| Abstract: | Low impact development (LID) and other land development methods have been presented as alternatives to conventional storm water management and site design. Low impact development encourages land preservation and use of distributed, infiltration‐based storm water management systems to minimize impacts on hydrology. Such systems can include shallow retention areas, akin to natural depression storage. Other approaches to land development may emphasize land preservation only. Herein, an analysis of four development alternatives is presented. The first was Traditional development with conventional pipe/pond storm water management and half‐acre lots. The second alternative was Cluster development, in which implementation of the local cluster development ordnance was assumed, resulting in quarter‐acre lots with a pipe/pond storm water management system and open space preservation. The “Partial” LID option used the same lot layout as the Traditional option, with a storm water management system emphasizing shallow depression storage. The “Full” LID used the Cluster site plan and the depression storage‐based storm water management system. The alternatives were compared to the hydrologic response of existing site conditions. The analysis used two design storms and a continuous rainfall record. The combination of land preservation and infiltration‐based storm water management yielded the hydrologic response closest to existing conditions, although ponds were required to control peak flows for the design storms. |
