Key Takeaways
⇢ Public parks offer scalable sites for stormwater capture, flood mitigation, heat buffering and biodiversity gains.
⇢ Aligning parks, stormwater, and planning departments can enable the creation of larger capital and operational funds, unlocking cost-effective Nature-Based Solutions (NBS).
⇢ Framing Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI) as simultaneously advancing resilience, public health, equity, workforce development, and community trust results in broader support.
Summary
a. Conventional storm sewers handle moderate storms but fail during extreme events, resulting in flooding of parks and neighbourhoods. Nature-Based Solutions (NBS), such as bioswales, permeable pavers, and urban wetlands, retain water on‑site, mitigating flood peaks.
b. Community‑centered design & maintenance:
○ Early prototyping, culturally sensitive engagement and dedicated GSI maintenance crews ensure both functional performance and social buy‑in.
○ Apprenticeships with high school STEM students (Raleigh) and municipal job‑training programs (Philadelphia and Pittsburgh) cultivate the next generation of GSI designers, installers and stewards.
c. Co‑benefits:
○ Healthier, more resilient communities.
○ Benefits for historically underserved communities.
○ Build community trust in nature-based solutions.
○ Transform how governmental agencies work together and serve their communities.
○ Gap in GI maintenance skills presents workforce development opportunities.
d. Case studies of Innovative financing models:
○ Separate capital streams and departmental mandates often keep parks and stormwater teams apart. Successful cities, such as Seattle and Boston, have formalized co‑funding and joint master planning.
○ GSI demands new horticultural and monitoring skills. Raleigh embedded stormwater dollars into parks’ maintenance crews, and Pennsylvania’s cities run targeted workforce programs.
○ Houston’s Bayou Greenways Initiative: Converted land adjacent to flood channels into an interconnected park/trail network with dual stormwater and recreation functions.
○ Atlanta’s Rodney Cook Sr. Park: Combines flood‑detention basins with community‑driven design to bring green space and climate resilience to a historically underserved area.
○ Boston’s Cabinet‑Level Green Infrastructure Leadership: Elevated GSI to a mayoral priority, streamlining cross‑department action and budget alignment.
○ Milwaukee’s GSI in Schoolyards Initiative: Transformed paved schoolyards into green spaces to reduce runoff and improve health. The initiative is a three-way legal agreement (between the City, the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, and the School District) covering funding, maintenance, and land use.
○ Atlanta’s Environmental Impact Bond: First-of-its-kind social impact bond to fund green infrastructure.
○ Tucson’s Park Bond + Water Bill Surcharge: $1/mo utility fee plus public bond to support a dedicated green‑infra fund.
○ Pittsburgh’s Stormwater Trust Fund: Developers pay a fee-in-lieu ($600K/acre-inch) when unable to meet stormwater code.
How can Cities apply these learnings?
a. Audit flood‑prone parks and corridors, and then overlay watershed models to select high‑impact GSI locations.
b. Funding / Revenue Streams:
○ Create inter‑departmental capital accounts or co‑apply for grants.
○ Issue environmental impact/social bonds.
c. Update design standards so all soil‑disturbing or redevelopment projects evaluate NBS first.
Suggested readings:
a. Nature-Based Solutions for Managing Stormwater in Parks by City Parks Alliance. https://cityparksalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Parks-and-Green-Stormwater-PolicyBrief-12-10-2024.pdf .
Ideas for further research
a. Spatial analyses measuring how GSI investments correlate with socio‑economic and environmental justice indicators (e.g., flood risk, heat‑vulnerability).
b. Comparative research on different municipal GSI maintenance models..
