Nature-based solutions in the built environment can be valuable tools for flood mitigation and stormwater management, in addition to preservation of larger tracts of open space. Nature-based solutions, which are defined in the Regional Vision to include green infrastructure, can be used to replace traditional “gray” infrastructure with vegetated or permeable surfaces. When used in this way, these approaches retain and filter stormwater where it falls rather than relying on built systems to convey stormwater elsewhere.See footnote 1 In addition to stormwater management, there are many co-benefits to including nature-based solutions into planning and development. These include environmental benefits, such as filtering water pollutants, improving air quality, sequestering carbon, and providing habitat.See footnote 2 They also provide important social and health benefits, such as reducing urban heat, providing recreational opportunities, and improving mental health and well-being through access to nature.See footnote 3 Local governments can also realize cost savings compared to conventional gray infrastructure for stormwater management.See footnote 4
Credit: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Hard infrastructure, like roads, can exacerbate flooding challenges by reducing the surface area providing natural water storage capacity or by acting as barriers to the surface flow of water.See footnote 5 Additionally, many forms of infrastructure are designed for long lifespans, sometimes many decades for larger investments like bridges. It is therefore important to ensure that these investments will be justified, cost-effective, and informed by the latest data relating both to the need for the infrastructure, and potential risks like flooding.
Planning, appropriately, plays a key role in infrastructure decisionmaking, providing an opportunity to develop a long-term vision and establish priorities for investment needs over time. Infrastructure planning processes can be a useful way to ensure that nature-based solutions are integrated into the built environment and help to minimize environmental impacts like worsened runoff that might otherwise occur from hard infrastructure alone. By recognizing and taking advantage of opportunities upfront, especially during the initial planning phase, local governments can help ensure that benefits provided by nature-based resilience and flood mitigation are realized from infrastructure investments and projects long into the future.
This objective focuses on how parishes and municipalities in Region Seven can integrate policies promoting nature-based solutions into different infrastructure planning processes. For a more holistic approach, local governments should consider conducting infrastructure planning in conjunction with the approaches for fostering resilient, affordable housing (discussed in Goal Three and Goal Four) and for incorporating nature-based approaches and open space in neighborhoods (discussed in Objective 1.2).
Three types of processes that lend themselves well to integrating nature-based solutions include:
These plans can be used individually or together. However, overall, when developing new or amending existing plans, parishes and municipalities should make an effort to integrate nature-based projects into these plans to help ensure their benefits can be realized community-wide.
“Transportation planning” often refers specifically to the development of long-range transportation plans, a prerequisite for states and urbanized regions to receive federal surface transportation funding. However, individual parishes and municipalities may wish to develop their own transportation plans to set priorities for local investment needs. Used in this part, “transportation planning” is intended to refer to local (parish or municipal) transportation planning, but these recommendations may also be applied in the context of statewide or metropolitan long-range transportation planning. Transportation planning should also integrate well with other forms of development-related planning, including comprehensive planning and any other plans that address land-use patterns and housing considerations.
There are many opportunities to integrate nature-based solutions into transportation planning and design. In doing so, it is possible to mitigate the flooding of roads and other infrastructure, while providing other social, environmental, and aesthetic benefits. Along roadways, for example, nature-based projects have proven to be effective at reducing air pollution including particulate matter, which can be particularly important in urban areas with more vehicular traffic.See footnote 6 These types of solutions can include tree planting, the installation of bioswales, the introduction of other green features along the right-of-way, and replacing traditional, non-permeable roads with permeable pavements (particularly for roads with low-volume traffic). Other nature-based solutions like vegetated berms have been also studied for the potential to provide protection for coastal roads from coastal flooding and surge.See footnote 7
Local governments that opt to develop transportation plans, such as a transportation master plan or transportation adaptation plan, can prioritize nature-based solutions in these documents as a way to steer investments towards these infrastructure projects that will help build resilience and mitigate flooding. For example, Ascension Parish developed a Transportation Master Plan in 2020 that identifies green infrastructure as a policy consideration that will help the parish achieve its overall vision.See footnote 8 The parish recommends using “green infrastructure best practices when possible for transportation improvements” and adopting green street standards “to provide additional benefits for stormwater management.”See footnote 9
Credit: The Water Collaborative. |
Another way that local governments can plan for nature-based flood mitigation is through drainage master planning or stormwater management planning. Drainage master plans and stormwater management plans provide an overall vision and plan for managing surface water and storm runoff, identifying drainage and flooding challenges and proposing infrastructure investments and regulatory changes to mitigate these challenges.
East Baton Rouge Parish is in the process of finalizing a comprehensive Stormwater Master Plan, which includes gathering data and developing models to understand buildings and areas at higher risk from flooding now and in the future. The parish is working to identify criteria, guidance, ordinances, projects, and other activities to mitigate flooding, and ultimately will develop a 20-year stormwater capital improvement plan to prioritize projects based on established criteria.See footnote 10 During the process of developing its Stormwater Master Plan, the parish also approved an interim change to its Unified Development Code to require the prioritization of green infrastructure solutions in transportation investments.See footnote 11
On a smaller scale, many local governments require drainage plans as a condition of subdivision development, which can help mitigate any exacerbated flood impacts that would otherwise occur as a result of development activities. St. John the Baptist Parish mandates that project proponents create a stormwater management plan for any development occurring on one acre or more (or resulting in the installation of one acre or more of impervious surface).See footnote 12 This plan must “include post-development stormwater best management practices (BMPs) that limit the post-developed peak flow rate to the pre-developed peak flow rate for the ten-year, 24-hour and the 25-year, 24-hour storm event.”See footnote 13 St. Tammany Parish requires a drainage and pavement plan for “construction of commercial, industrial, institutional and certain multifamily developments, with the goal of improving pre-development runoff and reducing post-development runoff based on a minimum 25-year storm event.”See footnote 14
Although not specific to infrastructure, local governments can also integrate policies and projects featuring nature-based solutions in other types of crosscutting plans, such as local comprehensive, hazard mitigation, and climate adaptation and resilience plans.
As discussed previously in Objective 1.1 and Objective 2.2, comprehensive planning provides the overarching policy vision for development within a specified parish or municipality. Comprehensive plans can therefore help a local government establish policies that prioritize green infrastructure and nature-based solutions in the built environment as land is developed or redeveloped.
Hazard mitigation planning is another valuable tool for expanding the use of nature-based solutions, particularly in that it opens up new potential sources of funding to implement these projects. Developing a hazard mitigation plan (HMP) is a prerequisite for receiving Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).See footnote 15 Projects implemented with HMA funds must align with priorities established and mitigate vulnerabilities identified in a local government’s HMP. Hazard mitigation planning can also earn a community credit under Community Rating System (CRS) Activity 510 ⎯ Floodplain Management Planning (although the maximum credit awarded is for the development of a community-wide floodplain management plan rather than a multi-hazard plan).See footnote 16
Climate adaptation and resilience plans outline or direct how local governments will aim to address forecasted climate change impacts, including challenges related to floods increasing in magnitude and frequency. These plans vary in format, level of detail, and sectors covered, among other factors, and are often preceded by and aligned with or include a climate vulnerability assessment. Adaptation and resilience plans are a logical vehicle for identifying priorities to reduce flood impacts, including through nature-based solutions; however, they typically lack the same authority or legal status of a local comprehensive plan or hazard mitigation plan.
When considering the most effective ways to integrate nature-based solutions in infrastructure-related planning processes, decisionmakers may find the following crosscutting considerations and practice tips useful:
These tips are based on priority implementation best practices and considerations most relevant to this specific objective and do not present an exhaustive list for regional and local planners and policymakers. In addition to this objective, decisionmakers should, at a minimum, also refer to Goal Five for crosscutting practice tips and considerations including structuring equitable and inclusive community engagement processes and using quantitative and qualitative data to inform decisions.
It is important to acknowledge that every jurisdiction will be starting from a different place and have a unique local context and needs, among other factors. Therefore, these practice tips could be adopted individually, collectively, or not at all. It will be up to policymakers to work directly with their communities and other key stakeholders and partners to assess and determine potential tools and approaches to implement this goal and objective.
The summaries below highlight resources and case studies available in Georgetown Climate Center’s Adaptation Clearinghouse that are relevant to this objective. They illustrate how many of the above benefits, practice tips, and planning, legal, and policy tools were or are being evaluated and used in practice in different jurisdictions. To learn more and navigate to the Adaptation Clearinghouse, click on the “View Resource” buttons.
Endnotes:
1. Georgetown Climate Ctr., Introduction, Green Infrastructure Toolkit (2016), View Source. | Back to contentBack to content
2. U.S. Envt’l Prot. Agency, Healthy Benefits of Green Infrastructure in Communities, available at View Source (2017). | Back to contentBack to content
5. Breanne Bizette, New bill focuses on I-12 median that caused major flooding in Livingston Parish in 2016, WAFB, (updated Jun. 9, 2021, 6:26 PM), View Source. | Back to contentBack to content
6. Richard Baldauf et al., Integrating Vegetation and Green Infrastructure into Sustainable Transportation Planning (Sept.–Oct. 2013), available at View Source. | Back to contentBack to content
7. Nature-based Resilience for Coastal Highways, Fed. Highway Admin., View Source (last visited Apr. 22, 2022). | Back to contentBack to content
8. Ascension Parish, Transportation Master Plan 49, 57 (Nov. 2020), available at View Source. | Back to contentBack to content
9. Id. at 57. Back to contentBack to content
10. About, East Baton Rouge Stormwater Master Plan, View Source (last visited Apr. 22, 2022). | Back to contentBack to content
11. Codes & Ordinances, East Baton Rouge Stormwater Master Plan, View Source (last visited Apr. 22, 2022). | Back to contentBack to content
12. St. John the Baptist Code of Ordinances § 115-17, View Source. | Back to contentBack to content
13. St. John the Baptist Code of Ordinances § 115-18, View Source. | Back to contentBack to content
14. St. Tammany Parish Code § 115-111, View Source. | Back to contentBack to content
15. Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) includes the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, the Flood Mitigation Assistance Program, and the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Program. For more information on the HMA grant programs and eligibility, see Hazard Mitigation Assistance Guidance, Fed. Emerg. Mgmt. Agency, View Source (last visited May 11, 2022). | Back to contentBack to content
16. Fed. Emergency Mgmt. Agency, National Flood Insurance Program Community Rating System: Coordinator’s Manual 510-2 (2017), available at View Source. | Back to contentBack to content
Read Previous Section Read Next Section
Back to top