

This streetscape design ties together retail activity, landscaping and parking. Tree grates were designed to capture water and provide shade while also providing easy 

access for pedestrians and motorists as they exit the 

parking area along the street. 

■ Structured parking: Instead of surface 

lots, parking can be provided in garages. 

The same number of spaces can thus be 

provided on considerably less land. While 

parking can also be provided below grade, 

for most areas this is prohibitively expensive. Therefore, this subsection will discuss items mainly related to structured 

parking. 

■ Reductions in number of spaces: 

Reducing the number of parking spaces 

involves two main techniques: 

1)	 Reduce parking requirements which 

mandate a certain amount of parking. 

These requirements often require too 

many spaces but can be retooled to 

reduce spaces, provide flexibility for 

TOD, or change from minimum to 

maximum ratios. 

2)	 Encourage shared parking, by which 

users of two nearby facilities can share 

the same parking spaces at different 

times. For example, a church, which 

generally needs parking on Sunday 

mornings could share parking spaces 

with a movie theater, which needs 

parking spaces in the evenings. Shared 

parking can also apply to better use of 

on-street parking spaces. 

This section does not include information on 

retrofitting parking lots with infiltration 

strips and landscaping since the focus is on 

the sizing and footprints for parking. There 

are links in the “Resources” section to more 

information on using infiltration techniques 

on new and existing parking lots. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 65 

Who Do I Talk to About Parking 

Plans and Requirements? 

In general, parking requirements are contained in land use and zoning documents, 

and are typically expressed as minimum 

numbers of spaces per unit of development. 

They may be in plans held in the department of public works or in the office of 

planning. On-street parking is typically governed within the local traffic engineering 

office or in the department of public works. 

There are various types of parking and policies related to parking as discussed below. 

Parking Requirements: Most zoning codes 

have detailed specifications of parking 

requirements by use (e.g., a commercial disTransforming parallel spaces to diagonal 

ones on this wide retail street increases 

the amount of parking without adding 

impervious surface. 

Photo: EPA 

trict may specify four parking spaces per 

1000 ft2 of office space). A residential district may require two off-street spaces per 

unit. Within a district, there may be further 

parking specification by use; for example, for 

a church or for fast food restaurants. 

Localities enacting smart growth plans are 

changing their parking standards in recognition that fewer spaces are needed when there 

are transportation options and a mix of uses. 

They are also changing policies to permit 

more flexible programs. For example, some 

jurisdictions are beginning to use maximum 

parking requirements instead of minimums. 

Review the parking requirements in your 

zoning codes, within special use permits, and 

in parking guidelines and stormwater ordinances that may serve as a barrier to flexibility. For example, language might require a 

business to satisfy its parking requirements 

within 400 feet and reserve parking only for 

that business. This could prohibit shared 

parking, as discussed below. 

Parking Overlay Districts: Overlay districts 

introduce new requirements. Parking overlays are good for transit districts, where 

policies are needed to support several 

modes of travel. For example, a TOD district may have a parking overlay that 

reduces the number of spaces needed based 

on proximity to a transit stop. Combining a 

parking overlay district with complimentary 

policies, such as shared parking agreements 

among several building owners, can help to 

balance demand for spaces throughout the 

day in a parking overlay district. In this 

case of TOD districts, you may need to also 

consult the transit agency. 

On-Street Parking: One of the most overlooked resources for parking is one that 

already exists—use of the street. There are a 

variety of management techniques to help 

use this resource, such as meters, permit 

parking and angled parking. These spaces 
66 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs Photo: City of Boulder, Colorado 

In Boulder, Colorado, downtown developers are discouraged from building 

parking for individual projects. Instead, 

they pay a parking and transportation 

in-lieu fee. These fees are then used to 

build public garages, as well as to fund 

transit, bicycle, and pedestrian 

improvements. 

can be governed by the Public Works departments, or by a special parking office. 

Site Plan Conditions or Proffers: If your 

jurisdiction negotiates site-specific development requirements, check the office that 

oversees site plan conditions or proffers. 

Often the number and location of parking 

spaces is a negotiated element on a projectby-project basis. 

Structured parking: Structured parking can 

either be a multi-level lot or underground 

parking. Because of the expense involved, 

structured parking typically occurs in downtown areas, districts with higher densities, or 

near arenas and stadiums. 

Shared parking: Some shared parking plans 

may be drawn by local redevelopment organizations or business improvement districts, 

or by large institutions like universities or 

hospitals. In larger cities, private parking 

companies may also exist, so check with 

them as you gather information on opportunities to improve parking policies. 

Parking Pricing: Parking pricing introduces a 

fee for parking. Pricing typically serves as a 

transportation demand strategy (to reduce 

vehicle use), a parking management strategy 

(to reduce problems in specific locations), 

and/or as a means to raise money for parking 

and other projects. 

Determining how much parking to provide 

for retail, offices and residential areas is a 

balancing act to make sure there is enough 

parking to support the range of intended 

uses, but not so much as to undermine good 

community design and stormwater improvements. As shown in Table 3, the decision on 

how many spaces to provide is more often 

than not tilted toward an oversupply. 

Stormwater Benefits 

Reducing the amount of surface parking 

reduces the quantity, speed, and impurities of 

the runoff. For example, one researcher calculated that a one-inch rainstorm on a one-acre 

meadow would produce 218 cubic feet of 

runoff, while a parking lot the same size 

would produce 3,460 cubic feet.21 Among the 

pollutants that accumulate on parking lots are 

cadmium, copper, lead, zinc, nickel, cobalt, 

and iron, which are found in gasoline, grease 

and oils, antifreeze, brake linings, and rubber. 

Under most parking standards, the number 

of spaces required is often dictated by times 

of “peak use,” such as holiday shopping, 

which tends to be heavier than at other times 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 67 

Table 3: Conventional Minimum Parking Ratios 

Land Use 

Parking Requirement Actual Average 

Park Parking Demand ing Ratio Typical Range 

Single family homes 2 spaces per 

dwelling unit 1.5 - 2.5 1.11 spaces per dwelling unit 

Shopping center 5 spaces per 

1000 ft2 GFA 4.0 - 6.5 3.97 per 

1000 ft2 GFA 

Convenience store 3.3 spaces per 

1000 ft2 GFA 2.0 - 10.0 --

Industrial 1 space per 

1000 ft2 GFA 0.5 - 2.0 1.48 per 

1000 ft2 GFA 

Medical/dental office 5.7 spaces per 

1000 ft2 GFA 4.5 - 10.0 4.11 per 

1000 ft2 GFA 

GFA: Gross floor area of a building without storage or utility spaces 

Source: Parking Generation, 2nd edition. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC. 1987; Smith, Thomas. Flexible 

Parking Requirements. Planning Advisory Service Report No. 377. American Planning Association, Chicago, IL. 40 pp. 1984; 

Wells, Cedar. Impervious Surface Reduction Technical Study. Draft Report. City of Olympia Public Works Department. 

Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA. 1994. 

of year. By reducing the number of spaces 

and integrating flexibility to handle peaks, 

there can be an overall reduction in the 

amount of impervious surface. 

In 1993, the city of Olympia, Washington, 

launched its impervious surface reduction 

study to simultaneously address water quality 

concerns and a growing population. As part 

of this larger study, the city conducted a comprehensive study of parking. The city found 

that, on average, 53 percent of commercial 

sites were taken up by parking lots. As part of 

the impervious surface reduction study, the 

researchers studied the feasibility of reducing 

commercial parking. They found that, while 

business owners did not think they provided 

too much parking, the typical occupancy rate 

in parking lots was only 46 to 67 percent. 

Eighteen of 31 representative sites had less 

than 75 percent occupancy rates during the 

busiest peak hours surveyed. The city also 

calculated that during a two-year rain event 

(2.8 inches in 24 hours), approximately 38 

cubic feet of runoff would be generated by a 

9-foot by 18.5-foot surface parking space (not 

including drive aisles and turn lanes).22 

Typical Costs 

Surface vs. structured parking: For a given 

parcel of land, structured parking is always 

more expensive than surface parking. 

According to one industry estimate, construction costs for parking spaces range from 

$1,500 to $1,800 per space for surface parking, and from $12,000 to $20,000 for structured parking (costs in 2000 dollars).23 

Parking requirements: Although there is no 

hard cost to changing parking requirements, 

municipalities will need to devote staff time or 

resources to hire a consultant to write new 
68 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs Photo: EPA 

In Saint Louis, Missouri, rush hour lanes along a main arterial are 

converted to diagonal parking on Sunday for nearby churches. 

This system allows many more cars to use on-street parking for 

the limited hours on Sunday when demand for spaces is high 

and traffic volumes are less than that generated on weekdays 

during rush hour. 

parking ordinances. If a locality wants to add 

more on-street metered parking, there are 

supply and administrative costs, though these 

can be offset by meter revenue. Note that 

some localities are using meter revenue to 

support the costs of planning and supporting 

parking for downtown and retail districts. 

Shared parking: In situations that lend 

themselves to shared parking, there are two 

main costs to making it happen. First, the 

parties involved generally draw up an agreement, which may present costs in terms of 

researching what to include and legal fees. 

Second, ongoing maintenance costs must be 

divided. Providing on-street parking makes 

use of an asset that is technically paid for 

and shared, and thus adds no additional cost 

to the developer or user. In addition, supplying parking in a lot requires more impervious surface to provide drive aisles, entrances 

and ramps. On-street parking does not 

require this extra infrastructure, thus lowering the amount of land, and thus cost, to 

provide parking. 

Measurable Goals 

One quantifiable goal could be reducing the 

amount of parking in new developments or 

redevelopment projects; for example, reducing the percentage of surface parking in new 

developments’ footprints by 5 percent. 

Another measurable goal could include 

changing ordinances to require maximum 

parking ratios instead of minimum ratios, 

adjusting downward the number of spaces 

used in a locality’s standards for parking, and 

encouraging the use of shared parking. 

Another measurable goal could be a surface 

lot replacement program. Where excess capacity is identified, the city can assess which lots 

are candidates for infill and which lots could 

be retrofitted with infiltration techniques. The 

decisions will likely be based on development 

trends, water quality goals and the availability 

of incentives. As with the discussion on infill 

and redevelopment, characterizing the performance should be conducted on a site, 

neighborhood, and watershed scale. 

Examples 

Surface vs. structured parking: Montgomery 

County, Maryland, contains four parking 

districts around rail stations. Special taxes 

are levied on development within the districts, and the zoning ordinance encourages 

structured parking by exempting parking 

garages from those taxes. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 69 

On-street Parking: In Arlington County, 

Virginia, the redevelopment plan for 

Columbia Pike places minimum requirements for providing public parking and 

maximums for the provision of private parking. A developer may pay an “in lieu of fee” 

if the parcel is too small to meet the standards. One innovative aspect of the plan is 

the ability to count adjacent on-street public 

spaces toward the parking requirement. The 

parking plan also includes a focus on centralized, shared parking that will create a 

“park once; then walk” environment for visitors who choose to drive. 

Santa Rosa, California, is conducting a parking project in its downtown area with “backin” diagonal parking. In the pilot phase, 22 

spaces replaced 15 parallel on-street spaces. 

With these spaces, motorists traveling along 

a street would drive past a diagonal parking 

space and then back into it. This layout 

makes easing back into traffic safer, since the 

motorist can see oncoming traffic and 

bicyclists. 

Parking requirements: A number of 

California jurisdictions have innovative 

parking requirements that effectively reduce 

the number of spaces required for residential 

development. For example, San Diego allows 

housing built in a transit-intensive area or 

designated for low-income residents to have 

0.25 fewer spaces per unit. Sunnyvale allows 

0.3 or 0.4 fewer spaces per unit if parking is 

unassigned (as opposed to available in private garages). Concord allows developers to 

request a variance from existing codes if 

housing will be occupied by seniors or disabled persons. 

San Antonio, Texas, has both minimum and 

maximum parking requirements. For example, most retail uses must provide at least 

one space for each 300 square feet of gross 

floor area, but no more than one space per 

200 square feet. In addition, structured parking and lots paved with pervious materials 

are exempted from maximums, providing an 

incentive for developers to reduce parking 

impacts. 

The University of Washington has initiated 

a pay-per-use parking program that replaces 

monthly parking passes with a per-hour fee. 

University employees are electronically 

charged each time they park rather than paying a flat monthly fee. Users also receive a 

free bus pass and Flexcar membership. 

Shared parking: The city of Tualatin, 

Oregon, granted a 25-percent reduction in 

parking spaces required by mixed-use development Tualatin Commons in return for 

shared parking. 

Points to Consider 

Once you have decided on new parking 

strategies like the ones outlined in this subsection, an important consideration is what 

to do with the land that is no longer dedicated to parking spaces. Water quality specialists might think the most obvious choice is 

to dedicate the land to absorbent open space. 

However, this open space may serve to scatter development and result in unwalkable 

“office parks.” From a redevelopment position, the obvious answer might be to fill it 

up with development, though this action 

could eliminate options for handling more 

water on site. The answer will depend on 

your community’s goals and site constraints. 
70 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Good urban planning will consider a compact form that addresses stormwater, a walkable and viable development program, and 

how people move in and around the site. 

Surface vs. structured parking: Structured 

parking incentives can be coupled with parking regulations that allow a maximum parking footprint (or impervious area) per 

residential unit. 

Parking requirements: Many neighborhoods 

oppose reducing parking requirements under 

the assumption that this will result in more 

commercial “spillover” parking in the neighborhoods. Some jurisdictions have adopted 

“zone” parking that only allows residents to 

park on streets in the affected neighborhood. 

These zones can be limited to rush hours or 

24 hours if the neighborhoods are experiencing severe spillover pressure for parking. In 

addition, developers might wish to reduce the 

number of spaces they are required to supply, 

but feel pressure from their financial backers 

to oversupply parking. An ample supply of 

parking is often viewed as a necessity for 

financial success or the ability to sell the property in the future. As the Washington State 

study shows, this view may overlook the 

financial penalty that comes with building 

spaces that ultimately are rarely (or ever) used. 

Shared parking: Although there are many 

potential instances in which shared parking 

can be used, there are several reasons why it is 

not as common as it might be. First, if the uses 

do not share a common property manager, 

they need formal or informal agreements to 

share parking. Second, they may not agree on 

whose responsibility it will be to maintain 

parking lots. Third, many business owners 

worry that their customers will stop patronizing them if they do not perceive that parking is 

adequate. Fourth, developers may fear that 

businesses will be less likely to lease their 

space or residents less likely to live there if 

they perceive the parking supply to be 

inadequate. 

To overcome these problems, local jurisdictions can draw up shared parking guidelines 

to get the business community behind such 

plans. To see what a model shared parking 

agreement looks like, go to Metro-Portland’s 

Shared Parking Handbook at 

<www.metro-region.org/article.cfm? 

articleid=435>. 

Car sharing: Car sharing has emerged as a 

viable transportation option in many areas. 

Car sharing works best in urban environments that have a fairly high density of residential units (so that there are enough 

potential members to use the service) and 

other transportation options, such as transit 

and the ability to make pedestrian trips. 

Most of these cities were covered under 

Phase I of NPDES, but university towns 

developing plans and ordinances under 

Phase II might be good candidates for introducing a car sharing program. The Car 

Sharing Network publishes an updated list of 

all cities where car sharing is underway at 

<www.carsharing.net/where.html>. 

The company Flexcar has studied the issue 

and estimates one shared car can take up to 

six cars off of the road (see <www.flexcar.com/ 

vision/impact.asp>). The stormwater benefits 

are achieved when one car can be used to 

meet the needs of several drivers. These benefits include reduced demand for parking and 

car storage, as well as a reduction in automobile-related deposition on roads that can pollute runoff. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 71 

“Green Parking:” New technologies for pervious pavers and porous pavement are 

advancing rapidly. This technology is particularly attractive for low traffic areas and for 

spillover parking needed for athletic events, 

churches, fairs, and episodic activities. 

Replacing existing impervious cover for 

parking with pervious pavers has appeal and 

can provide water quality improvements 

where urban runoff is a main contributor to 

water quality problems. Replacing existing 

parking spaces with green technology and 

materials can help abate stormwater runoff 

and the pollutants carried in that runoff. 

Green parking materials may not, however, 

lessen all of the environmental effects related 

to excess parking. Decisions on the total transportation system will be made to consider road 

design, number of turning lanes, drive aisles, 

and parking. In areas where your local transportation department is trying to balance 

transportation choices, the addition of new 

spaces, no matter the material, may work at 

cross purposes with smart growth plans aimed 

at making pedestrian trips as attractive as driving. In addition, green pavers require periodic 

maintenance. Fine debris and dirt accumulate 

in the drainage openings and reduce the pavement’s flow capacity. It is natural for settling 

and clogging to occur over time, so maintenance schedules require vacuum sweeping several times per year.

24 When adopting policies 

for green pavement and materials, review the 

overall development design and transportation 

goals to find the right incentives or program 

for emerging technologies related to parking. 

7. “Fix It First” 

Infrastructure Policies 

Definition 

“Fix It First” infrastructure policies place 

spending priorities on repair of existing infrastructure over installation of new infrastructure. Generally these refer to transportation 

infrastructure (e.g., roads, bridges, and rail 

systems) and water infrastructure (e.g., sewers 

and drinking water treatment/distribution), 

but may also apply to use of existing schools 

or other public buildings. 

Who Do I Talk to About “Fix It 

First” Policies? 

The first stop in any discussion about infrastructure is typically the public works 

department or city/county engineer, though 

your inquiries may be specific to a certain 

type of infrastructure. 

Transportation: Your local public works 

department generally has a division devoted 

to streets, which would have information on 

projects underway or that are in the last 

stages of planning. The public works director 

or city/county manager might also know 

Photo: Dan Burden 

Reducing the 

amount of 

stormwater that 

enter curbs and 

gutters can be an 

effective means 

of lessening the 

effects of urban 

form on local 

waterways. 
72 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

whether your locality has a framework for 

how transportation budgets are allocated for 

new construction and repair. On a regional 

level, the MPO or regional planning agency 

has knowledge of large-scale transportation 

planning and projects. MPOs are regional 

multi-jurisdictional organizations created for 

areas with a population greater than 50,000. 

They are mandated to make transportation 

spending decisions for metropolitan areas 

over 250,000 in population and would have 

information on any regional or state policies 

that prescribe funding priorities and allocation. At the state level, the department of 

transportation would have information on 

any such policies, though departments of 

community affairs or smart growth offices 

may have the most comprehensive information on statewide “Fix It First” policies. 

Water: On a local level, the responsibility 

over water infrastructure (e.g., drinking 

water and sewer service) is typically shared 

by the local government and water utilities. 

New infrastructure, increases in capacity, and 

larger repairs are typically included in 

Capital Improvement budgets. Once 

installed, water utilities cover operation and 

maintenance for treatment plants and conveyance systems. Local and county governments often have the most control over the 

extension of water and sewer service into 

new development areas. These extensions 

can be governed by annexation rules, interlocal agreements among cities and counties, 

planning documents, or can be made on a 

case-by-case basis. You may need to talk to 

someone in the planning office to see how 

extensions and prioritization of repair decisions are governed. 

Increasingly, infrastructure specific to handling stormwater is handled through a 

stormwater utility, though most funding lies 

within local capital improvement or operating budgets. Stormwater utilities are discussed in Subsection 9. 

Because water infrastructure investments are 

large, funding might include state and federal money. How those funds are spent can rely 

on requirements established through a state 

revolving fund, a state capital improvement 

project or other programs. Thus, your local 

water infrastructure manager is likely to refer 

you to state offices and other Web sites. 

Further explanations may also be available 

through the city/county attorney, since the 

funding requirements are often established in 

regulations. 

In some areas, large water projects may be 

planned and funded as part of large state and 

federal projects such as dams, canals and 

reservoirs. Though not a widespread practice, there are also some private water suppliers and engineering firms that could have 

control over capital and repair decisions. 

Stormwater Benefits 

“Fix It First” policies have long-term effects 

on stormwater management and can be a 

smart growth technique to encourage infill 

construction and redevelopment. In addition, 

“Fix It First” policies encourage replacement 

of older infrastructure, which can be a significant source of stormwater-related problems, 

particularly in older urban and suburban 

areas. In particular, sewer overflows during 

wet weather events can have severe environmental impacts. Inadequate or degraded sys­
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 73 

tems can also increase the chances or severity of property damage from flooding. 

“Fix It First” programs also can include new 

treatment technologies to improve the performance of existing systems. Many people 

are unaware that most stormwater runoff 

entering storm drains is not filtered and flows 

untreated into waterbodies. Oil/grit separators and in-pipe systems can be incorporated 

into the repair or routine maintenance of 

storm drains and pipes. For even stronger 

results, “Fix It First” policies can be coupled 

with techniques listed in Table 2 on page 23 

to handle and filter as much stormwater as 

possible on individual properties. 

Typical Costs 

“Fix It First” policies are built on the 

assumption that funds for infrastructure are 

limited and thus rely on shifting spending 

rather than increasing available funds. The 

costs are therefore measured in both shortterm and long-term impacts, since they shift 

spending from new infrastructure (new capital spending) to existing infrastructure 

(repair, operations, and maintenance). 

Even in cases where cities are developing 

strong programs to attract redevelopment, 

the poor condition of pipes and water handling facilities can be a barrier. The cost to 

repair water infrastructure around the country has been the subject of discussion and 

review—in particular, the funding needs to 

replace aging infrastructure. EPA recently 

launched a Sustainable Water Infrastructure 

initiative to complement the traditional 

funding programs with management techniques to lower costs, add efficiencies to 

water distribution and treatment systems and 

As part of Portland’s “Green Streets Program,” the city 

launched the Siskiyou project to add water-absorbing 

curb extensions. These vegetated extensions intercept 

some of the stormwater flow before it enters storm 

sewers. This type of feature can be added as part of a 

street repair program in older parts of town where a 

reduction in stormwater flow is needed. 

use a watershed approach for managing 

water infrastructure. Localities that are developing or fine-tuning smart growth plans will 

recognize parallels in this sustainable 

approach. Common themes include efficient 

use of land and water resources, a focus on 

existing infrastructure and investments, and 

the use of a regional approach to manage 

resources. See <www.epa.gov/water/ 

infrastructure>. 

Measurable Goals 

For a jurisdiction that has a “Fix It First” 

policy, a goal might be to rehabilitate 25 percent of existing water infrastructure, roads, 

and bridges over a five-year period. A locality 

could also express goals in terms of linear 

feet of pipes replaced. For a jurisdiction 

without such a program, the goal might be to 

adopt a “Fix It First” policy at the state level. 

Photo: City of Portland, Bureau of Environmental Services 
74 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Examples 	 and Massachusetts have adopted “Fix It First” 

legislation over the past two years as well. Beaufort County, North Carolina, is part of a 

multi-county program to reduce nitrogen Sometimes “Fix It First” policies are not 

and phosphorous loadings to the Tar and explicitly called such, but are embedded in 

Pamlico Rivers. The county has submitted a other programs. Directing a percentage of 

stormwater management plan to the state to	 funds to priority spending areas can turn out 

meet both state laws governing nutrient to be a “Fix It First” policy. Many water utilireductions and Phase II. Its August 2004 ties also have CMOMs, or “Capacity, 

draft stormwater plan includes the opportu- Management, Operations and Maintenance” 

nity to allow an exemption from nutrient plans. These plans are used to ensure efficient 

reduction requirements for projects included use of water and wastewater distribution sysin redevelopment areas with a “Fix It First” tems to ensure adequate baseflow into streams, 

policy. For more information, see to avoid overflows, and allocate resources to 

<h2o.enr.state.nc.us/nps/ strained lines and connections in the system. 

TarPamlico_Nutrient_Trading_Program_files/ Utility mangers establish policies to direct 

documents/BeaufortPgm8-13-04.doc>. funding. If you are a developer or work in an 

economic development department, contact New Jersey passed legislation in 2000 requir­ your local utility to see if the budget policies ing its Department of Transportation 

are aligned with your city’s redevelopment or (NJDOT) to reduce the backlog of bridges and economic development plan to direct develop- pavement needing repair by half over a five­ ment to existing activity centers. year period. It also forbids construction of 

new road investments unless approved by a Points to Consider 

joint resolution of the state legislature. The 

NJDOT must report annually on its progress States like New Jersey are finding that smart 

in achieving these and other goals. Michigan	 growth policies to direct development and 

Keep Water Out 

Even if your storm sewers are not in need of repair, one way to stay off of the “Fix It First” list 

is to “keep water out.” EPA is developing tools to help municipalities lessen the amount of 

stormwater that flows into combined and separate stormwater systems. The reduced volume 

of water has many advantages, including a reduction in the risk of overflows, less stress on 

pipes and conveyance systems, and lowered pollutant loadings. 

Some of the management practices to reduce the amount of water flowing into storm sewers are the same as many practices listed in this publication, including the promotion of better site designs and reduction of impervious surfaces, such as lowering the parking standards 

in your municipality’s codes. Portland, Oregon, is a leader in implementing both smart 

growth and water policies. The city has instituted, among other things, a downspout disconnection program, discounts on stormwater utility bills for homeowners who handle stormwater on site, and a pilot stormwater credit trading program. 

Once your “Fix It First” program has completed the investment in new infrastructure, you can 

prolong the investment by reducing stormwater flows that enter your gray infrastructure. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 75 

redevelopment are complicated by the fact 

that workable infrastructure is sometimes 

not in place. This highlights the importance 

of having infrastructure in place as you 

implement plans for redevelopment and 

infill. Implementing a “Fix It First” policy 

before other policies are in place may help 

your community realize redevelopment on a 

more predictable track. Likewise, a strict 

“Fix It First” policy may have the unintended consequence of prohibiting development 

in “greenfields” that are desired growth 

areas. New Jersey recently included language 

in infrastructure grants to give priority to 

infrastructure funding in preferred growth 

areas. A successful joint policy may include 

the pairing of redevelopment and “Fix It 

First” programs in order to synchronize public and private smart growth investments. 

The redrawing of funding allocations creates 

redistribution of existing funds (or has the 

appearance of doing so). Communities might 

find it helpful to consider the economic and 

environmental goals of infrastructure policy 

on a watershed wide basis. 

Finally, much of the evolution in thinking on 

water and stormwater has turned to green 

infrastructure, or using natural systems to 

handle stormwater. Green infrastructure 

need not be isolated to rural or suburban 

areas, as pointed out in Subsection 5 (Tree 

and Canopy Programs). States and localities 

should recognize, however, that policies to 

prioritize green infrastructure should not 

come at the expense of fixing aging pipes in 

areas served by gray infrastructure. 

Communities may want to seek out where 

the green and gray infrastructure support 

each other, or better, where green infrastructure can alleviate stormwater flow into both 

combined and separated systems. 

8. Smart Growth 

Street Designs 

Definition 

Smart growth street designs are based on a 

network of well-connected streets that support multiple modes of transportation. Some 

smart growth approaches to street design 

include multiple route choices, alternative 

street and sidewalk designs, adjusting the 

vehicular level of service (LOS) and/or creating LOS for other modes of transportation, 

and designing connected street networks and 

sidewalks to support multiple uses. 

Increasingly, stormwater guidance manuals 

list “green” techniques to mitigate the runoff 

from existing streets or those in the preliminary design phase, such as swales and elimination of curbs and gutters. The main 

emphasis in this section is the underlying 

street patterns, the connecting of transportation networks and the retrofitting of existing 

streets for multiple uses. The “Resources” 

section lists green techniques for streets 

which may be used to complement your 

smart growth street plans. 

Street and curb designs can be modified so 

stormwater flows into natural areas for treatment. Grates to handle overflow can reduce 

the chances of street flooding during heavy 

wet weather events. 

Photo: Anacostia River Business 

Coalition Washington, DC. 
76 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Who Do I Talk to About Street 

Designs? 

The rules that govern local street designs are 

most likely to be found at the local level in 

the public works department or in subdivision guidelines. Check with your department 

of transportation or planning to find out 

what policies are in place. In addition, individual developers may develop their own 

street networks for planned unit developments (PUDs). 

For streets that are already in place, there 

may be opportunities to improve connectivity and make better use of the existing street 

right-of-way. These may be included in long 

range comprehensive plans or redevelopment 

plans. Some of the improvements were listed 

in the previous subsection on parking. Other 

plans for streets may also be housed in the 

department that governs environmental 

improvements. 

Subdivision codes may also have requirements about street design. Where the codes 

are not explicit about street design, check to 

see if there are requirements regarding connections to surrounding parcels, streets, or 

developments. Some jurisdictions require 

multiple connections, while others may limit 

the number of connections. For example, a 

code may require no more than two connections from the subdivision. 

State departments of transportation play a 

role in building or improving state-controlled 

roads. In many growing areas, smaller highways and rural state roads are the main thoroughfares identified to serve new housing 

and commercial growth. 

Stormwater Benefits 

Because streets constitute the largest share of 

impervious cover in residential developments 

(about 40 to 50 percent), a shift to narrower 

streets can result in a 5- to 20-percent overall 

reduction in impervious area for a typical 

residential subdivision.25 As nearly all the 

pollutants deposited on street surfaces or 

trapped along curbs are delivered to the 

storm drain system during storm events, this 

reduced imperviousness translates into a 

lower volume of stormwater runoff and pollutant loadings from the development. For 

stormwater quality factors, residential streets 

rank as a major source for many pollutants, 

including sediment, bacteria, nutrients, 

hydrocarbons, and metals.26 

Understanding how a connected street network works to control stormwater on a 

watershed basis requires a review of how 

roadway design has evolved. Beginning in the 

1960s, typical roadway design practices 

favored a less networked, “hierarchical” street 

design. This design begins at the lot level, 

with numerous unconnected streets, in particular for residential areas. Aerial photographs of subdivisions reveal common 

unconnected layouts, such as “lollipop” 

designs with cul de sacs, or communities 

with only one entrance. Within housing subdivisions, the individual, smaller streets feed 

into collector roads, which then lead, often 

through only one intersection, to arterials. 

The arterials (which in some cases are highways) link large, centralized trip generators, 

such as shopping centers, office parks, and 

subdivisions. Because there are few alternative routes of travel, the road system is 

designed to handle the collective flow of travel through key intersections onto other large 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 77 

arterials. This road and intersection system 

features multiple turning lanes, wide intersections, and access lanes designed to minimize 

congestion with the collected and concentrated flow of traffic. This type of system increases the amount of land needed to handle 

collected traffic, concentrates traffic onto 

fewer roads, increases the pressure to widen 

the roads that handle collected traffic, and 

creates barriers to travel options, such as 

pedestrian trips. 

Communities developing alternatives for 

multi-modal networks often turn to the 10 

smart growth principles (see page 18) for 

guidance. The principles of creating walkable 

neighborhoods, mixing land uses, providing 

transportation options, directing development 

to existing communities and taking advantage 

of compact building design all come into 

play. The street systems that make this combination of features possible are characterized 

by multiple connections, as well as appropriately sized streets and intersections to support safe travel for vehicle drivers, bicyclists, 

and pedestrians. These street patterns can be 

in grids, but may also include paths and 

other connections. Although cul-de-sacs and 

dead-end streets are discouraged, there are a 

variety of street designs that can provide the 

slower traffic and privacy that homebuyers 

prefer, with the connections that help avoid 

the chokepoints and large feeder routes built 

into a hierarchical system. For stormwater 

engineers, the most beneficial point for a 

watershed lies in the compact form, which 

facilitates a higher intensity of development 

and mix of uses on less land. 

The stormwater performance of smart 

growth street systems can be further 

enhanced by policies to reduce the amount 

of runoff entering the curbs and gutters, 

mentioned throughout this document. 

Likewise, developers and landscape architects can plan for intermittent retention areas 

to collect and treat some of the road runoff 

prior to discharge into a storm sewer system. 

Finally, the notion of better stormwater management related to a tighter, connected network of streets with sidewalks may seem 

counterintuitive. Most literature on water 

quality highlights the detrimental effect of 

“connected impervious surfaces.” Most efficient urban layouts are just that—highly 

connected streets and blocks. Thus, when 

making the case for the stormwater benefits 

of smart growth street designs, urban planning and water resource professionals should 

establish the framework for considering the 

site, neighborhood, and region simultaneously, in the same way that has been presented 

for development districts. For most regions, 

the question of growth—and underlying road 

design—is not whether there will be growth 

or no growth, but rather what the growth 

(and roadway system) will look like and 

where it is located. 

Typical Costs 

Cost estimates vary widely. When building 

new street networks, narrower streets may 

cost less to build than wider streets. 

Considering that the cost of paving a road 

averages $15 per square yard, shaving even 

4 feet from existing street widths can yield 

cost savings of more than $35,000 per mile 

of residential street. In addition, because narrower streets produce less impervious cover 

and runoff than wider streets, additional 
78 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

savings can be realized in the reduced size 

and cost of downstream stormwater management facilities.27 

The costs will not necessarily always be 

lower, because specialized features like sidewalks, curb and gutter, street tree areas, and 

pavers are often included in the overall street 

design. These amenities, however, carry benefits for stormwater, transportation and community design, so a raw assessment of costs 

per mile or per trip might not capture the 

full range of benefits. 

Installation of stormwater-friendly streets can 

also involve additional costs over streets constructed according to standard practices. 

Portland, Oregon, estimated a higher cost 

due to planting and maintaining landscaped 

buffers.28 Where permeable or porous pavement is used, the site preparation for water 

storage involves additional costs. The cost 

savings these techniques bring for handling 

stormwater from streets can be hidden, however, because the budget for transportation 

and stormwater can be in separate accounts 

in different departments’ budgets. In deliberations over stormwater utility rates, Portland 

estimated that 70 percent of its runoff could 

be attributed to transportation-related surfaces.29 City and county managers should 

look to see where the higher costs of better 

street design are offset by lower demands on 

stormwater infrastructure. 

Measurable Goals 

Appropriate measurable goals for street design 

modifications are emerging. Like earlier discussions on development districts, local buildout analyses can help compare a “business as 

usual” scenario of build-out with one that 

contains more compact villages or districts. 

The streets component may be included with 

estimates of parking lanes, turning lanes, and 

other impervious surface coverage associated 

with roads and streets. 

Another measurable goal might be the 

reuse—or new uses—of existing streets. For 

example, adding bike lanes, adding on-street 

parking, or adding medians could be included in your stormwater management plan. 

Examples 

The Institute for Transportation Engineers 

has developed two recommended practice 

guidelines: Traditional Neighborhood 

Sidewalks on One Side of the Street – or Both? 

Some states and localities are recommending that sidewalks be limited to one side of the street 

to reduce impervious cover, however, most smart growth plans endorse a network of sidewalks. 

Which is correct? 

The answer lies not so much in stormwater control as it does in transportation. If sidewalks are 

designed as a prominent feature for handling a variety of trips (e.g., commuting, shopping, 

school travel, and recreation) and providing connections throughout the neighborhood, then 

placing them on both sides makes sense. If your project or plan envisions only recreational trips, 

however, then sidewalks on one side of the road makes sense. If you choose to only place sidewalks on one side, review the plan to make sure that future plans for growth and a mix of uses 

are taken into consideration so that sidewalks might be added later to meet the demand for 

pedestrian trips. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 79 

Photo: Local Government Commission. 

Development Street Design Guidelines (1999) 

and Neighborhood Street Design Guidelines 

(2003). These are available through ITE’s 

bookstore at <www.ite.org>. 

The metropolitan region around Portland, 

Oregon (Metro), has a regional street design 

manual, specifying stream treatments, street 

width, and associated water quality benefits. 

See <www.metro-region.org> and type “street 

design” into the site’s search engine. 

North Carolina’s Department of 

Transportation (NCDOT) approved street 

design guidelines to make it easier for local 

governments to implement traditional neighborhood street networks in new developments. The guidelines specify street width 

and the provision of bicycle and pedestrian 

facilities. See <www.doh.dot.state.nc.us/ 

operations/tnd.pdf> for more information 

and a link to the NCDOT Traditional 

Neighborhood Development Guidelines. The 

town of Cary, North Carolina, has adopted 

policies requiring street connections. 

This street and sidewalk in 

Hercules, California, shows 

how multiple objectives 

can be met at once. The 

streets are narrow; however, the rounded curb allows 

extra width in case emergency response vehicles 

need extra room. The sidewalk is constructed of 

pavers, and slopes toward 

the grassy areas on the 

straightaway. 

The Congress for New Urbanism (CNU), 

EPA, the Federal Highways Administration 

(FHWA) and the Institute of Transportation 

Engineers (ITE) are developing Context 

Sensitive Solutions for the Design of Major 

Urban Thoroughfares, which will provide 

alternatives for communities seeking smart 

growth street standards. Publication is 

expected in 2006. In the meantime, a literature review was developed in 2005 and is 

available at <cnu.org/pdf/ 

lit_review_assigned.pdf>. 

Dane County, Wisconsin, has established 

Street Standards for its Traditional 

Neighborhood Design Ordinance. See 

<www.co.dane.wi.us/plandev/build/pdf/tnd/2 

0040225_append_C.pdf>. 

Points to Consider 

Street designs have traditionally been established through sets of commonly recognized 

standards. Standard-setting organizations, 

such as the Institute of Transportation 

Engineers and the American Association of 
80 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

State Highway and Transportation Officials 

have issued standards that govern street 

designs, recommended road widths and 

design for turn lanes and access roads. These 

organizations are aware that the standards do 

not fit all situations, and are developing 

alternative standards and guidelines for communities that have smart growth plans. 

Because the alternative standards are new or 

in draft form, local transportation officials 

might be reluctant to adopt them. 

Stormwater and planning officials may want 

to meet with their transportation counterparts in developing a streets plan for joint 

stormwater and smart growth efforts. 

Building green streets, narrower streets, and 

multi-purpose streets can cause citizen concern and raise objections from emergency 

service providers. In Portland, Oregon, engineers, planners, and emergency response 

providers made test runs of various street 

widths to come to a decision on a street 

width that meets both smart growth and 

emergency response needs. The Local 

Government Commission has developed fact 

This diagram compares a traditional street layout 

with the unconnected streets associated with 

conventional subdivisions. 

Image: Local Government Commission. 

Traditional Conventional 

sheets on designing multi-use streets, available at <www.lgc.org> (look under “Free 

Resources” for the fact sheets). 

As noted earlier, a denser network of narrower 

streets can involve as much or more impervious surface within a concentrated district. 

This is where evaluating imperviousness on a 

“per unit” basis of development is helpful. 

This might be per unit of housing, or per 

square foot of development footprint. In redeveloping districts, smart growth designs often 

call for the addition of streets to break up 

larger blocks or connect centers of activity 

and the addition of sidewalks to promote 

walking. While these measures add impervious surface coverage, evaluating the environmental performance of this design requires a 

broader approach, as mentioned above. 

Finally, street design and construction is 

increasingly delegated to the developer and 

his or her site planners. For conventional residential or commercial development projects, 

the main requirements for connecting the 

development project deal with access to state 

highways or local roads. As noted above this 

access point is typically the only point of 

ingress and egress for the project. Local governments might experience resistance from 

developers who are not used to planning multiple connections to neighboring developments, or providing connections to 

commercial areas. Communities with smart 

growth street plans that require multiple connections will find that early and constant outreach is necessary so builders, developers, and 

land owners are aware of the requirements. In 

addition, local governments and real estate 

agents need to make potential homebuyers 

aware of streets that will be connected to 

future development projects to avoid conflicts. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 81 

9. Stormwater Utilities 

Definition 

Like urban forestry programs, stormwater 

utilities are not typically listed as smart 

growth policies. Many states and localities, 

however, have investigated where the rate 

structure of other utility programs, such as 

electricity, cable, and gas service, might be 

unintentionally subsidizing new growth at 

the expense of more cost-efficient service 

areas. A stormwater utility, like other utilities, establishes an organization where a user 

pays for municipal services, such as water, 

trash pick-up and sewer. This subsection 

includes suggestions for communities that 

have already made the decision to establish a 

utility to finance stormwater improvements. 

Stormwater regulations have spurred interest 

in stormwater utility creation as localities 

seek new ways to fund drainage and flooding 

projects. The legal structure and rate system 

for stormwater utilities vary around the 

country, and can depend on state legislative 

or enabling language. The legal aspects of 

establishing a stormwater utility are beyond 

the scope of this publication, but there are 

Photo: University of Connecticut Cooperative Extension System 

several things to look for in setting up a utility in coordination with smart growth goals. 

The mission statement, rate structure, and 

planning can all have influence over a locality’s ability to shape a comprehensive 

approach to handling stormwater. 

Who Do I Talk to About 

Stormwater Utilities? 

Stormwater utilities are typically set up by a 

local government (as mentioned above, most 

states must first pass enabling legislation 

allowing localities to establish these utilities). Thus, the first step is to make sure that 

the legal framework exists for the creation of 

a utility. For ease of billing, stormwater utility fees typically appear on the same bill 

issued for water and sewer, so you might 

find contact information there or in your 

local government directory. The stormwater 

utility may also be located in the public 

works department. The local government 

will typically post information on how the 

stormwater utility is organized, the billing 

structure and the stormwater master plan on 

a Web site. 

Stormwater utility rates can be adjusted to add incentives for homeowners who collect and handle rainwater 

on their properties. Municipalities that have impaired 

waterways and are experiencing high rates of infill can 

use this approach to reduce stormwater volumes. 
82 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

Typical Costs 

While costs vary, rates are typically in the $2 

to $5 per month per household range. The 

main consideration for a stormwater utility is 

that all costs collected for the utility only be 

spent on stormwater projects. The costs of 

establishing a utility also vary. Most communities have created the stormwater utility 

within water and sewer departments for ease 

of administration. Where localities decide to 

introduce variable pricing and incentives 

within the rate system, resources will be 

needed to establish baseline rates and create 

maps and verification systems so that incentives are properly instituted. The “Resources” 

section includes several Web sites with more 

details on the costs associated with establishing and operating a stormwater utility. 

Stormwater Benefits 

Stormwater utilities have been established to 

provide a fair and predictable source of funding for stormwater projects. As towns experience growth, they need to fund systems to 

handle the stormwater that flows from newly 

developed parcels, as well as from older 

areas. Larger cities may need to repair and/or 

expand sewer and water systems to support 

redevelopment. Some older cities are also 

separating their old combined sewer pipes 

into two systems: one that handles stormwater from the streets and a second system to 

deliver sanitary sewerage to a wastewater 

treatment plant. A stormwater utility can 

provide stable funding to address the runoff 

problems associated with development and 

redevelopment. 

Stormwater utilities also recognize that all 

properties within the utility district have a 

role in both producing and mitigating 

stormwater. For most municipalities affected 

by Phases I and II of the NPDES stormwater 

permitting program, improvements are tied 

to project approvals for development and 

redevelopment projects. Thus, the improvements for controlling post-construction 

runoff are made only when a building permit 

is issued for a site. 

For many watersheds, however, the negative 

impacts of stormwater runoff arise from 

existing development that was constructed 

prior to adoption of improved site designs 

and construction practices. Where existing 

properties are the main source of stormwater 

volume and/or pollutants, the improvements 

enacted through Phases I and II are not likely to bring immediate relief to stressed or 

impaired waterways. However, when there is 

a program and/or dedicated source of revenue for improvements, stormwater problems for the entire community can be 

accomplished in a predictable fashion. Keep 

in mind a community need not have a 

stormwater utility to begin making improvements on existing properties. 

Examples 

Maturing stormwater utilities are experimenting with ways to structure rates to recognize property owners’ actions that result in 

less burden on the public stormwater system. 

This can include reduced rates or tradable 

credits where the property owner (or manager) demonstrates that a BMP has been added 

and handles stormwater on site. 

Many municipalities with stormwater utilities are developing credit manuals. The manuals assist property owners in assessing 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 83 

(1) the types of activities that can receive a 

credit (2) how to apply for the credit, and 

(3) other factors, such as continuing maintenance. The most common activities that 

qualify for credits include onsite retention 

and detention and small scale BMPs, such as 

rain barrels. 

The recently approved Stormwater Utility 

Credit Manual for non-residential users from 

Lake County, Ohio, recognizes that some 

non-traditional approaches can have 

stormwater benefits. In their manual, the 

county notes there are creative ways to 

reduce the pressure for additional impervious surfaces: 

“Non-residential customers seeking a credit 

may request unique opportunities or 

approaches to improving water quality. For 

instance, a non-residential customer may 

also be an NPDES MS4 permitee that must 

implement a Stormwater Management Plan 

for its facility. Another example might be a 

retail outlet that provides “Park and Ride” 

space to encourage use of the transit system, 

thereby minimizing the growth of impervious area by reducing the need for additional 

parking lots and travel lanes on roadways. 

The LCSMD will review and evaluate these 

types of unique requests on a case-by-case 

basis to determine the credit value for a site 

to which the BMP is being applied.”30 

The city of Maryville, Tennessee, allows 

smaller homes to qualify where total imperviousness on the site is less than 1,800 

square feet. To view Maryville’s manual, see 

<www.ci.maryville.tn.us/epc/IMAE.pdf>. 

Variations on this type of credit can be used 

for higher density development projects 

where the footprint of buildings is smaller in 

a district. 

To recognize the site level and watershed 

level impacts that come with development, 

Eugene, Oregon, has split its stormwater 

utility rate into three components: impervious surface, administrative, and street-related. Homeowners can claim a credit only on 

the impervious surface portion of the fee 

when they adopt beneficial practices such as 

use of rain barrels or installation of rain 

gardens. 

Points to Consider 

At a basic level, the purpose of a stormwater 

utility is clear: to assess a charge for handling 

the stormwater runoff generated from a 

given piece of property. Measuring the exact 

volume of runoff from distinct properties is 

time and resource intensive, however. In 

addition, some properties are more vulnerable to the impacts of stormwater than others; 

even if the utility applies a rate evenly, the 

benefits can vary across the landscape. And 

third, much of the runoff (up to 40 percent) 

comes from publicly owned impervious surfaces such as roads and schools. So, what 

should you look for in a stormwater utility? 

Residential properties: Most localities use 

some sort of simplified system for assessing 

rates. The easiest is a flat fee. This, however, 

would not provide homeowners with an 

incentive to handle more stormwater on 

their lots. For administrative ease, some 

localities have allowed homeowners to 

appeal for a rate reduction if they have 

installed rain gardens, added rain barrels, or 

disconnected downspouts. 
84 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

The redevelopment 

of older commercial 

corridors often 

begins with 

streetscape improvements, which can be 

designed to capture 

stormwater, provide 

tree canopy and 

complement the 

redevelopment 

goals of more walkable and economically vibrant districts. Photo: NRCS 

Of particular smart growth interest is the 

method of charging based on the percent of 

impervious surface coverage. A fee based on 

the percent of impervious surface coverage 

might not recognize the benefits of smaller 

lots in a compact district. Where densities 

are higher, the individual plots are likely to 

have a greater percent of impervious surface 

coverage. As explained in Subsections 3 

(Redevelopment, page 48) and Subsection 4 

(Development Districts, page 51), this design 

has a lowered impact overall when one considers the per unit impact in a watershed. A 

rate that recognizes the overall water benefits 

of higher density housing can help recognize 

the lowered impact on a per unit basis. An 

alternative to charges based on percent 

impervious surface is to develop a charge 

based for the development district which recognizes the lowered impact for the watershed. Fees can then be assessed per house 

within the district. 

Commercial properties: Assessing rates for 

commercial properties is a bit more predictable and straightforward, but it is important to examine for any barriers to 

developement projects that have benefits for 

the watershed. Commercial properties are 

generally assessed a fee based on impervious 

surface coverage. One of the more important 

smart growth considerations is accounting 

for the stormwater impacts of redevelopment 

of vacant or underperforming commercial 

properties. As these parcels are redeveloped, 

they often generate the same amount of 

runoff as before, but as noted elsewhere in 

this report, they take on development 

demand that could go to undeveloped areas 

elsewhere in the watershed. To further 

improve the performance of these sites, look 

for opportunities to handle water on site or 

disconnect the impervious surfaces with 

neighboring parcels. In addition, a locality 

may want to introduce a stormwater fee 

credit for improving “gray” infrastructure, 

particularly when a developer agrees to fix 

combined sewer pipes that overflow. With 

these modifications in the rate structure, a 

property is fairly assessed its contribution to 

local impacts, but gets a credit based on the 

watershed benefits. 

Depending on specific legal requirements, a 

utility may be able to split the rate into other 

types of categories to recognize smart growth 

benefits. This is where it is important, in the 

development of your utility’s charter and 

planning, to develop a “purpose” statement 

to describe the adverse impacts of stormwater and establish a framework for recognizing 

better practices within the utility and its rate 

structure. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 85 

Summary and Conclusion overlapping demands. The water quality features of smart growth have not traditionally Cities, counties, towns and campuses around appeared in BMP menus or lists of stormwater 

the country are well on their way developing performance measures. This document has 

stormwater plans under the Clean Water Act. taken common smart growth techniques, What many local water quality managers explained their water and stormwater benefits, might not realize is that their colleagues in the and provided examples. Understanding the 

transportation and zoning departments are benefits, though, requires a new view of 

engaged in planning and development activi- stormwater—one that considers multiple levels ties that parallel—and often overlap with— of environmental and development context. watershed and stormwater planning. Thus, development projects must be evaluated Embedded in land use and comprehensive at the site, neighborhood, and watershed levels plans are features at the site, neighborhood, to fully assess environmental performance. 

and even regional level that have a great 

impact on the quantity and quality of In conclusion, the stormwater permitting 

stormwater. Where the locality is pursuing program is designed to foster innovation and 

smart growth development strategies and tech- adaptive management. Over the next five 

niques, they are often unknowingly developing years, your community is likely to observe 

“best management practices” (BMPs) for opportunities for improvement. As your 

Phases I and II.	 town engages in planning for transportation, 

regional planning, and development, pay This document was developed to help water attention to areas that are amenable to better 

quality practitioners, developers, smart water quality and stormwater management.

growth advocates, and local/state govern- You may find that you can gain water quality ment officials think in new ways about the improvement while addressing transportaoverlapping demands of water planning and tion, housing, economic development, and local comprehensive planning. 	 community goals all in the same community. 

The Clean Water Act’s stormwater permitting 

program offers opportunities to meet these 

Next Steps – Guidance and Technical Assistance for Municipalities 

EPA also expects to improve its guidance and technical assistance on implementation of the NPDES 

stormwater permitting program for MS4s. For communities developing smart growth programs and 

stormwater management plans, the Agency is exploring activites that: 

■ Provide more information and assistance on watershed permitting for communities that want to integrate 

their smart growth plans. 

■ Support development of BMP manuals for common smart growth techniques and development districts, 

such as TNDs. 

■ Develop model codes, stormwater ordinances, and permit language that recognize the stormwater performance of 

smart growth and/or offer flexibility for redevelopment, infill, and smart growth site design for new development. 

■ Develop decision support tools to help localities and developers estimate the amount of stormwater pollution prevented through compact development and redevelopment. 

■ Develop information on strategic combinations of BMPs for urban infill and redevelopment that include 

smart growth and traditional stormwater BMPs 
86 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

EPA’s Guidance on Post-Construction Stormwater Controls – 

Through a Smart Growth Lens 

On December 8, 1999, EPA published the Phase II 

rules in the Federal Register, along with model language that could be adopted. EPA’s language, 

presented below, was adopted in part or whole 

by many states and permitting authorities. The 

examples listed in the notice include a combination of traditional stormwater control techniques, 

as well as several smart growth techniques and 

concepts. If your state or locality has adopted 

some or all of the model language, here are some 

tips for integrating your existing smart growth 

plan with this guidance. 

From the 1999 Federal Register Notice: 

Post-construction storm water management in 

new development and redevelopment. 

(i) You must develop, implement, and enforce a 

program to address stormwater runoff from new 

development and redevelopment projects that 

disturb greater than or equal to one acre, including projects less than one acre that are part of a 

larger common plan of development or sale, that 

discharge into your small MS4. Your program 

must ensure that controls are in place that would 

prevent or minimize water quality impacts. 

(ii) You must: 

(A) Develop and implement strategies which 

include a combination of structural and/or nonstructural best management practices (BMPs) 

appropriate for your community; 

(B) Use an ordinance or other regulatory mechanism to address postconstruction runoff from 

new development and redevelopment projects to 

the extent allowable under state, tribal or local 

law; and 

(C) Ensure adequate long-term operation and 

maintenance of BMPs. 

(iii) Guidance: If water quality impacts are considered from the beginning stages of a project, new 

development and potentially redevelopment provide more opportunities for water quality protection. EPA recommends that the BMPs chosen: be 

appropriate for the local community; minimize 

water quality impacts; and attempt to maintain 

pre-development runoff conditions. In choosing 

appropriate BMPs, EPA encourages you to participate in locally based watershed planning efforts 

which attempt to involve a diverse group of 

stakeholders including interested citizens. When 

developing a program that is consistent with this 

measure’s intent, EPA recommends that you 

adopt a planning process that identifies the 

municipality’s program goals (e.g., minimize 

water quality impacts resulting from post-construction runoff from new development and redevelopment), implementation strategies (e.g., 

adopt a combination of structural and/or nonstructural BMPs), operation and maintenance 

policies and procedures, and enforcement procedures. In developing your program, you should 

consider assessing existing ordinances, policies, 

programs, and studies that address stormwater 

runoff quality. In addition to assessing these existing documents and programs, you should provide opportunities to the public to participate in 

the development of the program. Non-structural 

BMPs are preventative actions that involve management and source controls such as: policies 

and ordinances that provide requirements and 

standards to direct growth to identified areas, 

protect sensitive areas such as wetlands and 

riparian areas, maintain and/or increase open 

space (including a dedicated funding source for 

open space acquisition), provide buffers along 

sensitive water bodies, minimize impervious surfaces, and minimize disturbance of soils and vegetation; policies or ordinances that encourage 

infill development in higher density urban areas, 

and areas with existing infrastructure; education 

programs for developers and the public about 

project designs that minimize water quality 

impacts; and measures such as minimization of 

percent impervious area after development and 

minimization of directly connected impervious 

areas. Structural BMPs include: storage practices 

such as wet ponds and extended-detention outlet structures; filtration practices such as grassed 

swales, sand filters and filter strips; and infiltration 

practices such as infiltration basins and infiltration 

trenches. EPA recommends that you ensure the 

appropriate implementation of the structural 

BMPs by considering some or all of the following: 

preconstruction review of BMP designs; inspections during construction to verify BMPs are built 

as designed; postconstruction inspection and 

maintenance of BMPs; and penalty provisions for 

the noncompliance with design, construction, or 

operation and maintenance. Stormwater technologies are constantly being improved, and EPA 

recommends that your requirements be responsive to these changes, developments, or improvements in control technologies. (Citation: 64 FR 

68843, December 8, 1999). 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 87 

For communities that have embarked on smart 

growth planning, there are several overlapping 

themes: 

“EPA recommends that the BMPs chosen: be appropriate for the local community; minimize water 

quality impacts; and attempt to maintain pre-development runoff conditions.” 

Listing your smart growth accomplishments and 

their water quality impacts is one way that your 

BMPs can be appropriately chosen. As mentioned 

in this document, maintaining pre-development 

runoff conditions for redevelopment projects is 

typically neutral since impervious cover replaces 

existing impervious cover. In some areas, localities have defined pre-development conditions as 

the undeveloped state. There may be water quality imperatives that call for this increased standard. The key is to ensure that all development 

projects in the watershed are held to standards 

that lead to increased protection so that redevelopment rules do not unintentionally penalize 

redevelopment compared to new development. 

“...implementation strategies (e.g., adopt a combination of structural and/or non-structural BMPs)... ” 

For smart growth and stormwater goals, the most 

effective BMPs will be strategic combinations of 

mutually supportive policies. For example, policies to create better sidewalks might lead to 

pedestrian improvements at intersections, which 

in turn are supported by plans for a more compact town center to bring uses within walking 

distance of each other. These policies act to support each other and are synergistic, so that the 

end result is the cumulative benefits of the individual policies. Many comprehensive plans recognize the combinations or urban design policies; 

make sure that your stormwater plan reflects the 

same links among policies. 

“...Non-structural BMPs are preventative actions...” 

Note that prevention of stormwater-related problems is integral to EPA’s guidance. As noted in this 

document, reusing existing developed areas and 

compact building forms prevent much of the 

stormwater generated from development activity. 

“...and measures such as minimization of percent 

impervious area after development...” 

EPA’s guidance does emphasize reducing impervious area. When considering reductions, however, 

the development context for smart growth and 

stormwater are important. While each individual 

property may meet impervious surface caps, the 

development “footprint” becomes enlarged as 

individual development sites grow to include the 

required land set-aside. This, in turn disperses 

uses and the infrastructure needed to serve it, 

including roads and other impervious surfaces. 

Thus, while the narrow objective of minimizing 

impervious surface coverage on the development 

site level is met, the watershed can actually see 

an increase in land disturbance and impervious 

surface coverage. Water quality practitioners 

should recognize that while land development 

approvals are made on a site-by-site basis, the 

impact of the individual development project 

transcends boundaries. This is not to say that 

impervious surface caps do not have a place in 

protecting water quality. In some places, watershed-wide caps have been put into place, followed by assessments of the land 

conservation/development balance. Like other 

aspects of development decisions, the scale, location, and interrelationship with other policies are 

important. 

“...minimization of directly connected 

impervious areas...” 

Communities that are seeking to add a street to 

connect an older downtown to new residential 

areas might find that strict policies to reduce connected, impervious surfaces prohibit the connections that are needed for economic development 

and transportation improvements. Screen your 

impervious surface policies to see where 

improvements to make compact development 

work might be prohibited. 

“EPA recommends...preconstruction review of 

BMP designs.” 

Preconstruction reviews can identify where there 

is disagreement among details in various land 

development policies. The preconstruction review 

should include several departments to identify 

where a city or county’s smart growth policies 

and stormwater regulations run counter to each 

other, and to develop alternative site designs to 

accomplish the goals of all programs. 
88 SECTION 2: Specific Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater BMPs 

6	 Rogers, George O. and Buren B. DeFee II. 2005. Longterm impact of development on a watershed: Early indicators of future problems. Landscape and Urban Planning 

Volume 73, Issues 2-3, 15 October 2005, Pages 215-233. 

7	 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Onsite 

wastewater treatment systems manual. EPA625/R-00/008. 

Cincinnati, OH: Office of Research and Development. 

8	 Richards, Lynn, Geoffrey Anderson, and Mary Kay Bailey, 

January 2006. Protecting Water Resources with Higher 

Density Developments. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency. www.epa.gov/ 

smartgrowth 

9	 American Rivers. 2002. Paving our way to water short­


ages: How sprawl aggravates the effects of drought.


Washington, DC. http://www.americanrivers.org/


site/DocServer/sprawlreportfinal1.pdf?docID=595


10	 Harbor, J., Engel, B., Jones, D., Pandey, S., Lim, K. and 

Muthukrishnan, S., A Comparison of the Long-Term 

Hydrological Impacts of Urban Renewal versus Urban 

Sprawl. National Conference on Tools for Urban Water 

Resource Management & Protection, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Conference Proceedings. 2000. 

11	 Pollard, Trip. October 2001. Greening the American 

dream. Planning Magazine, American Planning 

Association. 

12	 Center for Urban Policy Research. September 2000. The 

costs and benefits of alternative growth patterns. New 

Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University. 

13	 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. September 1999. 

Project XL and Atlantic Steel: Supporting environmental 

excellence and smart growth. www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/ 

pdf/atlantic_steel_xl.pdf 

14	 Deason, Jonathan, Gary A. Carroll, George William 

Sherk,. September 2001. Public policies and private decisions affecting the redevelopment of brownfields: An 

analysis of critical factors, relative weights and areal differentials. Washington D.C.: The George Washington 

University. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. 

www.gwu.edu/~eem/Brownfields/project_report/ 

report.htm 

15	 Khattak, Asad and Daniel Rodriguez. July 2005. Travel 

behavior in neo-traditional neighborhood developments: 

A case study in USA. Transportation Research Part A: 

Policy and Practice. Volume 39, Issue 6, Pages 481-500. 

16	 New Urbanism. Comprehensive Report and Best Practices 

Guide, 2003-2004 edition. Pages 14-6 and 14-7. New 

Urban News. 

17	 Montgomery County Department of Environmental 

Protection. 2000; Center for Watershed Protection. 1998; 

Schueler, 1994; Arnold, C. L. Jr. and C. J. Gibbons. 1996. 

Impervious surface coverage: The emergence of a key 

environmental indicator. Journal of the American 

Planning Association 62. 

18	 Schueler, T. 2000. The Compaction of Urban Soil. 

Techniques for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, MD: 

Center for Watershed Protection. 

19	 Examples in this section from Citizens for a Scenic 

Florida. American Forests' urban ecological analysis. 

www.scenicflorida.org/lscurbanecolog.html 

20	 International City/County Management Association. 

November 2002. Trees: The green infrastructure. Item 

#42791. www.icma.org 

21	 Schueler, Tom. December 1995. Site planning for urban 

stream protection. Washington Metropolitan Council of 

Governments. 

22	 Washington Department of Ecology. 2002. City of Olympia's 

impervious surface reduction study. 

http://depts.washington.edu/cwws/Research/Reports/ipds.pdf 

23	 "Determining the Cost of an Above-Grade Parking 

Structure," Parking Today (www.parkingtoday.com), May 

2000, pp. 27-28. 

24	 Low-Impact Development Center, Inc. Permeable pavers 

maintenance. www.lid-stormwater.net/permeable_pavers/ 

permpavers_maintain.htm 

25	 Schueler, T.R. 1995. Site planning for urban stream protection. Ellicott City, MD: Center for Watershed Protection. 

26	 Bannerman, R. 1994. Sources of pollutants in Wisconsin 

stormwater. . Milwaukee, WI: Wisconsin Department of 

Natural Resources. 

27	 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. . Post-construction 

stormwater management in new development and redevelopment. . cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/menuofbmps/post_18.cfm 

28	 Portland Metro, 2002. Green streets: Innovative solutions 

for stormwater and stream crossings. . http://www.metroregion.org/article.cfm?ArticleID=262 

29	 Bureau of Environmental Services, Portland, Oregon . 

January 6, 2000. Report to Mayor Vera Katz memo. 

30	 County of Lake, Ohio. January 26, 2005. Lake County 

stormwater utility fee: Credit manual for non-residential 

users. . www2.lakecountyohio.org/smd/Credit 

%20Manual%20Level%202%20%20Advisory%20 

Board%20Approved.pdf 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 89 

SECTION 3 

Resources 

This section lists resources for general smart growth, for water resources by smart 

growth technique (as listed in the document for easy reference) and by state. A 

listing of these sites is not an EPA endorsement, and as materials are finalized and 

updated, links may change. Many stormwater programs at the state and local levels are 

being revised, so keep these keywords in mind if you need to use a search engine to find 

updated links: 

“ordinance” 

“NPDES” “design manual” 

“Phase I” or “Phase II” “post construction” 

“MS4” “redevelopment” 

“stormwater” “infill” 

“BMP” 

These terms used singly or in various combinations, coupled with the name of your state 

and/or municipality, should take you to Web sites that contain information on the progress of 

stormwater programs, schedules for public meetings, drafts for review, opportunities for 

incorporation of smart growth techniques, and other information. 

Many of these links cite regulatory documents, and thus are necessarily long; an electronic 

version can be found at <www.epa.gov/smartgrowth> to copy and paste Web addresses to 

your internet browser. 
90 SECTION 3: Resources 

Smart Growth 

For more information on making the integrated smart growth and water case, visit 

www.epa.gov/smartgrowth or www.smartgrowth.org. 

A good introductory primer is “Why Smart Growth: A Primer” 

www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/pdf/WhySmartGrowth_bk.pdf 

“Our Built and Natural Environments: A Technical Review of the Interactions between Land 

Use, Transportation and Environmental Quality” 

www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/pdf/built.pdf 

Planetizen, a planning and smart growth Web site, lists 50 good Web sites: 

www.planetizen.com/websites 

The Congress for New Urbanism has a compendium of model codes on a variety of subjects, 

including street design, rehabilitation, and urban design. The compendium also includes 

place-specific codes. 

www.cnu.org/pdf/code_catalog_8-1-01.pdf 

Water and Smart Growth 

EPA has issued several helpful resources on growth and water resources: 

“Protecting Water resources with Smart Growth” 

www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/water_resource.htm 

EPA’s Watershed Academy hosts an online training course. 

www.epa.gov/watertrain/smartgrowth 

EPA’s Region 6 has compiled an exhaustive list of water resources that are applicable 

throughout the country. The site also lists the Web sites of state stormwater offices for each 

of the 50 states and U.S. territories. 

www.epa.gov/region6/water/npdes/sw/resources.pdf 

The Met Council has released a series of documents on controlling stormwater in 

cold climates. 

www.metrocouncil.org/environment/watershed/bmp/manual.htm 

Stormwater Sites 

EPA’s main site for NPDES permits: 

http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/index.cfm 

EPA’s stormwater program home page 

http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/home.cfm?program_id=6 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 91 

EPA Fact Sheet on Phase II 

www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/fact2-0.pdf 

State stormwater programs 

http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/linkresult.cfm?program_id=6&link_category=2&view=link 

Resource List for Stormwater Management Programs and Phase II 

www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/sw_resource_list.pdf 

Menu of Best Management Practices (BMPs) 

http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/menuofbmps/menu.cfm 

The Stormwater Authority lists state programs, news, white papers, and articles 

www.stormwaterauthority.org/ 

The Natural Resources Defense Council’s “Stormwater Strategies” 

www.nrdc.org/water/pollution/storm/stoinx.asp 

Project NEMO (Non-point Education for Municipal Officials) 

http://nemo.uconn.edu 

EPA’s National Management Measures to Control NonPoint Source Pollution from Urban 

Areas 

www.epa.gov/nps/urbanmm/ 

Innovations in Phase II Guidance and Permits to Include Smart 

Growth 

EPA’s model permit for Phase II includes language on specific smart growth techniques 

(e.g. infill), as well as flexibility to custom design ordinances and guidance. 

www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/modpermit.pdf 

The Michigan Environmental Council is developing materials on smart growth and 

Michigan’s innovative stormwater and watershed permitting. 

www.michiganenvironmentalcouncil.org 

The Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program has developed a new 

Phase I permit to include many smart growth innovations. Under the reissued permit, the 

city of San Jose revised local ordinances to incentivize smart growth projects, such as affordable housing and redevelopment. 

■ The regional permit: 

www.scvurpppw2k.com/pdfs/other/NPDES_Permit_C3New_Finalodrtransltr.PDF 

■ The San Jose Policy changes: 

www.sanjoseca.gov/planning/stormwater/pol_stormwater.pdf 
92 SECTION 3: Resources 

The city of Poway, California, has defined BMP to include redevelopment and development 

projects that improve stormwater performance as compared to conventional designs. 

www.codepublishing.com/ca/poway/Poway16/Poway16101.html#16.101.200 

Resources by Smart Growth Technique 


Regional Planning


EPA’s Surf Your Watershed


www.epa.gov/surf


EPA hosts a page on build-out tools


www.epa.gov/greenkit/2tools.htm


EPA link to source water protection plans 


www.epa.gov/safewater/protect.html


The Trust for Public Land published “Protecting the Source” on regional source water 

protection efforts. 

www.tpl.org 

www.tpl.org/tier3_cd.cfm?content_item_id=1337&folder_id=195 

New Jersey’s program for regional and integrated planning 

www.smartgrowthgateway.org 

For information on the Highlands (New Jersey) water protection plan 

www.highlands.state.nj.us/index.html and 

www.state.nj.us/dep/highlands/faq_info.htm 

New Jersey’s Regional Plan Association hosts research and position papers. 

www.planningpartners.org 

RPA developed a paper on goal oriented zoning using smart growth techniques. 

www.planningpartners.org/projects/wma11/sg_alt/smartgrowthalt_text.pdf 

The Association of New Jersey Environmental Commissions’ Smart Growth Survival Kit 

www.anjec.org 

The Central New York Regional Planning Board’s regional assistance program for Phase II 

communities 

www.cnyrpdb.org/stormwater-phase2/ 

The University of Rhode Island’s Cooperative Extension’s A Creative Combination: Merging 

Alternative Wastewater Treatment with Smart Growth 

http://www.uri.edu/ce/wq/mtp/PDFs/manuals/Creative%20Combination%203-10.pdf 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 93 

The Planning Commissioners Journal hosts a page on transfer of development rights programs, including examples, common challenges, and resources. 

www.plannersweb.com/wfiles/w370.html 

Appalachian Regional Commission’s site on strategic planning and best practices. 

www.arc.gov/index.do?nodeId=44 

Infill 

The Washington State Phase II permit application 

www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/stormwater/phase_2/Phase%20II%20Application.pdf 

(see page 14 for the language on infill development). 

The Greenbelt Alliance published “Smart Infill” with information on zoning codes, design, 

and public participation 

www.greenbelt.org (go to ”Resource Center” and “Reports”) 

The Metro Council published the Urban Small Sites Best Management Practice (BMP) 

Manual. 

www.metrocouncil.org/environment/Watershed/bmp/manual.htm 

Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations 

www.ampo.org 

The Local Government Commission, the REALTORS, and EPA co-published “Creating Great 

Neighborhoods: Density in Your Community” 

www.lgc.org/freepub/PDF/Land_Use/reports/density_manual.pdf 

Smart Growth America produced “Choosing Our Community’s Future” to assist neighborhood leaders in shaping growth in their neighborhoods. 

www.smartgrowthamerica.org 

Wisconsin developed post-construction standards that vary for development type 

(i.e., new development, redevelopment, infill). 

www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/water/wm/nps/stormwater/post-constr/ 

Clark County’s (Washington) comprehensive plan 

www.co.clark.wa.us/longrangeplan/review/index.html 

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources’ list of general land use terms 

dnr.wi.gov/org/es/science/landuse/education/GPZ.htm. 

New Jersey’s two-tiered permit system for infiltration requirements 

www.njstormwater.org 
94 SECTION 3: Resources 

Austin, Texas, smart growth incentives for infill 

www.ci.austin.tx.us/smartgrowth/incentives.htm 

San Diego’s Localized Equivalent Area Drainage program (LEAD) for sharing stormwater 

costs across projects 

www.sannet.gov/stormwater 

The Center for Watershed Protection sponsors Builders for the Bay, “Smart Site,” and the Site 

Design Roundtable 

www.cwp.org 

Maryland’s Guide to BMP Selection 

www.mde.state.md.us/assets/document/chapter4.pdf 

Redevelopment 

The National Vacant Properties Campaign has information on the most common conditions 

leading to vacated properties, and ways to develop programs that can bring unproductive 

property back. 

www.vacantproperties.org/ 

The Congress for the New Urbanism’s Greyfields into Goldfields 

www.cnu.org/cnu_reports/Executive_summary.pdf 

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Smart Codes in Your 

Community: A Guide to Building Rehabilitation Codes 

http://www.huduser.org/publications/destech/smartcodes.html 

The Smart Growth Leadership Institute has a Web site devoted to code audits to identify barriers to redevelopment. 

www.sgli.org/implementation.html 

The U.S. Green Building Council’s (USGBC’s) scorecards, called LEED (for Leadership in 

Environmental and Energy Design), contain rating systems for development and redevelopment projects. USGBC has a new scorecard under development call LEED Neighborhood 

Design (LEED ND). 

www.usgbc.org/leed/leed_main.asp 

EPA’s case study of the Atlantic Steel redevelopment project 

www.epa.gov/projectxl/atlantic/index.htm 

Development Districts 

The state of Oregon created a design manual for development districts, which can serve as a 

base example for developing a joint smart growth and stormwater design manual. 

egov.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/publications/wqgbchapter4dsnstan.PDF 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 95 

Emeryville, California, developed design guidelines for highly urbanized areas with limited 

opportunities for infiltration – Design Guidelines for Green, Dense Redevelopment. The final 

document will be released in 2006. 

www.ci.emeryville.ca.us/planning 

Elm Grove, Wisconsin, has developed plans to include downtown revitalization, stormwater 

control, and open space planning. 

www.elmgrovewi.org 

Chesterfield, Burlington County, in New Jersey has a code for transfer of development rights, 

including a “Planned Village Development” district ordinance for receiving areas. 

www.smartgrowthgateway.org/ordinances/chesterfield.pdf 

EPA Brownfields site 

www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/index.html 

San Diego’s “City of Villages” planning initiative 

www.sandiego.gov/cityofvillages 

San Diego’s Urban Runoff Program 

www.sandiego.gov/stormwater 

The Trust for Historic Preservation sponsors the Main Street Program 

www.mainstreet.org/ 

Caltrans has a site dedicated to transit oriented development. This site describes each project, 

giving information on land use plans, transportation performance, and project details. 

transitorienteddevelopment.dot.ca.gov 

The Congress for New Urbanism’s compilation of code innovations 

www.cnu.org/pdf/code_catalog_8-1-01.pdf. 

New Urban News developed New Urbanism: Comprehensive Report & Best Practices Guide, 

which contains analyses, best practices, and examples. To order, go to 

www.newurbannews.com. 

Tree Programs 

Treelink has a page with links to tree preservation, urban forestry, and urban 

design ordinances. 

www.treelink.org/linx/?navSubCatRef=25 

Casey Trees is developing detailed information on the amount of stormwater that can be 

intercepted by tree cover and green roofs. 

www.greenroofs.org/resources/greenroofvisionfordc.pdf 
96 SECTION 3: Resources 

American Forests has information on research, ordinances, and CITYGreen software. 

www.americanforests.org 

International Society of Arboriculture 

www.isa-arbor.com 

Scenic America has a model tree ordinance and supporting information 

www.scenic.org/portals/0/trees%20-%20ordinance.doc 

Trees Atlanta’s assessment of the benefits of tree canopy 

www.treesatlanta.org 

The USDA Forest Service Southern Region 

www.urbanforestrysouth.org 

Metro’s Trees for Green Streets: An Illustrated Guide 

www.metro-region.org/article.cfm?articleid=263 

Parking Reduction Strategies 

Parking Spaces/Community Spaces is set for release in 2006 from EPA. 

www.epa.gov/smartgrowth. 

The Stormwater Center has a fact sheet on planning, designing and retrofitting parking lots. 

www.stormwatercenter.net/Assorted%20Fact%20Sheets/Tool4_Site_Design/ 

GreenParking.htm 

Olympia, Washington’s Impervious Surface Reduction Study 

depts.washington.edu/cwws/Research/Reports/ipds.pdf 

Model agreement for shared parking 

www.metro-region.org/article.cfm?articleid=435 

The North Central Texas Council of Governments developed guidance, which includes parking reduction strategies. 

www.dfwstormwater.com/Storm_Water_BMPs/post-construct.asp#rec 

Information on car-sharing 

www.carsharing.net/where.html 

“Fix It First” 

The National Governors Association issued an Issue Brief on “Fix it First.” 

www.nga.org/cda/files/0408FIXINGFIRST.pdf 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 97 

EPA’s Sustainable Water 

www.epa.gov/water/infrastructure. 

Smart Growth Street Design 

The Institute for Transportation Engineers developed two recommended practice guidelines: 

“Traditional Neighborhood Development Street Design Guidelines” (1999) and 

“Neighborhood Street Design Guidelines” (2003). 

www.ite.org 

The Victoria Transport Policy Institute hosts an online transportation encyclopedia. This frequently updated site includes many details on transportation and street networks and 

includes examples from across the country, as well as international examples. 

www.vtpi.org/tdm/index.php 

The American Planning Association has issued a report, Planning for Connectivity: Getting 

from Here to There, Report PAS #515, written by Susan Handy, Robert Paterson, and Kentt 

Butler. 

www.planning.org. 

The metropolitan region around Portland, Oregon (Metro) developed a regional street design 

manual, specifying stream treatments, street width, and associated water quality benefits. 

www.metro-region.org (type “street design” into the site’s search engine) 

North Carolina’s Department of Transportation (NCDOT) approved street design guidelines 

for Traditional Neighborhood Development Design. 

www.doh.dot.state.nc.us/operations/tnd.pdf 

The Local Government Commission developed fact sheets on designing multi-use streets. 

www.lgc.org (under “Free Resources”) 

The Congress for New Urbanism published a literature review of street designs for traditional 

neighborhood design and smart growth projects. This literature review will be used to support further work with the Institute of Transportation Engineers on the subject. 

cnu.org/pdf/lit_review_assigned.pdf 

Dane County, Wisconsin, adopted traditional street standards. 

www.co.dane.wi.us/plandev/build/pdf/tnd/20040225_append_C.pdf 

Seattle launched the Siskiyou Green Street Project to add vegetated curb extensions. These 

extensions handle some of the stormwater that would otherwise enter the storm sewer. 

www.portlandonline.com/bes/index.cfm?c=dhfjc 
98 SECTION 3: Resources 

Stormwater Utilities 

The Center for Urban Policy and the Environment at Indiana University-Purdue University 

Indianapolis (IUPUI), in cooperation with EPA, hosts a page dedicated to stormwater 

finance. Some of the case studies provide examples on how to creatively match the rate 

structure with impacts. 

http://stormwaterfinance.urbancenter.iupui.edu/ 

Lake County (Ohio) Credit Manual for Tier 2 Cities, Lake County Stormwater Management 

Department. 

www2.lakecountyohio.org/smd/Credit%20Manual%20Level%202%20%20Advisory 

%20Board%20Approved.pdf 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 99 

SECTION 4 

New Jersey – A Case Study in Weaving 

Stormwater and Smart Growth Policies Together 

The state of New Jersey has one of the 

most fully developed smart growth 

programs of any state. In 1985, the 

state adopted the State Planning Act, which 

led to the creation of a State Development 

and Redevelopment Plan (the State Plan). 

This plan was created through a statewide 

planning process called cross-acceptance, 

which ensures that governments at all levels, 

as well as stakeholders and the public, participate in deciding the future of New Jersey’s 

growth. Early accomplishments included 

farmland protection, a land acquisition program, and comprehensive brownfields redevelopment policies. 

In the early 1980s New Jersey passed its 

stormwater management rules. As attention to 

smart growth and the awareness of the environmental impacts of development increased, 

so did interest in updating stormwater rules. 

In the 1990s, with the new Phase II requirements on the horizon, the state developed 

rules with both growth and stormwater goals 

in mind. In 2003, the state passed two companion laws, one called the “MS4 Law” to 

establish a statewide permitting system, and 

the other called the “Stormwater Management 

Rule,” which modernized the state’s original 

stormwater laws and forged closer links 

between stormwater and other growth management plans. 

Goals for Smart Growth 

The purpose of the State Plan is to coordinate planning activities and establish 

statewide planning objectives in the following areas: land use, housing, economic development, transportation, natural resource 

conservation, agriculture and farmland retention, recreation, urban and suburban redevelopment, historic preservation, public 

facilities and services, and intergovernmental 

coordination 

New Jersey uses the goals in the State Plan as 

a guide. The state is divided into five regions, 

with different goals based on the existing 

development profile, as well as plans for 

growth in that area. The accompanying State 

Plan Policy Map serves as the underlying 

land use-planning and management framework that directs funding, infrastructure 

improvements, and preservation for programs throughout New Jersey. 
100 SECTION 4: New Jersey – A Case Study 

Goals for Water and 

Stormwater 

The new stormwater rules are meant to complement other environmental and economic 

goals. The new rules place an emphasis on 

ground water recharge, though that requirement would be waived for urban areas. In 

urbanizing areas, LID techniques are to be 

used to maintain existing vegetation and 

drainage patterns. In all areas of the state, 

BMPs would be chosen to achieve an 80 percent reduction in certain pollutant loads. 

Areas along waterways designated as 

Category One (C1) water resources have special protections, such as the Highlands area 

of the state. 

Specific Policies that Meet 

Both Water and Smart 

Growth Goals 

This section describes policy areas that have 

both water and smart growth goals. 

Tiered Stormwater Requirements: 

Instead of creating blanket requirements for 

all areas of the state, New Jersey adopted two 

tiers to administer stormwater requirements. 

Municipalities within the state are assigned 

to either Tier A or Tier B. Tier A municipalities are generally located within the more 

densely populated regions of the state or 

along the coast. Tier B municipalities are 

generally more rural and in non-coastal 

regions. The Tier B Permit includes basic 

requirements and concentrates on new development and redevelopment projects and 

public education. The Tier A Permit includes 

the requirements found in the Tier B Permit, 

plus BMPs aimed at controlling stormwater 

pollutants from existing development. 

Meeting Smart Growth Goals: By establishing tiers instead of general requirements, the 

state recognizes that the requirements based 

on development context can help create a 

level playing field so that greenfields development is not unintentionally favored due to 

less strict requirements. 

Meeting Stormwater Goals: Tier A rules 

address stormwater problems found in 

urbanized areas, such as pet waste and litter. 

The infiltration requirements are tied to areas 

of the state critical for recharge, but are not 

required in urbanized areas where legacy 

pollutants may enter underground water 

systems. 

“Fix It First:” 

The New Jersey State Development and 

Redevelopment Plan and Infrastructure 

Needs Assessment, both adopted in March 

2001, are used to encourage smart infrastructure investments. The “Fix It First” rules are 

particularly strong for transportation investments. For water and sewer infrastructure, 

the rules are not as explicit, but there are 

other policies that help direct funds for 

repair and replacements of water infrastructure. The State Planning Act links the state’s 

annual capital budget recommendations to 

the State Development and Redevelopment 

Plan, and makes the Infrastructure Needs 

Assessment an integral part of the State Plan. 

One concern voiced by developers is the 

poor condition of infrastructure in many of 

the designated growth areas. The state has 

responded through its “Water Quality 

Management Planning and Smart Growth 

Implementation Process” grant. 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 101 

Meeting Smart Growth Goals: By focusing 

infrastructure investments in existing cities, 

towns, and suburbs, New Jersey can encourage downtown revitalization, decrease development pressures on farmland and other 

open space, and conserve limited funds by 

taking advantage of past infrastructure 

investments. 

Meeting Stormwater Goals: Combined sewer 

overflows account for much of the pollution 

in New Jersey’s waterways and harbors. Fixing 

aging infrastructure can mitigate —or eliminate—this source of pollution. Over a third of 

Newark’s 170-mile collection system is brick. 

Fixing the infrastructure not only helps with 

overflows, but also decreases the strain on the 

system caused by inflow and infiltration (I/I). 

In addition, upgrades to infrastructure in designated growth areas can attract development 

that may go elsewhere in sensitive watersheds. 

Utility Policies: 

The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities 

(NJBPU) is the state’s utility regulatory 

authority with oversight over the state’s energy, telecommunications, water/wastewater, 

and cable television industries. Following the 

creation of a board-wide Smart Growth 

Policy Team, the NJBPU looked at its infrastructure extension formula and the extent 

to which developers will be required to pay 

for the necessary infrastructure. The formula 

was established to accommodate growth 

based on where development is occurring 

and how infrastructure improvements can 

best be financed to support increased development in designated growth areas. As stated 

in the 2005 strategic plan, NJBPU wants to 

make developers constructing on greenfield 

sites bear the full cost of gas, electric, and 

water line extensions, while reimbursing 

older communities and designated growth 

areas for laying utilities on their own. 

Meeting Smart Growth Goals: Currently, 

builders negotiate the amount they contribute 

to gas, electrical, and water line extension on 

a case-by-case basis often with large reimbursements, while the total cost of service 

expansion to new subdivisions is subsidized 

by ratepayers in cities and older suburbs. 

Adjusting the formulae for rates and extensions to reflect actual costs brings transparency to the costs of various development 

patterns. Denser, older communities are more 

efficiently served per unit that dispersed 

development, thus holding down both installation and long term maintenance costs. 

Meeting Stormwater Goals: The BPU’s 

adjustments to extension and rate policies 

complement “Fix It First” policies and those 

geared to directing growth to designated 

growth areas. Funds can be targeted to 

repair, replacement, and capacity upgrades 

rather than installation to serve new, dispersed development. Holding down utility 

costs in urban areas can attract residents and 

commercial entities. 

Infill and Redevelopment 

Districts: 

New Jersey has several programs and policies 

geared toward redevelopment and revitalizing existing neighborhoods. The list is long, 

and the accompanying policies, grant programs and incentives are too long to list 

here. Among the programs are: 

■ New Jersey’s Office of Brownfield Reuse 

www.state.nj.us/dep/srp/brownfields/obr/ 
102 SECTION 4: New Jersey – A Case Study 

■ Rehabilitation Subcode 

www.nj.gov/dca/codes/rehab/index.shtml 

■ Transit Village Initiative 

www.state.nj.us/transportation/ 

community/village 

Meeting Smart Growth Goals: The recycling 

of brownfields and vacant sites allows the 

state to meet its smart growth goals of protecting open space by clustering development on existing sites, already served by 

infrastructure. In addition, the state has 

taken strides to provide affordable housing 

and save historic buildings through redevelopment. The transit villages and older areas 

that are served by multiple modes of transit 

offers options and reduces the amount of 

infrastructure needed to support automobile 

dependent types of development. 

Meeting Stormwater Goals: Both public and 

private sector investment in older areas provides funding for infrastructure upgrades. 

The focus on larger sites (brownfields, transit 

station areas) allows localities to better plan 

for handling stormwater on site. 

Agricultural Smart Growth Plan: 

New Jersey’s 2003 Agricultural Smart Growth 

Plan provides a roadmap for the future of agriculture across the state. The plan consists of 

five components: 1) farmland preservation, 2) 

innovative conservation planning, 3) economic 

development, 4) natural resource conservation, 

and 5) agricultural industry sustainability. 

Other components of the plan aim to preserve 

20,000 acres of farmland per year through 

2009 and integrate economic development and 

smart growth into the agricultural industry. 

The future of agriculture in an expanding, 

global market also depends upon innovative 

planning techniques, economic development, 

natural resource conservation, and programs 

and policies which keep the industry viable. 

For more information visit <www.nj.gov/agriculture/smartgrowthplan.pdf>. 

Meeting Smart Growth Goals: The 

Agricultural Smart Growth Plan primarily 

strives to achieve the goal of preserving 

farmland, but the plan also involves community and stakeholder participation in the 

decisionmaking process and encourages a 

sense of place in rural communities by 

strengthening their economies. 

Meeting Stormwater Goals: The Agricultural 

Smart Growth Plan brings innovative conservation goals to protect stream buffers and 

target land best suited for infiltration and 

forestry. In addition the agricultural smart 

growth plan provides better tools to design 

commercial and residential growth. Targeting 

commercial entities to existing downtowns 

and encouraging rural housing development 

designs can help minimize the development 

footprint overall. 

Transfer of Development Rights: 

The transfer of development rights (TDR) is a 

tool used to encourage a shift in growth away 

from agricultural, environmentally sensitive, 

or historic open space to designated areas 

where new development is desired. By incorporating TDR provisions in their land-use regulations, municipalities can encourage the 

protection of open space at a far lower cost 

than outright purchase. In a TDR program, a 

community identifies a conservation area 

within its boundaries where it would like to 

see protected from development (the sending 

zone) and another area where the community 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 103 

desires more growth (the receiving zone) as 

identified in the municipality’s land-use plan. 

Landowners in the sending zone are allocated 

a number of development credits, which can 

be sold to developers, speculators, or the community itself. In return for selling his or her 

development credits, the landowner in the 

sending zone agrees to place a permanent 

conservation easement on his or her land. 

Meanwhile, the purchaser of the development 

credits can apply them to develop at a higher 

density than otherwise allowed on property 

under the base zoning. 

On March 29, 2004, then-Governor 

McGreevey signed a bill authorizing all 

municipalities in New Jersey to adopt TDR 

programs, making New Jersey the first state in 

the nation to make TDR available statewide. 

TDRs typically work best when they are used 

in combination with other policies. Receiving 

areas must be ready to accept the density 

being sent, which means the zoning and infrastructure must be in place. 

Meeting Smart Growth Goals: New Jersey’s 

TDR program meets several of the state’s 

smart growth principles, most notably the 

protection of open space, farmland, and scenic resources; compact, clustered community 

design; and locating future growth in communities with existing infrastructure. The 

state has a well-developed program in the 

Pinelands. To see more on the details of how 

the TDR program has been established, see 

<www.nj.gov/dca/osg/resources/tdr/ 

index.shtml>. 

Meeting Stormwater Goals: Much of the 

land identified as sending areas are also critical for water and recharge. That water would 

become urban runoff if developed under 

conventional standards and would result in 

stream degradation throughout larger segments. Receiving areas, which can then be 

developed more intensively, can accommodate more development on a smaller footprint, thus making more efficient use of land 

on a per unit basis. While most TDR programs are geared toward farmland preservation, they can also be designed for erosion 

control and water quality. For example, a 

TDR program can be implemented along 

with a source water protection plan. 

Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 105 

Acronyms & Glossary


Acronyms 

BID—Business Improvement District 

BMP—Best Management Practices 

COG—Council of Governments 

CWA—Clean Water Act 

CZMA—Coastal Zone Management Act 

ICMA—International City/County Managers 

Association 

LID—Low Impact Development 

LOS—Level of Service 

MPO—Metropolitan Planning Organization 

NACO—National Association of Counties 

NAHB—National Association of 

Homebuilders 

NPDES—National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System 

NPS—Nonpoint Source Pollution 

NRCS—Natural Resource Conservation 

Services 

PFA—Priority Funding Area 

SWMP—Stormwater Management Plan 

SWPP—Stormwater Prevention Plan or 

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan 

TIF—Tax Increment Financing 

TDR—Transfer of Development Rights 

TMDL—Total Maximum Daily Load 

TND—Traditional Neighborhood 

Development 

TOD—Transit Oriented Development 

UDO—Unified Development Ordinance 

USEPA—United States Environmental 

Protection Agency 
106 GLOSSARY 

Glossary 

BMPs (Best Management Practices): 

Methods that have been determined to be 

the most effective, practical means of preventing or reducing pollution from nonpoint sources, such as pollutants carried by 

urban runoff. These methods can be structural (e.g., devices, ponds) or non-structural 

(e.g., policies to reduce imperviousness). 

BMPs classified as “non-structural” are those 

that rely predominantly on behavioral 

changes rather than construction in order to 

be effective. “Structural” BMPs are engineered or constructed to prevent or manage 

stormwater. 

Biofiltration: The use of vegetation such as 

grasses and wetland plants to filter and treat 

stormwater runoff as it is conveyed through 

an open channel or swale. 

Buffer Zone: A designed transitional area 

around a stream lake or wetland left in a natural, usually vegetated, state so as to protect 

the waterbed from runoff-related pollution. 

Development is typically prohibited or 

restricted in a buffer zone. 

Charrette: A French word meaning “cart”; 

often used to describe the final, intense work 

effort expended by art and architecture students to meet a project deadline. In modern 

terms, a charrette is an intense community 

workshop, typically held over several consecutive days, conducted to gather ideas and 

develop feasible community design options. 

Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) and 

Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSOs): 

Overflows occur when pipes carrying sewage 

and/or stormwater are overwhelmed by a 

high volume of water, typically during rainstorms. Older cities tend to have combined 

sewers (stormwater and sewage are carried 

in the same pipe); however, sanitary sewers 

can overflow as well. 

Detention: The storage and slow release of 

stormwater following a precipitation event 

by means of an excavated pond, enclosed 

depression, or tank. Detention is used both 

for pollutant removal, stormwater storage, 

and peak flow attenuation. 

Exfiltration: The downward flow of water 

into the soil. 

Floodplain: A natural or statistically derived 

area adjacent to a stream or river where 

water overflows its banks at some frequency 

during extreme weather events. 

General Permit: A permit issued under the 

NPDES program to cover a certain class or 

category of stormwater discharges. These 

permits reduce the administrative burden of 

permitting stormwater discharges. Most permitting authorities also allow for individual 

permits, which are tailored to meet unique 

needs. 

Hydrology: The science dealing with the 

properties, distribution, and circulation of 

water on and below the Earth’s surface and 

in the atmosphere. 

Impervious Surface: A hard surface area that 

either prevents or retards the entry of water 

into the soil mantle as occurs under natural 

conditions (prior to development), and from 

which water runs off at an increased rate of 

flow or in increased volumes. Common 

impervious surfaces include but are not 
Using Smart Growth Techniques as Stormwater Best Management Practices 107 

limited to rooftops, walkways, patios, driveways, parking lots, compacted soil, and roadways. “Effective impervious surface” is 

commonly used to describe impervious surfaces connected to receiving water directly or 

with a conveyance device (e.g., curbs, pipes, 

gutters). 

Infiltration: The process or rate at which 

water percolates from the land surface into 

the ground. Infiltration is also a general category of BMPs designed to collect runoff and 

allow it to flow through the ground for 

treatment. 

Infiltration/Inflow (I/I): Clean storm and/or 

groundwater that enters the sewer system 

through cracked pipes, leaky manholes, or 

improperly connected storm drains, down 

spouts and sump pumps. Most inflow comes 

from stormwater and most infiltration comes 

from groundwater. I/I affects the size of conveyance and treatment systems and, ultimately, the rate businesses and residents pay 

to operate and maintain them. 

Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP): 

A standard that applies to all MS4 operators 

under NPDES permits. The standard has no 

exact definition, as it was intended to be 

flexible to allow operators to tailor their 

stormwater programs to their particular site 

MS4 (Municipal Separate Storm Sewer 

System): A publicly owned conveyance or 

system of conveyances that discharges to 

waters of the United States or waters of the 

state, and is designed or used for collecting 

or conveying storm water. Conveyances can 

include any pipe; ditch or gully; or system of 

pipes, ditches, or gullies, that is owned or 

operated by a governmental entity and used 

for collecting and conveying storm water. 

For purposes of implementing NPDES, regulated communities have been divided into 

small, medium and large MS4s: 

■ Large MS4: all municipal separate storm 

sewers that are located in an incorporated 

place with a population of 250,000 or 

more according to the latest Census. 

■ Medium MS4: all municipal separate 

storm sewers that are located in an incorporated place with a population of more 

than 100,000 but less than 250,000. 

■ Small MS4: any municipal separate storm 

sewer that is not defined as being “large” 

or “medium,” but which meets certain criteria on density or other factors used 

locally for designation. 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 

System (NPDES): A provision of the Clean 

Water Act that prohibits the discharge of pollutants into waters of the United States 

unless a special permit is issued by EPA, a 

state (where designated), a tribal government 

or Indian reservation. 

Nonpoint source (NPS) pollution: 

Pollution that is caused by or attributable to 

diffuse sources. Typically, NPS pollution 

results from land runoff, precipitation, 

atmospheric deposition, or percolation. 

Notice of Intent (NOI): An application to 

notify the permitting authority of a facility’s 

intention to be covered by a general permit; 

exempts a facility from having to submit an 

individual or group application. 

Permitting Authority: The NPDES-authorized state agency or EPA regional office that 
108 Smart Growth Stormwater 

administers the NPDES program, issuing 

permits, providing compliance assistance, 

conducting inspections, and enforcing the 

program. 

Pollution-generating pervious surfaces: A 

non-impervious surface with vegetative 

ground cover subject to use of pesticides and 

fertilizers. Such surfaces include, but are not 

limited to, the lawn and landscaped areas of 

residential or commercial sites, golf courses, 

parks, and sports fields. 

Post-Construction BMPs: A subset of BMPs 

including source control and structural treatment BMPs that detain, retain, filter, or educate to prevent the release of pollutants to 

surface waters during the final functional life 

of development. 

Retention: The process of collecting and 

holding surface and stormwater runoff with 

no surface outflow. 

Runoff: Any drainage that leaves an area as 

surface flow. 

Sanitary Sewer: An underground pipe system that carries sanitary waste and other 

wastewater to a treatment plant 

Stormwater Sewer System: A system of 

pipes and channels that carry stormwater 

runoff from surfaces of building, paved surfaces, and the land to discharge areas 

Stormwater Management: The prevention, 

control, and mitigation of the effects of 

stormwater runoff. Management programs 

include regulatory and non-regulatory 

aspects, but are typically integrated with 

other water quality programs. 

Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP): 

A plan, which may be integrated with other 

land development plans or regulations, that 

spells out how a regulated entity intends to 

prevent and treat stormwater runoff. 

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan 

(SWPPP): A plan to describe a process 

though which a facility thoroughly evaluates 

potential pollutant sources at a site and 

selects and implements appropriate measures 

designed to prevent or control the discharge 

of pollutants in stormwater runoff. 

Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL): 

A regulatory limit of the greatest amount of 

pollutants that can be released into a body 

of water without adversely affecting water 

quality. 

Water Quality Standards: State-adopted and 

EPA-approved ambient standards for waterbodies. The standards cover the use of the 

waterbody and the water quality criteria that 

must be met to protect the designated use or 

uses. 

Watershed: A geographic area in which 

water flowing across the surface will drain 

into a certain stream or river and flow out of 

the area via that stream or river. All of the 

land that drains to a particular body of water. 



1EPA

United States Environmental Protection Agency (1807-T) Washington, DC 20460 Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300 EPA 231-B-05-002 December 2005 www.epa.gov/smartgrowth 

2Recycled/Recyclable--Printed with vegetable oil based inks on 100% (minimum 50% postconsumer) recycled paper.