To search for model legislation, research, reports, and more, type your area of interest into the search bar above. You can filter your search by state, level of government, document type, and policy area to match the info you need to your unique community’s progressive goals.
Reducing the negative impacts of storm water is gaining priority in United States communities’ efforts to develop more sustainably and to comply with Clean Water Act requirements. Nationwide, communities may need to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in coming decades to meet clean water goals, assuming expansion and repair of conventional infrastructure (US EPA 2002). These projections include $54.8 billion for combined sewer overflow (CSO) control, and another nine billion dollars for storm water management programs (US EPA 2008a). The Clean Water Act’s regulatory requirements, along with perennial budget struggles facing many municipalities, are driving cities and utilities to identify and choose the most cost-effective approaches to storm water management.
Stormwater runoff is a major cause of water pollution in urban areas. When rain falls in undeveloped areas, the water is absorbed and filtered by soil and plants. When rain falls on our roofs, streets, and parking lots, however, the water cannot soak into the ground. In most urban areas, stormwater is drained through engineered collection systems and discharged into nearby water bodies. The stormwater carries trash, bacteria, heavy metals, and other pollutants from the urban landscape, polluting the receiving waters. Higher flows also can cause erosion and flooding in urban streams, damaging habitat, property, and infrastructure.
Understanding the effect of flooding on Great Lakes cities and identify strategies to manage the problem of urban flooding. The effects of urban flooding—sewer backups, basement seepage, property damage, and street ponding—collectively cause millions of dollars of damage each year, the survey encourages collaboration among utilities and municipalities, partners and investors in Great Lakes cities.
CMAP staff partnered with the Center for Neighborhood Technology (CNT) and the Illinois Department of Natural Resources’ (IDNR) Office of Water Resources (OWR) through its Lake Michigan Water Allocation Program in an effort to improve understanding of the water-loss control practices and challenges faced by community water suppliers whose source of water is Lake Michigan. The effort involved analysis of water-use data (2007-12) compiled by IDNR from annual audit reports required of communities with an allocation of lake water; an Internet-based survey questionnaire featuring 23 questions sent to 172 community water suppliers with public infrastructure to manage; site visits with six communities for an in-depth discussion of the water-loss control issues; and additional site visits with three communities to begin to gauge response to the industry standard water-loss control tool available to help solve the problem.
There are nearly 950,000 more manufacturing jobs in the U.S. today than in 2010. This resurgence presents a major opportunity for communities. As a rejection of inefficient sprawling industrial parks and overseas production, there is growing demand for urban manufacturing locations. But cities that want to take advantage of manufacturing’s return need to prepare. An EcoDistrict approach to industrial revitalization can help keep costs down and bring the benefits of manufacturing to a community, while reducing the environmental burdens.
For any state or agency looking to increase adoption of the M36 water audit methodology, there are several key takeaways from Georgia’s new auditing requirements: State agencies and their partners should place emphasis on the value and usefulness of M36 for utilities. Beyond instituting any auditing requirement, states should highlight the benefits of this practice in helping utilities improve business operations. Data validation is paramount. Water loss audits and future planning must be based on accurate and reliable audit results in order to effectively improve water systems. Encourage strong relationships between state and local governments. It is critical for states to have a strong commitment to providing training resources and support to utilities as they adopt the M36 auditing method. Encourage public reporting. Sharing audit results improves transparency, accountability and understanding between a utility and its customers. Enthusiastic training sessions. The auditing process can be dull. It is important to provide engaging trainings that emphasize the benefits of adopting the M36 method.
Identifying hidden assets in the urban neighborhoods and ways in which water resource investments can achieve multiple benefits.
The Smart Water for Smart Regions initiative offers a blueprint for the responsible and sustainable utilization of water in the Great Lakes states, working with communities to minimize leaks and reduce flooding through cost-effective, coordinated solutions including.