Environmental Science and Ecotechnology 1 (2020) 100010

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environmental Science and Ecotechnology

journal homepage: www.journals.elsevier.com/environmental-science-and-
ecotechnology/

Original Research

Measuring performance of low impact development practices for the surface

runoff management
Wenyu Yang a, b, Kurt Brüggemann c, Kiwanuka David Seguya b, Ehtesham Ahmed b,
Thomas Kaeseberg d, Heng Dai e, Pei Hua f, g, Jin Zhang e, *, Peter Krebs b
a
Brandenburgische Technische Universit€at, 03046, Cottbus, Germany
b
Institute of Urban and Industrial Water Management, Technische Universit€at Dresden, 01062, Dresden, Germany
c
Institute for Integrated Management of Material Fluxes and of Resources, United Nations University, 01067, Dresden, Germany
d
Zweckverband Wasserversorgung Meißner Hochland, 01683, Nossen, Germany
e
Institute of Groundwater and Earth Sciences, Jinan University, 510632, Guangzhou, China
f
SCNU Environmental Research Institute, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Chemical Pollution and Environmental Safety, MOE Key Laboratory of Theoretical
Chemistry of Environment, South China Normal University, 510006, Guangzhou, China
g
School of Environment, South China Normal University, University Town, Guangzhou, 510006, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Continuous urbanization over the last few years has led to the increase in impervious surfaces and stormwater
Low impact development runoff. Low Impact Development (LID) is currently receiving increased attention as a promising strategy for
Stormwater management model surface runoff management. To analyze the performance of LID practices for surface runoff management, a long-
Cost-effectiveness analysis
term hydrological modeling from 2001 to 2015 along with a cost-effectiveness analysis were carried out on a
Decision-making process
campus in Dresden, Germany. Seven LID practices and six precipitation scenarios were designed and simulated in
a Storm Water Management Model (SWMM). A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted by calculating the life-
cycle costs and runoff removal rate of LID practices. Results demonstrated that the LID practices significantly
contributed to surface runoff mitigation in the study area. The LID performance was primarily affected by the
length of the precipitation scenarios and LID implementing schemes. The runoff removal rate of the LID practices
fluctuated significantly when the rainfall scenario was shorter than 12 months. When the rainfall scenario
exceeded 1 year the effects on the runoff removal rate was constant. The combination of an infiltration trench,
permeable pavement, and rain barrel (IT þ PP þ RB), was the best runoff control capacity with a removal rate
ranging from 23.2% to 27.4%. Whereas, the rain barrel was the most cost-effective LID option with a cost-
effectiveness (C/E) ratio ranged from 0.34 to 0.41. The modeling method was improved in this study by con-
ducting long-term hydrological simulations with different durations rather than short-term simulations with
single storms. In general, the methods and results of this study provided additional improvements and guidance
for decision-making process regarding the implementation of appropriate LID practices.

1. Introduction an urbanized world [11].

Traditional grey infrastructures include gutters, stormwater sewers,
The increase in proportions of impermeable surfaces due to the tunnels, culverts, detention basins, pipes, and mechanical devices, which
excessive urbanization in recent years has altered the catchment hydro- are used collectively in a system to capture and convey surface runoff.
logical characteristics [1,2]. These changes have resulted in the increase These systems focus on the quick and effective removal of runoff through
in runoff generation [3–5]. The increased runoff contributes to multiple the direct collection, conveyance, detention, and discharge into natural
negative impacts, such as increased burden on the drainage system and water bodies [4]. The increase in the drainage capacity of grey in-
urban flooding risks, reduced ground and river base flows, and degraded frastructures relies on expanding and upgrading the existing systems.
water quality [6–10]. Under these circumstances, an effective storm However, due to the increased pressures of climate change and urbani-
runoff management method is essential for managing the challenges of zation, reinforcing the capacity of grey infrastructures has been

* Corresponding author. Institute of Groundwater and Earth Sciences, Jinan University, 510632, Guangzhou, China.
E-mail address: [email protected] (J. Zhang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ese.2020.100010
Received 20 September 2019; Received in revised form 8 December 2019; Accepted 7 January 2020
2666-4984/© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
W. Yang et al. Environmental Science and Ecotechnology 1 (2020) 100010

increasingly proven to be costly, especially for highly urbanized areas expense related to LID practices vary with time due to differences in the
[12–14]. The rapid rise of surface imperviousness and climate initial costs as well as maintenance and operating costs, it is not accurate
change-induced extreme rainfall events make expanding and upgrading to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of LID practices in a short period of
the existing drainage system challenging since these methods do not time.
comply with the aspirations of sustainable urban development [15,16]. Accordingly, in order to improve the knowledge gaps of previous
More recently, low impact development (LID), which is also termed as studies, this study proposed two main objectives: (i) evaluate the tech-
water-sensitive urban design (WSUD), is regarded as a promising strategy nical performance of LID practices for surface runoff management
for sustainable urban stormwater management [6,17,18]. Contrasting through long-term hydrological simulations and (ii) identify the optimal
conventional centralized techniques, LID technology refers to the LID options through long-term cost-effectiveness analyses. The methods
decentralized design, which reduces stormwater by mimicking and results of this study will provide additional guidance for the decision-
pre-development hydrology and promoting processes of infiltration and making processes related to LID practice implementation.
evapotranspiration in the urban watersheds [7,17]. As a result, LID The remainder of this study is illustrated as follows: METHODS,
technology has attracted immense research interest in the past ten years, which explained the methods and tools, as well as source data used in this
and meaningful efforts have been made by scholars to explore LID per- study; the RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS, which presented the results and
formance for surface runoff management. corresponding discussions; the CONCLUSIONS, which summarized the
The evaluation of LID performance includes multi-scale experiments results and implications of this study.
and modeling [14,15]. Most of these studies emphasized the runoff
control capacity of LID for short-term precipitation scenarios which 2. Methods
represents a single heavy storm event with different intensities and du-
rations. However, some scholars pointed out that LID practices are nor- 2.1. Study area
mally implemented as a long term functioning engineering measure, and
the technical performance in short-term scenarios do not adequately The study area was selected in the city of Dresden in Germany and
represent the average performance during the long-term implementa- was chosen based on the available data and funding constants. As pre-
tion. For example [4], found that LID practices during a three-month sented in Fig. 1 and Table 1, the study area is a 0.85 km2 campus area
precipitation scenario performed generally better than in single hourly with multiple land cover types, including road, building, parking lot,
events [19]. also noticed that the LID practices had an annual average squares, and green land. As showed in Fig. 2, the drainage network is
runoff removal rate of 51.9%, whereas the values for single rainfall distributed along the roads to collect and convey the stormwater runoff
events ranged from 6.4% to 100%. Furthermore, since the engineering to three outlets on the north edge of the study area. This area has a typical

Fig. 1. Scope and location of the study area in Germany and Dresden region.

2
W. Yang et al. Environmental Science and Ecotechnology 1 (2020) 100010

Table 1 rain gauges, sub-catchments, and LID controls [9].

Catchment characteristics of the study area. The hydraulic module is used to simulate some hydro-mechanic
Land cover Area (m2) Imperviousness (%) processes such as external inflow of surface runoff, flow routing
through pipelines, and possible flow regimes. This module also includes
Road 298,000 95
Building 109,640 90 involves junctions, conduits, outfalls, and other hydraulic objects. The
Parking lot & square 38,200 85 water flow in the drainage pipe network is simulated as a one-
Greenland 404,160 25 dimensional unsteady flow (Saint-Venant equations), which consist of
Total 850,000 61 conservation equations of mass and momentum [25].

urbanized catchment and a complete drainage system and represents a 2.3. Model construction
suitable site to study the runoff management performance of different
LID practices. Four types of data were supplied by the local authorities to develop
the model for the study area: piping network, terrain condition, satellite
images, and hydrological records. Specifically, the piping network
2.2. Model theory including locations and dimensions of manholes and pipes were stored as
a DWG file in AutoCAD, the terrain condition was stored as a DEM model
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Storm Water Management in ArcGIS, the satellite images of study area were stored as a TIF file, and
Model (SWMM) was adopted as the modeling approach in this study. As a hydrological records (i.e., historical rainfall events and corresponding
dynamic rainfall-runoff model, the SWMM has been continuously flow rate of outlets from 1995 to 2015) were stored as a TXT file.
developed for the adoption in planning, analysis, and design of urban According to previous studies [26–29], the drainage system model
drainage systems since 1971 [9,20–22]. During the past few years, the was ideally constructed based on the following assumptions and
SWMM was widely used for short term and long term hydrological simplifications:
simulations by scholars. The results generated from the SWMM is a
suitable model to systematically and mathematically analyze runoff 1) Rainfall intensity is the same across the whole study area;
quantity and quality from catchments [8,9,14,19,22–24]. The SWMM 2) Only manholes at the starting point, endpoint, and intersection of
calculates the generation and transportation of stormwater runoff based pipelines are included in the model;
on two theoretical modules, which are the hydrological and hydraulic 3) Catchment is subdivided according to the road distribution;
modules, respectively [13]. 4) Runoff flows into the nearest manhole.
The hydrological module is used to simulate hydrological events such
as time-varying precipitation and rainfall interception from depression More specifically, 30 sub-catchments were added in accordance with
storage. This module contains various hydrological objects, including location and shape of 30 blocks in the study area, and each sub-

Fig. 2. Model integrating based on: (a) Catchment imperviousness, (b) Catchment topography, (c) Drainage network distribution, and (d) Drainage model in SWMM.

3
W. Yang et al. Environmental Science and Ecotechnology 1 (2020) 100010

catchment was assigned with specific impervious rates and surface slopes the consistency of simulated and observed data in hydrological modeling
on the basis of catchment imperviousness and topography as shown in because of its high sensitivity to hydrological flow changes [30,31]. R2 is
Fig. 2(a) and (b). In addition to the 36 junction nodes, 41 pipe links and 3 expressed as the squared value of Pearson’s product-moment correlation
outfalls were deployed in the model based on the current pipe network coefficient, the value ranges from 0.0 to 1.0, indicating the goodness of fit
distribution shown in Fig. 2(c). The constructed drainage model in the from low to high [28,42]. R2 was calculated in this study using Equation
SWMM was presented in Fig. 2(d). (1).
0 12
Pn
2.4. Calibration and validation B ðOi  OaÞ*ðSi  SaÞ C
R2 ¼ @qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Pn
i¼1
ffi qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Pn ffiA (1)
2 2
i¼1 ðOi  OaÞ * i¼1 ðSi  SaÞ
Some sensitive parameters related to depression storage capacity and
surface roughness can affect the accuracy of hydrological and hydraulic where, Oi is the ith observed value, Oa is the average value of all
simulations [30–32]. Based on previous studies in Dresden [33,34], four observed values; Si is the ith simulated value, Sa is the average value of
parameters were selected as sensitive parameters in this study. These all simulated values.
parameters include N-Impervious, N-Pervious, Dstore-Impervious, and As presented in Table 2, the R2 varied between 0.905 and 0.962,
Dstore-Pervious. These parameters represent roughness coefficient and indicated that the validated model was acceptable [43,44]. Fig. 3 sum-
depression storage depth of impervious and pervious areas [22]. marizes two of the calibration and validation results. The key parameters
In order to improve the model accuracy, the key parameters were with the empirical value range and calibrated values were listed in
firstly assigned with empirical value ranges based on existing literature Table 2.
and the SWMM model technical manual [9,20,32,35,36]. These param-
eters were then further calibrated and validated against the observed and 2.5. Precipitation scenario
simulated flow rates of outfalls derived from hydrological records and
simulations. Considering the potential change of catchment characteris- In order to evaluate the technical performance of the LID practices for
tics due to urban development over the past few years, the record of the surface runoff management through long-term hydrological simulations,
latest four years from 2012 to 2015 was selected. More specifically, four six long-term precipitation scenarios with different durations were
rainfall events in the period from 2012 to 2013 were used for calibration, designed based on observed rainfall events from 2001 to 2015. Six sce-
and four rainfall events from 2014 to 2015 were used for validation. narios with a rainfall intensity unit of millimeter/day (mm/day) and
Several indexes were developed and commonly used by previous durations of 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 60 months, 120 months,
studies, such as coefficient of determination (R2) [37,38], root mean and 180 months were studied. Fig. 4 displayed the hyetographs of the six
squared error (RMSE) [15,39], and Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency coefficient precipitation scenarios.
(NSE) [6,12,26,27,29,40,41] to determine the goodness of fit of the re-
sults. The coefficient of determination (R2) is commonly used to describe

Table 2
Results of calibration and validation for key parameters.
Key parameter Empirical value range Selected rainfall event Usage Correlation coefficient (R2) Calibrated value Reference
a
N-Impervious 0.010–0.025 16.05.2012 Calibration 0.962 0.012 [32,36]
15.05.2014 Validation 0.955
N-Pervious 0.04–0.80 14.08.2012 Calibration 0.918 0.2 [32,35,36]
19.08.2014 Validation 0.905
Dstore-Impervious (mm)b 1.27–3.81 30.05.2013 Calibration 0.926 1.27 [9,20,32]
18.05.2015 Validation 0.909
Dstore-Pervious (mm) 2.54–7.62 06.07.2013 Calibration 0.951 2.54 [9,20,32]
22.07.2015 Validation 0.940
a
N-Impervious/Pervious: Manning’s roughness coefficient of the impervious/pervious area.
b
Dstore-Impervious/Pervious: Depth of depression storage of the impervious/pervious area.

Fig. 3. Partial results of model calibration & validation: (a) Calibration with rainfall on 16/05/2012, and (b) Validation with rainfall on 15/05/2014.

4
W. Yang et al. Environmental Science and Ecotechnology 1 (2020) 100010

Fig. 4. Hyetographs for precipitation scenarios with duration of: (a) 3 months, (b) 6 months, (c) 12 months, (d) 60 months, (e) 120 months, and (f) 180 months.

2.6. LID implementing scenario Considering the possibility of both single- and combined-applications
of LID practices, seven implementing scenarios of selected LID practices
Over the past decade, various LID practices have been developed, were designed. Three scenarios implemented three single LID practices
including Green Roof (GR), Rain Barrel (RB), Bio-Retention (BR), Vege- (IT, PP, and RB), and the remaining four scenarios implemented four LID
tative Swale (VS), Infiltration Trench (IT), and Permeable Pavement (PP). combinations (IT þ RB, IT þ PP, PP þ RB, and IT þ PP þ RB). Further-
Some LID practices have been successfully implemented in many parts of more, previous studies reported that some technical parameters related
the world such as Maryland (USA), Berlin (Germany), Manchester to the infiltration and storage process should also be considered during
(United Kingdom), and Chongqing (China) [33,45,46]. The benefits of the design of implementing LID scenarios [22,24,59,60]. Therefore,
the implementation of LID have been demonstrated by previous studies. seven implementation scenarios with different installation sites and di-
For instance Ref. [1], documented that PP removed 34.8% of the runoff mensions, and technical parameters were determined based on academic
volume [47], concluded that the GR decreased runoff induced flooding papers and design manuals, listed in Table 4. Installing locations for LID
damage by over 35% [48], reported that VS reduced 44.3% of the peak practices were determined according to land-use distribution and actual
flow on average, and a combination of BR and IT was able to delay when conditions of the study area. The approximate locations of implemented
the time point of peak flow occurred by over 30% according to Ref. [12]. LID practices were presented in Fig. 5.
According to policies and technical manuals developed by regional
and national institutes [46,49,50], suitable implementing scenarios of
LID practices can vary based on land-use types. Therefore, a systematic 2.7. Cost-effectiveness analysis
analysis on the catchment characteristics of the study area is the key to
the implementation of LID. As shown in Table 1, the study area mainly Cost-effectiveness is an economic indicator generally used to compare
consists of four land-use types: buildings, roads, parking lots, squares, expenditures and benefits achieved based on stormwater management
and green space. The first three land-use types with sealed catchments measures [62,63]. In this case, the costs were expressed as a life-cycle
are suitable for LID implementation. After reviewing the Dresden local cost (LCC) and the effectiveness was expressed as a runoff removal rate
and German national technical manuals [51,52], three LID practices were of LID practices.
selected to implement in this study area. The characteristics of selected The LCC is an economic index that involves all the associated ex-
LID practices were listed in Table 3. penses throughout the lifetime [63]. These costs primarily including
capital, annual operation, and maintenance costs [64]. Since the LCC

Table 3
Characteristics of selected LID practices.
LID Suitable installing Empirical installing ratio Unit Empirical capital cost per Empirical annual cost per Empirical lifespan Reference
practicea site (%) unit ($) unit ($) (year)

IT Roadside 9–15 m2 72.57–117.36 1.86–2.86 15–50 [4,53,54]

RB Private building 10–50 L 17.36–48.02 0.25–0.63 10–40 [54–56]
PP Parking lot 8–40 m2 50.71–77.29 1.01–1.57 8–30 [14,54,
56–58]
a
IT: Infiltration Trench, RB: Rain Barrel, PP: Permeable Pavement.

5
W. Yang et al. Environmental Science and Ecotechnology 1 (2020) 100010

Table 4
Seven implementing scenarios of LID practices.
LID Installing site Installing Installing Soil layer Soil layer hydraulic Storage layer Storage layer Drain Reference
practice ratio (%) dimensions porosity (%) conductivity (m/d) thickness/barrel clogging factor delay
(m2) height (mm) (%) (hr)

IT Roadside 15 11,224 50 0.3. 450 0 n.a. [22,59]

RBa Building 15 13,469 n.a. n.a. 680 n.a.b 6 [22,61]
PP Parking lot and 15 6734 50 0.3 300 0 n.a. [22,24,
square 60]
IT þ RB Roadside and 15 þ 15 11,224 þ
Building 13,469
IT þ PP Roadside and 15 þ 15 11,224 þ 6734
Parking lot and
Square
PP þ RB Building and Parking 15 þ 15 13,469 þ 6734
lot and Square
IT þ PP Roadside and 15 þ 15 11,224 þ
þ RB Building and Parking þ15 13,469 þ 6734
lot and Square
a
One rain barrel with a volume of 208 L (height: 680 mm, diameter: 625 mm) is designed to collect runoff from 100 m2 of private building roof, and the drain delay
time was set as 6 h according to technical manual [22].
b
n.a.: not applicable.

T 
X 
1
PVC ¼ C0 þ Ca * (2)
t¼0 ð1 þ rÞt

where, PVC is the present value of life-cycle cost, $; C0 is capital cost, $;

Ca is annual operation and maintenance cost, $; T is lifespan, years; t is
time variation, year; r is the discount rate, which was set as 5% according
to benchmark yield of infrastructures [53].
The runoff removal rate was determined through hydrological
modeling and mathematical calculations. The drainage model in the
SWMM was firstly simulated in the original scenario without LID
implementation to determine the original runoff volume (Vo). Subse-
quently, the drainage model was simulated in scenarios with LID
implementation to get the modified runoff volume (Vm). Runoff removal
rate (R) was calculated by Equation (3).

Vo  Vm
R¼  100% (3)
Vo
The cost-effectiveness was expressed as the C/E ratio of LCC and the
runoff removal rate of the LID practices. The C/E ratio indicated the
economic-technical performance of the LID practice. Therefore, the lower
the ratio signifies a more effective LID practice. The C/E ratio was
calculated by Equation (4).

LCC
C E¼ (4)
R

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Technical performance of LID practices

Combining six precipitation scenarios and seven LID implementing

scenarios, a total of 42 simulations were conducted in this study to
analyze the technical performance of the various LID practices for runoff
removal in different rainfall patterns and LID implementing schemes. The
simulation results were presented in Table 5 and the detail calculations
for runoff removal rates of the LID implementing scenarios were illus-
Fig. 5. Installing locations for seven LID implementing scenarios of (a) IT, (b) trated in Table S1 in the Supplementary material.
PP, (c) RB, (d) IT þ PP, (e) IT þ RB, (f) PP þ RB, and (g) IT þ PP þ RB.
As showed in Table 5, 12.9%–27.4% of the runoff volume was
reduced in six precipitation scenarios by seven of the implemented LID
involves all of the inputs and incurred costs during the whole lifespan, options. These results suggest that the LID practices achieved effective
the present value of cost (PVC) for approach has been used for the mitigation of surface runoff. In addition, it can be seen from the results
simplified calculation of the LCC [53]. The present value of LCC was that the runoff control capacity could vary among different LID options.
calculated by Equation (2). For single-applied LID practices, IT had the highest runoff removal rate
range of 14.9%–18.6%, whereas PP had the lowest removal rate range of

6
W. Yang et al. Environmental Science and Ecotechnology 1 (2020) 100010

Table 5 Table 6
Technical performance of seven LID implementing scenarios. Life-cycle cost of seven LID implementing scenarios.
LID practice Runoff volume removal rate LID Installing Assigned Assigned Assigned PVC
a practice dimensions capital cost annual cost lifespan (million
3 Mon 6 Mon 12 Mon 60 Mon 120 180
(m2) per unit ($) per unit ($) (year) $)a
Mon Mon
IT 11,224 11.97 0.80 15 0.232
IT 14.93% 18.60% 17.92% 16.48% 15.96% 16.36%
RB 13,469 3.68 0.06 15 0.058
PP 12.93% 16.16% 15.51% 14.20% 13.75% 14.10%
PP 6734 110.15 0.44 15 0.774
RB 14.30% 17.85% 17.14% 15.74% 15.25% 15.64%
IT þ RB 11,224 þ 15 0.291
IT þ PP 19.86% 23.73% 23.01% 21.51% 20.97% 21.40%
13,469
IT þ RB 21.61% 25.68% 24.87% 23.30% 22.76% 23.23%
IT þ PP 11,224 þ 15 1.006
PP þ RB 18.23% 21.98% 21.24% 19.77% 19.26% 19.68%
6734
IT þ PP þ 23.24% 27.42% 26.64% 25.04% 24.46% 24.94%
PP þ RB 13,469 þ 15 0.832
RB
6734
a
Mon: month. IT þ PP 11,224 þ 15 1.065
þ RB 13,469 þ
6734
12.9%–16.2%. As for the combine-applied LID options, the combination
a
of IT þ PP þ RB showed the best performance in regards to the runoff PVC for LID combination is the sum of PVC for all involved LID practices.
removal rate range from 23.2% to 27.4%, while the combination of PP þ
RB only reduced about 20% of the surface runoff. This result indicated most expensive one among the three LID practices because of the large
that the runoff control capacity can vary among different LID practices, excavation and material requirements during the construction stage [54].
and properly combined application of the LID practices is an effective As for the combine-applied LID options, the combination of IT þ PP þ RB
way to improve the runoff reduction rate. was the most expensive scenario which cost 1.065 million US dollars,
In addition, the variation of rainfall patterns was proven to be an followed by the combination of IT þ PP cost 1.006 million US dollars
impact factor for runoff mitigation effectiveness of the LID practice. As during the whole lifespan. These results support that the LID imple-
demonstrated in Table 5, the runoff volume removal rate showed a menting scenarios could cause a strong influence on economic perfor-
fluctuation in six precipitation scenarios. More specifically, the runoff mance of the different options and a mathematical analysis is essential to
removal rate of LID practices was at the lowest point in a 3-month rainfall quantify this influence.
scenario, and it climbed to the peak when the rainfall duration increased
to 6 months. However, the runoff removal rate showed a slight drop and 3.3. Cost-effectiveness analysis
then remained in a stable range when the length of the rainfall scenario
was longer than 12 months. Overall, the average runoff removal rate of The cost-effectiveness of the LID practices was analyzed by calcu-
the selected LID practices during the whole 15 years ranged from 14.2% lating the C/E ratio of the LCC and runoff removal rates in the long-term
to 25.0%. The reason for this result was that the 3-month and 6-month precipitation scenarios. The results of the cost-effectiveness analysis were
precipitation scenarios length was too short to comprehensively show listed in Table 7.
the alteration in the rainfall patterns with seasonal changes, which leads As presented in Table 7, the RB showed the lowest C/E ratio range of
to a larger fluctuation in the magnitude of rainfall events and the sub- 0.32–0.41 and PP had the highest C/E ratio ranging from 4.79 to 5.99. As
sequent performance of the LID practices in the first two scenarios. In for the LID combinations, the C/E ratio of the combination of IT þ PP þ
contrast, when the lengths of the last four precipitation scenarios were RB ranged from 3.88 to 4.58. Although RB did not perform well for runoff
longer than 12 months and included different rainfall patterns based on reduction, it was the most cost-effective LID option due to the lowest
four seasons, the magnitude of the rainfall events and technical perfor- engineering expense. In contrast, PP was the lowest cost-effective option
mance of the LID practices only had a slight fluctuation due to the annual because of the high LCC and the low runoff removal rate. Despite the best
climate change. This result suggests that the short-term hydrological performance for runoff removal, the combination of IT þ PP þ RB was
simulations could not reflect the average technical performance of LID not the most cost-effective option due to the high engineering expense.
practices during the long-term implementation, which aligns with pre- The LID technical performance, which was unlike the engineering
vious studies. expense, did not proportionally increase with the combined imple-
mentation of LID practices. Thus the combined-applied LID options
generally had a higher C/E ratio relative to the single-applied LID op-
3.2. Economic performance of LID practices
tions. This result illustrated that during the determination process for LID
implementation, it is not proper to solely evaluate the LID options based
The economic performance of the LID practices was evaluated by
on the technical performance or economic performance. The integrated
calculating the LCC of seven LID implementation scenarios. Considering
consideration of both factors could be a more reasonable way for proper
the length of the simulation period, the lifespan of all LID practices was
decision-making.
set to 15 years in this study. The capital and annual costs of LID practices
and the median values of the empirical ranges in Table 3 were assigned to
calculate the LCC for single-applied LID practices. As for the LID com-
binations, the LCC was the sum of all the values involved with the Table 7
respective LID practices. The results of the economic performance were Result of cost-effectiveness analysis.
listed in Table 6 and the detail calculations for LCC of the LID imple- LID practice C/E ratioa (%)
menting scenarios were illustrated in Table S2 in the Supplementary
3 Mon 6 Mon 12 Mon 60 Mon 120 Mon 180 Mon
material.
As demonstrated in Table 6, RB was the cheapest LID option with the IT 1.55 1.25 1.29 1.41 1.45 1.42
PP 5.99 4.79 4.99 5.45 5.63 5.49
LCC of 0.058 million US dollars, whereas PP was the most expensive RB 0.41 0.32 0.34 0.37 0.38 0.37
single-applied LID practice with the LCC of 0.774 million US dollars. This IT þ PP 5.07 4.24 4.37 4.68 4.80 4.70
result indicated that the engineering expenses of LID practices varied IT þ RB 1.35 1.13 1.17 1.25 1.28 1.25
widely due to the different structures involved. More specifically, RB was PP þ RB 4.56 3.79 3.92 4.21 4.32 4.23
IT þ PP þ RB 4.58 3.88 4.00 4.25 4.35 4.27
the cheapest LID practice because it was a simple barrel with several
a
pipes, which was easy to install and maintain. In contrast, PP was the C/E ratio: Cost-effectiveness ratio.

7
W. Yang et al. Environmental Science and Ecotechnology 1 (2020) 100010

3.4. Research implications Catchments project in the framework of the Sino-German “Innovation
Cluster Major Water” (Grant No.: 02WCL1337A-K) funded by German
This study evaluated the performance of LID practices for stormwater Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). Mention of trade
runoff control using a long-term hydrological modeling and cost- names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or
effectiveness analysis. Two contributions were expected to be made. recommendation for use. This manuscript has not been subjected to the
Firstly, the modeling method was improved in this study through con- above agencies’ required peer and policy review and therefore does not
ducting multiple long-term hydrological simulations with different du- reflect the views of the above agencies and no official endorsement
rations rather than single storm events with short-term scenarios. This should be inferred.
improved approach allows for a more comprehensive evaluation of the
LID technical performance. Secondly, results suggested that the RB was Appendix A. Supplementary data
the most cost-effective LID practice and IT þ PP þ RB performed the best
based on technical performance based on LID combination on the campus Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
area in Dresden, Germany These two LID options were expected to be org/10.1016/j.ese.2020.100010.
considered in environmental policies as potential solutions for storm
runoff management in both this area and other campuses across References
Germany.
Despite the comprehensive nature of this study, the results bring to [1] D. Line, R. Brown, W. Hunt, W. Lord, Effectiveness of LID for commercial
development in North Carolina, J. Environ. Eng. 138 (2011) 680–688, https://
light potential limitation of this study. This study mainly focused on the doi.org/10.1061/(asce)ee.1943-7870.0000515.
impact of the long-term rainfall duration on the LID performance, while [2] J. Zhang, P. Hua, P. Krebs, The build-up dynamic and chemical fractionation of Cu,
the LID performance could also be affected by several other factors (e.g., Zn and Cd in road-deposited sediment, Sci. Total Environ. 532 (2015a) 723–732,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.06.074.
rainfall patterns, installing dimensions, and technical parameters of LID [3] L. Ahiablame, R. Shakya, Modeling flood reduction effects of low impact
practices), which could lead to uncertainties for LID implementation. development at a watershed scale, J. Environ. Manag. 171 (2016) 81–91, https://
Therefore, two potential directions will be considered in future research doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.01.036.
[4] M. Guan, N. Sillanp€a€a, H. Koivusalo, Assessment of LID practices for restoring pre-
on this topic to improve the comprehensiveness of this study. For development runoff regime in an urbanized catchment in southern Finland, Water
example, the uncertainty analysis of aforementioned influential factors Sci. Technol. 71 (2015) 1485–1491, https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2015.129.
and the comprehensive evaluation of the LID performance through more [5] W. Zhang, G. Villarini, G.A. Vecchi, J.A. Smith, Urbanization exacerbated the
rainfall and flooding caused by hurricane Harvey in Houston, Nature 563 (2018)
scenarios should be evaluated.
384–388, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0676-z.
In summary, the methods and results of this study provided additional [6] S.-S. Baek, D.-H. Choi, J.-W. Jung, H.-J. Lee, H. Lee, K.-S. Yoon, K.H. Cho,
improvements and guidance for the decision-making process related to Optimizing low impact development (LID) for stormwater runoff treatment in urban
the LID practice implementation. area, Korea: experimental and modeling approach, Water Res. 86 (2015) 122–131,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2015.08.038.
[7] M.E. Dietz, Low impact development practices: a review of current research and
4. Conclusion recommendations for future directions, Water, Air, Soil Pollut. 186 (2007)
351–363, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-007-9484-z.
[8] X. Dong, H. Guo, S. Zeng, Enhancing future resilience in urban drainage system:
In order to analyze the performance of the LID practices for surface green versus grey infrastructure, Water Res. 124 (2017) 280–289, https://doi.org/
runoff management, long-term hydrological modeling and cost- 10.1016/j.watres.2017.07.038.
effectiveness analysis were carried out in this study. [9] L. Rossman, Modeling low impact development alternatives with SWMM, J. Water
Manage. Model. (2010), https://doi.org/10.14796/jwmm.r236-11, 2366-R311.
A total of 42 long-term hydrological simulations were conducted to [10] P. Wang, X. Wu, Y. Hao, C. Wu, J. Zhang, Is Southwest China drying or wetting?
analyze the technical performance of the LID practices for runoff Spatiotemporal patterns and potential causes, Theor. Appl. Climatol. (2019) 1–15,
removal. Results supported that the LID technical performance was https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-019-02935-4.
[11] T.A. Larsen, S. Hoffmann, C. Lüthi, B. Truffer, M. Maurer, Emerging solutions to the
affected by the length of the precipitation scenarios and LID imple- water challenges of an urbanizing world, Science 352 (2016) 928, https://doi.org/
menting schemes. The runoff removal rate of LID practices fluctuated 10.1126/science.aad8641.
largely when the rainfall scenario was shorter than 12 months and [12] P. Hua, W. Yang, X. Qi, S. Jiang, J. Xie, X. Gu, H. Li, J. Zhang, P. Krebs, Evaluating
the effect of urban flooding reduction strategies in response to design rainfall and
remained in a tighter range when the precipitation duration exceeded 1
low impact development, J. Clean. Prod. 242 (2020) 118515, https://doi.org/
year. The combination of the infiltration trench and permeable pave- 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118515.
ment, as well as rain barrel (IT þ PP þ RB), showed the best runoff [13] T. Kaeseberg, M. Kaeseberg, J. Zhang, J.W. Jawitz, P. Krebs, P.S.C. Rao, The nexus
of inhabitants and impervious surfaces at city scale—wastewater and stormwater
control capacity with a removal rate range of 23.2%–27.4%.
travel time distributions and an approach to calibrate diurnal variations, Urban
The cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out to analyze the Water J. 15 (2018) 576–583, https://doi.org/10.1080/1573062x.2018.1529189.
economic-technical performance of the LID practices. Results suggested [14] H.-p.p. Qin, Z.-x.x. Li, G. Fu, The effects of low impact development on urban
that the RB was the most cost-effective LID option with a C/E ratio range flooding under different rainfall characteristics, J. Environ. Manag. 129 (2013)
577–585, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.08.026.
of 0.32–0.41 and PP had the highest the C/E ratio ranging from 4.79 to [15] X. Gu, Z. Liao, G. Zhang, J. Xie, J. Zhang, Modelling the effects of water diversion
5.99. As for the LID combinations, the combination of IT þ PP þ RB with and combined sewer overflow on urban inland river quality, Environ. Sci. Pollut.
a C/E ratio range of 3.88–4.58 was not the best technically-economic Res. 24 (2017) 21038–21049, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-9686-x.
[16] V.G. Mitchell, Applying integrated urban water management concepts: a review of
performing option despite the highest runoff removal rate. Australian experience, Environ. Manag. 37 (2006) 589–605, https://doi.org/
This study improved the modeling method through conducting mul- 10.1007/s00267-004-0252-1.
tiple long-term hydrological simulations with different durations rather [17] K. Eckart, Z. McPhee, T. Bolisetti, Performance and implementation of low impact
development – a review, Sci. Total Environ. 607–608 (2017) 413–432, https://
than single storms with short-term scenarios, which allows for a more doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.06.254.
comprehensive study of LID technical performance. The evaluation [18] J. Schirmer, F. Dyer, A framework to diagnose factors influencing proenvironmental
method in this study could also be used to analyze the performance of behaviors in water-sensitive urban design, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 115 (2018) E7690,
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1802293115.
storm runoff management measures and provide additional guidance in
[19] S.S. Cipolla, M. Maglionico, I. Stojkov, A long-term hydrological modelling of an
the decision-making process for similar approaches. extensive green roof by means of SWMM, Ecol. Eng. 95 (2016) 876–887, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2016.07.009.
[20] C.S. Chu, Urban runoff model, in: Proceedings, International Symposium on Urban
Acknowledgments
Storm Water Management, July 24-27, 1978, Office of Research and Engineering
Services, College of Engineering, University of Kentucky, 1971, p. 95.
This work was jointly supported by the COLABIS project (Collabo- [21] J. Gironas, L.A. Roesner, L. Rossman, J. Davis, A new applications manual for the
rative Early Warning Information Systems for Urban Infrastructures, storm water management model (SWMM), Environ. Model. Softw 25 (2010)
813–814, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2009.11.009.
Grant No.: 03G0852A), and Managing Water Resources for Urban

8
W. Yang et al. Environmental Science and Ecotechnology 1 (2020) 100010

[22] B. Luan, R. Yin, P. Xu, X. Wang, X. Yang, L. Zhang, X. Tang, Evaluating Green [43] C. Baffaut, J. Delleur, Expert system for calibrating SWMM, J. Water Resour. Plan.
Stormwater Infrastructure strategies efficiencies in a rapidly urbanizing catchment Manag. 115 (1989) 278–298, https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9496(1989)
using SWMM-based TOPSIS, J. Clean. Prod. 223 (2019) 680–691, https://doi.org/ 115:3(278).
10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.028. [44] H.-Q. Peng, Y. Liu, H.-W. Wang, L.-M. Ma, Assessment of the service performance of
[23] D.S. Bisht, C. Chatterjee, S. Kalakoti, P. Upadhyay, M. Sahoo, A. Panda, Modeling drainage system and transformation of pipeline network based on urban combined
urban floods and drainage using SWMM and MIKE URBAN: a case study, Nat. sewer system model, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 22 (2015), https://doi.org/10.1007/
Hazards 84 (2016) 749–776, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2455-1. s11356-015-4707-0.
[24] S. Zhang, Y. Guo, SWMM simulation of the storm water volume control [45] M. K€ ohler, M. Schmidt, F.W. Grimme, M. Laar, V.L. de Assunç~ao Paiva, S. Tavares,
performance of permeable pavement systems, J. Hydrol. Eng. 20 (2014), https:// Green roofs in temperate climates and in the hot-humid tropics–far beyond the
doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0001092, 06014010-06014010. aesthetics, Environ. Manag. Health (2002), https://doi.org/10.1108/
[25] A. Preissmann, Propagation of Translatory Waves in Channels and Rivers, Proc, 1st 09566160210439297.
Congress of French Association for Computation, Grenoble, France, AFCAL, 1961, [46] M. Shafique, R. Kim, M. Rafiq, Green roof benefits, opportunities and challenges–A
pp. 433–442. review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 90 (2018) 757–773, https://doi.org/10.1016/
[26] M.M. Ahmad, A.R. Ghumman, S. Ahmad, H.N. Hashmi, Estimation of a unique pair j.rser.2018.04.006.
of Nash model parameters: an optimization approach, Water Resour. Manag. 24 [47] Q. Zhou, T.E. Panduro, B.J. Thorsen, K. Arnbjerg-Nielsen, Adaption to extreme
(2010) 2971–2989, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-010-9590-3. rainfall with open urban drainage system: an integrated hydrological cost-benefit
[27] T. Chai, R.R. Draxler, Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error analysis, Environ. Manag. 51 (2013) 586–601, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-
(MAE)?–Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature, Geosci. Model Dev. 012-0010-8.
(GMD) 7 (2014) 1247–1250, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-1247-2014. [48] H. Jia, X. Wang, C. Ti, Y. Zhai, R. Field, A.N. Tafuri, H. Cai, S.L. Yu, Field monitoring
[28] D.R. Legates, G.J. McCabe Jr., Evaluating the use of “goodness-of-fit” measures in of a LID-BMP treatment train system in China, Environ. Monit. Assess. 187 (2015)
hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation, Water Resour. Res. 35 (1999) 373, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-015-4595-2.
233–241, https://doi.org/10.1029/1998wr900018. [49] HUD-PRC, Technical Code for Rainwater Management and Utilization of Building
[29] X. Song, C. Zhan, J. Xia, F. Kong, An efficient global sensitivity analysis approach and Sub-district (in Chinese), 2016. GB 50400-2016.
for distributed hydrological model, J. Geogr. Sci. 22 (2012) 209–222, https:// [50] USEPA, Low Impact Development (LID). A Literature Review, Office of Water,
doi.org/10.1007/s11442-012-0922-5. Washington, D.C, 2000. EPA-841-B-00-005.
[30] S.M. Ghoraba, Hydrological modeling of the Simly Dam watershed (Pakistan) using [51] M. Artmann, O. Bastian, K. Grunewald, M. Artmann, O. Bastian, K. Grunewald,
GIS and SWAT model, Alex Eng J 54 (2015) 583–594, https://doi.org/10.1016/ Using the concepts of green infrastructure and ecosystem services to specify
j.aej.2015.05.018. Leitbilder for compact and green cities—the example of the landscape plan of
[31] P. Krause, D. Boyle, F. B€ ase, Comparison of different efficiency criteria for Dresden (Germany), Sustainability 9 (2017), https://doi.org/10.3390/su9020198,
hydrological model assessment, Adv. Geosci. 5 (2005) 89–97, https://doi.org/ 198-198.
10.5194/adgeo-5-89-2005. [52] H.H. Blotevogel, R. Danielzyk, A. Münter, Spatial Planning in Germany:
[32] L. Rossman, W. Huber, Storm Water Management Model Reference Manual Volume Institutional Inertia and New Challenges, Spatial Planning Systems and Practices in
I–Hydrology (Revised), US Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, USA, Europe, Routledge, 2014, pp. 103–128 (Chapter 5).
2016. Chapter-3. [53] Z. Liao, H. Chen, F. Huang, H. Li, Cost–effectiveness analysis on LID measures of a
[33] A. Speak, J. Rothwell, S. Lindley, C. Smith, Urban particulate pollution reduction by highly urbanized area, Desalin. Water Treat. 56 (2015a) 2817–2823, https://
four species of green roof vegetation in a UK city, Atmos. Environ. 61 (2012) doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2014.964327.
283–293, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.07.043. [54] M. Uda, T. Van Seters, C. Graham, L. Rocha, Assessment of Life Cycle Costs for Low
[34] C. Xu, M. Jia, M. Xu, Y. Long, H. Jia, Progress on environmental and economic Impact Development Stormwater Management Practices, 2013. Chapter-3.
evaluation of low-impact development type of best management practices through a [55] L.M. Ahiablame, B.A. Engel, I. Chaubey, Effectiveness of low impact development
life cycle perspective, J. Clean. Prod. 213 (2019) 1103–1114, https://doi.org/ practices in two urbanized watersheds: retrofitting with rain barrel/cistern and
10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.272. porous pavement, J. Environ. Manag. 119 (2013) 151–161, https://doi.org/
[35] H. Kim, M. Jung, K.J.B. Mallari, G. Pak, S. Kim, S. Kim, L. Kim, J. Yoon, Assessment 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.01.019.
of porous pavement effectiveness on runoff reduction under climate change [56] K. Alfredo, F. Montalto, A. Goldstein, Observed and modeled performances of
scenarios, Desalin. Water Treat. 53 (2015) 3142–3147. prototype green roof test plots subjected to simulated low-and high-intensity
[36] R.H. McCuen, Approach to confidence interval estimation for curve numbers, precipitations in a laboratory experiment, J. Hydrol. Eng. 15 (2009) 444–457,
J. Hydrol. Eng. 7 (2002) 43–48, https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1084-0699(2002)7: https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)he.1943-5584.0000135.
1(43). [57] C.L. Abbott, L.M. Comino, In-situ hydraulic performance of a permeable pavement
[37] J. Zhang, R. Li, X. Zhang, C. Ding, P. Hua, Traffic contribution to polycyclic sustainable urban drainage system, Water Environ. J. 17 (2003) 187–190, https://
aromatic hydrocarbons in road dust: a source apportionment analysis under doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-6593.2003.tb00460.x.
different antecedent dry-weather periods, Sci. Total Environ. 658 (2019) 996–1005, [58] F. Montalto, C. Behr, K. Alfredo, M. Wolf, M. Arye, M. Walsh, Rapid assessment of
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.281. the cost-effectiveness of low impact development for CSO control, Landsc. Urban
[38] J. Zhang, J. Wang, P. Hua, P. Krebs, The qualitative and quantitative source Plan. 82 (2007) 117–131, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.02.004.
apportionments of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in size dependent road [59] H. Jia, Y. Lu, S.L. Yu, Y. Chen, L.Y. Shaw, Y. Chen, Planning of LID–BMPs for urban
deposited sediment, Sci. Total Environ. 505 (2015b) 90–101, https://doi.org/ runoff control: the case of Beijing Olympic Village, Separ. Purif. Technol. 84 (2012)
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.09.091. 112–119, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2011.04.026.
[39] W. Tian, Z. Liao, J. Zhang, An optimization of artificial neural network model for [60] W.C. Lucas, D.J. Sample, Reducing combined sewer overflows by using outlet
predicting chlorophyll dynamics, Ecol. Model. 364 (2017) 42–52, https://doi.org/ controls for Green Stormwater Infrastructure: case study in Richmond, Virginia,
10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2017.09.013. J. Hydrol. 520 (2015) 473–488, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.10.029.
[40] P. Hua, K.R.F. de Oliveira, P. Cheung, F.V. Gonçalves, J. Zhang, Influences of model [61] M.P. Jones, W.F. Hunt, Performance of rainwater harvesting systems in the
structure and calibration data size on predicting chlorine residuals in water storage southeastern United States, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 54 (2010) 623–629, https://
tanks, Sci. Total Environ. 634 (2018) 705–714, https://doi.org/10.1016/ doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.11.002.
j.scitotenv.2018.03.364. [62] Z. Liao, G. Zhang, Z. Wu, Y. He, H. Chen, Combined sewer overflow control with
[41] J. Xie, H. Chen, Z. Liao, X. Gu, D. Zhu, J. Zhang, An integrated assessment of urban LID based on SWMM: an example in Shanghai, China, Water Sci. Technol. 71
flooding mitigation strategies for robust decision making, Environ. Model. Softw 95 (2015b) 1136–1142, https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2015.076.
(2017) 143–155, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.06.027. [63] S. Spatari, Z. Yu, F.A. Montalto, Life cycle implications of urban green
[42] P. Hua, E. Vasyukova, W. Uhl, A variable reaction rate model for chlorine decay in infrastructure, Environ. Pollut. 159 (2011) 2174–2179, https://doi.org/10.1016/
drinking water due to the reaction with dissolved organic matter, Water Res. 75 j.envpol.2011.01.015.
(2015) 109–122, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2015.01.037. [64] S. Fuller, S. Petersen, Life-cycle Costing Manual for the Federal Energy Management
Program, NIST Handbook 135, 1996.