Optimization of low impact development layout designs for megacity flood mitigation

Abstract This study establishes an innovative systematic optimization model for megacity flood mitigation by combining multiple Low Impact Development (LID) devices, taking into consideration a Benefit-Cost (B/C) Analysis. The contributions provided by this study include: (1) analysis of flooding consequences on a developing megacity; (2) development of a technical approach enabling an automatic and effective optimization process, linking with an embedded Storm Water Management Model (SWMM); and (3) proposal of adaptive solutions using a combined layout design scheme. Our investigation sets the Benefit/Cost ratio as the objective function to deal with flooding in all return periods (RPs). The decision variables correspond to the allocated areas and quantity of LID devices, including porous pavements, bioretention cells, infiltration trenches, rain barrels, vegetable swales, green roofs, and tree boxes. Under such layout, the flooding loss was simulated with SWMM, and the optimal solution was solved by employing a Simulated Annealing (SA) algorithm. Min-Sheng Community in Taipei is chosen as a study area for demonstrating the applicability of the developed model. Results show that the B/C ratio of identified optimal design can reach 1.448, with green roofs and bioretention cells as main devices, and rain barrels and porous pavements as secondary supplies. Regarding rainfalls in all RPs, the peak flows and delay of peak times at Fu-Yuan Pumping Station can decrease significantly in the range of 5.75–29.80% and 12.50–20%, respectively; and 9.52%–23.49% and 12.50%–37.5% at the subcatchments. The efficiency of flood detention is higher for low RPs than high RPs, while the time-delay ability is smaller.

[1]  David J. Sample,et al.  Reducing combined sewer overflows by using outlet controls for Green Stormwater Infrastructure: Case study in Richmond, Virginia , 2015 .

[2]  James C. Y. Guo Hydrology-Based Approach to Storm Water Detention Basin Design Using New Routing Schemes , 2004 .

[3]  Steven J. Burian,et al.  Hydrologic modeling analysis of a passive, residential rainwater harvesting program in an urbanized, semi-arid watershed , 2014 .

[4]  William F. Hunt,et al.  Retrofitting with innovative stormwater control measures: Hydrologic mitigation of impervious cover in the municipal right-of-way , 2015 .

[5]  Nien-Sheng Hsu,et al.  Optimal Spatial Design of Capacity and Quantity of Rainwater Harvesting Systems for Urban Flood Mitigation , 2015 .

[6]  J. C. Packman,et al.  Assessing the impact of urbanization on storm runoff in a peri-urban catchment using historical change in impervious cover , 2014 .

[7]  C. D. Gelatt,et al.  Optimization by Simulated Annealing , 1983, Science.

[8]  James C. Y. Guo,et al.  Incentive Index Developed to Evaluate Storm-Water Low-Impact Designs , 2010 .

[9]  Weiping Chen,et al.  Assessing the effectiveness of green infrastructures on urban flooding reduction: A community scale study , 2014 .

[10]  F. Montalto,et al.  Observed and Modeled Performances of Prototype Green Roof Test Plots Subjected to Simulated Low- and High-Intensity Precipitations in a Laboratory Experiment , 2010 .

[11]  Michael E. Dietz Low Impact Development Practices: A Review of Current Research and Recommendations for Future Directions , 2007 .

[12]  R. Leuven,et al.  Key factors for biodiversity of surface waters in climate proof cities , 2012 .

[13]  Jihn-Sung Lai,et al.  Improvement of a drainage system for flood management with assessment of the potential effects of climate change , 2013 .

[14]  Richard H. McCuen,et al.  Spatio-temporal effects of low impact development practices , 2009 .

[15]  Ximing Cai,et al.  Crossing-scale hydrological impacts of urbanization and climate variability in the Greater Chicago Area , 2014 .

[16]  D. Booth,et al.  FOREST COVER, IMPERVIOUS‐SURFACE AREA, AND THE MITIGATION OF STORMWATER IMPACTS 1 , 2002 .

[17]  Ru-Yih Wang,et al.  Analyzing Hazard Potential of Typhoon Damage by Applying Grey Analytic Hierarchy Process , 2004 .