Chapter 2: Why Stormwater Matters – The Impacts of Urbanization (2004)

2.1 What is Urban Stormwater Runoff?

Figure 2-1 Hydrologic cycleStormwater runoff is a natural part of the hydrological cycle, which is the distribution and movement of water between the earth’s atmosphere, land, and water bodies.  Rainfall, snowfall, and other frozen precipitation send water to the earth’s surfaces. Stormwater runoff is surface flow from precipitation that accumulates in and flows through natural or man-made conveyance systems during and immediately after a storm event or upon snowmelt.  Stormwater runoff eventually travels to surface water bodies as diffuse overland flow, a point discharge, or as groundwater flow. Water that seeps into the ground eventually replenishes groundwater aquifers and surface waters such as lakes, streams, and the oceans.  Groundwater recharge also helps maintain water flow in streams and wetland moisture levels during dry weather. Water is returned to the atmosphere through evaporation and transpiration to complete the cycle. A schematic of the hydrologic cycle is shown in Figure 2-1.


Traditional development of the landscape with impervious surfaces such as buildings, roads, and parking lots, as well as storm sewer systems and other man-made features, alters the hydrology of a watershed and has the potential to adversely affect water quality and aquatic habitat.  As a result of development, vegetated and forested land that consists of pervious surfaces is largely replaced by land uses with impervious surfaces.  This transformation increases the amount of stormwater runoff from a site, decreases infiltration and groundwater recharge, and alters natural drainage patterns.  This effect is shown schematically in Figure 2-2.  In addition, natural pollutant removal mechanisms provided by on-site vegetation and soils have less opportunity to remove pollutants from stormwater runoff.  During construction, soils are exposed to rainfall, which increases the potential for erosion and sedimentation.  Development can also introduce new sources of pollutants from everyday activities associated with residential, commercial, and industrial land uses.  The development process is known as “urbanization.” Stormwater runoff from developed areas is commonly referred to as “urban stormwater runoff.”


Figure 2-2 Impacts of urbanization on the hydrologic cycleUrban stormwater runoff can be considered both a point source and a nonpoint source of pollution.  Stormwater runoff that flows into a conveyance system and is discharged through a pipe, ditch, channel, or other structure is considered a point source discharge under EPA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program, as administered by DEP.  Stormwater runoff that flows over the land surface and is not concentrated in a defined channel is considered nonpoint source pollution.  In most cases stormwater runoff begins as a nonpoint source and becomes a point source discharge (MADEP, 1997).  Both point and nonpoint sources of urban stormwater runoff have been shown to be significant causes of water quality impairment (EPA, 2000).


According to the draft 2002 Connecticut list of impaired waters (“303(d)” list prepared pursuant to Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act), urban runoff and stormwater discharges were a significant cause of aquatic life and contact recreation impairment to approximately one-quarter of the state’s 893 miles of major rivers and streams.  Urban runoff is also reported as a contributor to excessive nutrient enrichment in numerous lakes and ponds throughout the state, as well as a continued threat to estuarine waters and Long Island Sound (EPA, 2001).  Table 2-1 summarizes impaired Connecticut water bodies (i.e., those not meeting water quality standards) for which urban runoff, stormwater discharges, or other wet-weather sources are suspected causes of impairment (DEP, 2002 draft).  This list does not include water bodies impaired as a result of other related causes such as combined sewer overflows (CSOs) and agricultural runoff or unknown sources.

Figure 2-3 Relationship between watershed imperviousness and stream healthImpervious cover has emerged as a measurable, integrating concept used to describe the overall health of a watershed.  Numerous studies have documented the cumulative effects of urbanization on stream and watershed ecology (Schueler et al., 1992; Schueler, 1994; Schueler, 1995; Booth and Reinelt, 1993, Arnold and Gibbons, 1996; Brant, 1999; Shaver and Maxted, 1996).  Research has shown that when impervious cover in a watershed reaches between 10 and 25 percent, ecological stress becomes clearly apparent.  Beyond 25 percent, stream stability is reduced, habitat is lost, water quality becomes degraded, and biological diversity decreases (NRDC, May 1999). Figure 2-3 illustrates this effect.


To put these thresholds into perspective, typical total imperviousness in medium density, single-family home residential areas ranges from 25 to nearly 60 percent (Schueler, 1995).Table 2-2 Typical impervious coverage of land uses in the Northeast U.S.Table 2-2 indicates typical percentages of impervious cover for various land uses in Connecticut and the Northeast United States.  It is important to note that these tabulated values reflect impervious coverage within individual land uses, but do not reflect overall watershed imperviousness, for which the ecological stress thresholds apply.  However, in developed watersheds with significant residential, commercial, and industrial development, overall watershed imperviousness often exceeds the ecological stress thresholds.




The impacts of development on stream ecology can be grouped into four categories:


  1. Hydrologic Impacts
  2. Stream Channel and Floodplain Impacts
  3. Water Quality Impacts
  4. Habitat and Ecological Impacts


The extent of these impacts is a function of climate, level of imperviousness, and change in land use in a watershed (WEF and ASCE, 1998).  Each of these impacts is described further in the following sections.

Table 2‑1. Connecticut Water Bodies Impaired by Urban Stormwater Runoff


Major Basin

Water Body

Major Basin


Water Body

Pawcatuck River Basin Pawcatuck River Estuary Thames River Basin Thames River Estuary

Willimantic River

Middle River

Quinebaug River

Southeast Coastal Basins Fenger Brook

Inner Stonington Harbor

West and Palmer Coves

Mumford Cove

Alewife Cove

Wequetequock Cove

Copps Brook Estuary Quiambog Cove

Mystic River Estuary

Pequonock River Estuary

Jordan Cove

Pattagansett River

Bride Brook

Fourmile River

Housatonic River Basin Housatonic River

Housatonic River Estuary

Ball Pond

Still River

Kenosia Lake

Padanaram Brook

Sympaug Brook

Naugatuck River

Naugatuck River, West


Northfield Brook Lake

Steele Brook

Mad River

Hop Brook Lake

Southwest Coastal Basins Bridgeport Harbor

Blackrock Harbor

Sherwood Mill Pond

Westcott Cove

Greenwich Cove

Byram Beach

Captain Harbor

Rooster River

Ash Creek/Turney Creek

Mill River

Upper/Lower Mill Ponds

Sasco Brook/Estuary

Saugatuck River Estuary

Norwalk River and Harbor

Ridgefield Brook

Five Mile River/Estuary

Darien Cove

Holly Pond, Cove Harbor

Stamford Harbor

Cos Cob Harbor

Byram River/Estuary

South Central Coastal Basins Oyster River Tributary

Madison Beaches

Island Bay/Joshua Cove

Thimble Islands

Plum Bank

Indiantown Harbor

Patchogue River

Hammonasset River Estuary

Clinton Harbor

Guilford Harbor

Cedar Pond

Linsley Pond

Branford Harbor

Hanover Pond

Quinnipiac River

New Haven Harbor

Tenmile River

Sodom Brook

Harbor Brook

Wharton Brook

Mill River

Edgewood Park Pond

West River Estuary

Milford Harbor/Gulf Pond

Connecticut River Basin Rainbow Brook

Seymour Hollow Brook

Pequabuck River

Birge Pond

Pine Lakes

Park River, South Branch

Batterson Park Pond

Piper Brook

Trout Brook

Park River, North Branch

Hockanum River

Union Pond

Mattabesset River

Willow Brook

Pocotopaug Creek


Source: 2002 List of Connecticut Waterbodies Not Meeting Water Quality Standards (draft 5/14/02). The impaired waters list is updated by DEP every two to three years.



2.2      Hydrologic Impacts

Development can dramatically alter the hydrologic regime of a site or watershed as a result of increases in impervious surfaces. The impacts of development on hydrology may include:


  • Figure 2-4 Changes in Stream Hydrology as a result of UrbanizationIncreased runoff volume
  • Increased peak discharges
  • Decreased runoff travel time
  • Reduced groundwater recharge
  • Reduced stream baseflow
  • Increased frequency of bankfull and overbank floods
  • Increased flow velocity during storms
  • Increased frequency and duration of high stream flow


Figure 2-4 depicts typical pre-development and post-development streamflow hydrographs for a developed watershed.

2.3      Stream Channel and Floodplain Impacts

Stream channels in urban areas respond to and adjust to the altered hydrologic regime that accompanies urbanization.  The severity and extent of stream adjustment is a function of the degree of watershed imperviousness (WEF and ASCE, 1998).  The impacts of development on stream channels and floodplains may include:


  • Channel scour, widening, and downcutting
  • Streambank erosion and increased sediment loads
  • Shifting bars of coarse sediment
  • Burying of stream substrate
  • Loss of pool/riffle structure and sequence
  • Man-made stream enclosure or channelization
  • Floodplain expansion

2.4      Water Quality Impacts

Urbanization increases the discharge of pollutants in stormwater runoff.  Development introduces new sources of stormwater pollutants and provides impervious surfaces that accumulate pollutants between storms.  Structural stormwater collection and conveyance systems allow stormwater pollutants to quickly wash off during storm or snowmelt events and discharge to downstream receiving waters.  By contrast, in undeveloped areas, natural processes such as infiltration, interception, depression storage, filtration by vegetation, and evaporation can reduce the quantity of stormwater runoff and remove pollutants.  Impervious areas decrease the natural stormwater purification functions of watersheds and increase the potential for water quality impacts in receiving waters.


Urban land uses and activities can also degrade groundwater quality if stormwater with high pollutant loads is directed into the soil without adequate treatment.  Certain land uses and activities, sometimes referred to as stormwater “hotspots” (e.g., commercial parking lots, vehicle service and maintenance facilities, and industrial rooftops), are known to produce higher loads of pollutants such as metals and toxic chemicals.  Soluble pollutants can migrate into groundwater and potentially contaminate wells in groundwater supply aquifer areas.


Table 2-3 lists the principal pollutants found in urban stormwater runoff, typical pollutant sources, related impacts to receiving waters, and factors that promote pollutant removal.  Table 2-3 also identifies those pollutants that commonly occur in a dissolved or soluble form, which has important implications for the selection and design of stormwater management practices described later in this manual. Chapter Three contains additional information on pollutant removal mechanisms for various stormwater pollutants.

Table 2‑3. Summary of Urban Stormwater Pollutants



Stormwater Pollutant



Potential Sources


Receiving Water Impacts



Promoted By1

Excess Nutrients

Nitrogen, Phosphorus


Animal waste, fertilizers, failing septic systems, landfills, atmospheric deposition, erosion and sedimentation, illicit sanitary connections Algal growth, nuisance plants, ammonia toxicity, reduced clarity, oxygen deficit (hypoxia), pollutant recycling from sediments, decrease in submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) Phosphorus:

High soil exchangeable aluminum and/or iron content, vegetation and aquatic plants



Alternating aerobic and anaerobic conditions, low levels of toxicants, near neutral pH (7)


Suspended, Dissolved, Deposited, Sorbed Pollutants

Construction sites, streambank erosion, washoff from impervious surfaces Increased turbidity, lower dissolved oxygen, deposition of sediments, aquatic habitat alteration, sediment and benthic toxicity Low turbulence, increased residence time

Bacteria, Viruses

Animal waste, failing septic systems, illicit sanitary connections Human health risk via drinking water supplies, contaminated swimming beaches, and contaminated shellfish consumption High light (ultraviolet radiation), increased residence time, media/soil filtration, disinfection
Organic Materials

Biochemical Oxygen Demand, Chemical Oxygen Demand

Leaves, grass clippings, brush, failing septic systems Lower dissolved oxygen, odors, fish kills, algal growth, reduced clarity Aerobic conditions, high light, high soil organic content, low levels of toxicants, near neutral pH (7)

Oil and Grease

Industrial processes; commercial processes; automobile wear, emissions, and fluid leaks; improper oil disposal Toxicity of water column and sediments, bioaccumulation in food chain organisms Low turbulence, increased residence time, physical separation or capture techniques

Copper, Lead, Zinc, Mercury, Chromium, Aluminum


Industrial processes, normal wear of automobile brake linings and tires, automobile emissions and fluid leaks, metal roofs Toxicity of water column and sediments, bioaccumulation in food chain organisms High soil organic content, high soil cation exchange capacity, near neutral pH (7)
Synthetic Organic Chemicals

Pesticides, VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs, PAHs


Residential, commercial, and industrial application of herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, rodenticides; industrial processes; commercial processes Toxicity of water column and sediments, bioaccumulation in food chain organisms Aerobic conditions, high light, high soil organic content, low levels of toxicants, near neutral pH (7), high temperature and air movement for volatilization of VOCs
Deicing Constituents

Sodium, Calcium, Potassium


Ethylene Glycol

Other Pollutants


Road salting and uncovered salt storage. Snowmelt runoff from snow piles in parking lots and roads during the spring snowmelt season or during winter rain on snow events. Toxicity of water column and sediments, contamination of drinking water, harmful to salt intolerant plants.  Concentrated loadings of other pollutants as a result of snowmelt. Aerobic conditions, high light, high soil organic content, low levels of toxicants, near neutral pH (7)
Trash and Debris Litter washed through storm drain network Degradation of aesthetics, threat to wildlife, potential clogging of storm drainage system Low turbulence, physical straining/capture
Freshwater Impacts Stormwater discharges to tidal wetlands and estuarine environments Dilution of the high marsh salinity and encouragement of the invasion of brackish or upland wetland species such as Phragmites Stormwater retention and volume reduction
Thermal Impacts Runoff with elevated temperatures from contact with impervious surfaces (asphalt) Adverse impacts to aquatic organisms that require cold and cool water conditions Use of wetland plants and trees for shading, increased pool depths
1Factors that promote removal of most stormwater pollutants include:

·       Increasing hydraulic residence time

·       Low turbulence

·       Fine, dense herbaceous plants

·       Medium-fine textured soil


Source: Adapted from DEP, 1995; Metropolitan Council, 2001; Watershed Management Institute, Inc., 1997.


Excess Nutrients

Urban stormwater runoff typically contains elevated concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus that are most commonly derived from lawn fertilizer, detergents, animal waste, atmospheric deposition, organic matter, and improperly installed or failing septic systems.   Nutrient concentrations in urban runoff are similar to those found in secondary wastewater effluents (American Public Works Association and Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission). Elevated nutrient concentrations in stormwater runoff can result in excessive growth of vegetation or algae in streams, lakes, reservoirs, and estuaries, a process known as accelerated eutrophication. Phosphorus is typically the growth-limiting nutrient in freshwater systems, while nitrogen is growth-limiting in estuarine and marine systems.  This means that, in marine waters algal growth usually responds to the level of nitrogen in the water, and in fresh waters algal growth is usually stimulated by the level of available or soluble phosphorus (DEP, 1995).


Nutrients are a major source of degradation in many of Connecticut’s water bodies.  Excessive nitrogen loadings have led to hypoxia, a condition of low dissolved oxygen, in Long Island Sound.  A Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for nitrogen has been developed for Long Island Sound, which will restrict nitrogen loadings from point and non-point sources throughout Connecticut.  Phosphorus in runoff has impacted the quality of many of Connecticut’s lakes and ponds, which are susceptible to eutrophication from phosphorus loadings.  Nutrients are also detrimental to submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV).  Nutrient enrichment can favor the growth of epiphytes (small plants that grow attached to other things, such as blades of eelgrass) and increase amounts of phytoplankton and zooplankton in the water column, thereby decreasing available light.  Excess nutrients can also favor the growth of macroalgae, which can dominate and displace eelgrass beds and dramatically change the food web (Deegan et al., 2002).



Sediment loading to water bodies occurs from washoff of particles that are deposited on impervious surfaces such as roads and parking lots, soil erosion associated with construction activities, and streambank erosion. Although some erosion and sedimentation is natural, excessive sediment loads can be detrimental to aquatic life (phytoplankton, algae, benthic invertebrates, and fish) by interfering with photosynthesis, respiration, growth, and reproduction.  Solids can either remain in suspension or settle to the bottom of the water body.  Suspended solids can make the water cloudy or turbid, detract from the aesthetic and recreational value of a water body, and harm SAV, finfish, and shellfish.  Sediment transported in stormwater runoff can be deposited in a stream or other water body or wetland and can adversely impact fish and wildlife habitat by smothering bottom dwelling aquatic life and changing the bottom substrate.  Sediment deposition in water bodies can result in the loss of deep-water habitat and can affect navigation, often necessitating dredging.  Sediment transported in stormwater runoff can also carry other pollutants such as nutrients, metals, pathogens, and hydrocarbons.



Pathogens are bacteria, protozoa, and viruses that can cause disease in humans. The presence of bacteria such as fecal coliform or enterococci is used as an indicator of pathogens and of potential risk to human health (DEP, 1995).  Pathogen concentrations in urban runoff routinely exceed public health standards for water contact recreation and shellfishing.  Sources of pathogens in stormwater runoff include animal waste from pets, wildlife, and waterfowl; combined sewers; failing septic systems; and illegal sanitary sewer cross-connections.  High levels of indicator bacteria in stormwater have commonly led to the closure of beaches and shellfishing beds along coastal areas of Connecticut.


Organic Materials

Oxygen-demanding organic substances such as grass clippings, leaves, animal waste, and street litter, are commonly found in stormwater.  The decomposition of such substances in water bodies can deplete oxygen from the water, thereby causing similar effects to those caused by nutrient loading.  Organic matter is of primary concern in water bodies where oxygen is not easily replenished such as slower moving streams, lakes, and estuaries.  An additional concern for unfiltered water supplies is the formation of trihalomethane (THM), a carcinogenic disinfection byproduct generated by the mixing of chlorine with water high in organic carbon (NYDEC, 2001).



Urban stormwater runoff contains a wide array of hydrocarbon compounds, some of which are toxic to aquatic organisms at low concentrations (Woodward-Clyde, 1990).  The primary sources of hydrocarbons in urban runoff are automotive.  Source areas with higher concentrations of hydrocarbons in stormwater runoff include roads, parking lots, gas stations, vehicle service stations, residential parking areas, and bulk petroleum storage facilities.



Metals such as copper, lead, zinc, mercury, and cadmium are commonly found in urban stormwater runoff.  Chromium and nickel are also frequently present (USEPA, 1983).  The primary sources of these metals in stormwater runoff are vehicular exhaust residue, fossil fuel combustion, corrosion of galvanized and chrome-plated products, roof runoff, stormwater runoff from industrial sites, and the application of deicing agents. Architectural copper associated with building roofs, flashing, gutters, and downspouts has been shown to be a source of copper in stormwater runoff in Connecticut and other areas of the country (University of Connecticut; Barron, 2000; Tobiason, 2001).  Marinas have also been identified as a source of copper and aquatic toxicity to inland and marine waters (Sailer Environmental, Inc. 2000).  Washing or sandblasting of boat hulls to remove salt and barnacles also removes some of the bottom paint, which contains copper and zinc additives to protect hulls from deterioration.


In Connecticut, discharge of metals to surface waters is of particular concern.  Metals can be toxic to aquatic organisms, can bioaccumulate, and have the potential to contaminate drinking water supplies.  Many major rivers in Connecticut have copper levels that exceed Connecticut’s Copper Water Quality Criteria.  Although metals generally attach themselves to the solids in stormwater runoff or receiving waters, recent studies have demonstrated that dissolved metals, particularly copper and zinc, are the primary toxicants in stormwater runoff from industrial facilities throughout Connecticut (Mas et al., 2001; New England Bioassay, Inc., 2001).  Additionally, stormwater runoff can contribute to elevated metals in aquatic sediments.  The metals can become bioavailable where the bottom sediment is anaerobic (without oxygen) such as in a lake or estuary.  Metal accumulation in sediments has resulted in impaired aquatic habitat and more difficult maintenance dredging operations in estuaries because of the special handling requirements for contaminated sediments.


Synthetic Organic Chemicals

Synthetic organic chemicals can also be present at low concentrations in urban stormwater.  Pesticides, phenols, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and polynuclear or polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are the compounds most frequently found in stormwater runoff.  Such chemicals can exert varying degrees of toxicity on aquatic organisms and can bioaccumulate in fish and shellfish. Toxic organic pollutants are most commonly found in stormwater runoff from industrial areas.  Pesticides are commonly found in runoff from urban lawns and rights-of-way (NYDEC, 2001). A review of monitoring data on stormwater runoff quality from industrial facilities has shown that PAHs are the most common organic toxicants found in roof runoff, parking area runoff, and vehicle service area runoff (Pitt et al., 1995).


Deicing Constituents

Salting of roads, parking lots, driveways, and sidewalks during winter months and snowmelt during the early spring result in the discharge of sodium, chloride, and other deicing compounds to surface waters via stormwater runoff.  Excessive amounts of sodium and chloride may have deleterious effects on water, soil, and vegetation, and can also accelerate corrosion of metal surfaces. Drinking water supplies, particularly groundwater wells, may be contaminated by runoff from roadways where deicing compounds have been applied or from highway facilities where salt mixes are improperly stored.  In addition, sufficient concentrations of chlorides may prove toxic to certain aquatic species.  Excess sodium in drinking water lead to health problems in individuals on low sodium diets. Other deicing compounds may contain nitrogen, phosphorus, and oxygen demanding substances. Antifreeze from automobiles is a source of phosphates, chromium, copper, nickel, and cadmium.


Other pollutants such as sediment, nutrients, and hydrocarbons are released from the snowpack during the spring snowmelt season or during winter rain on snow events.  The pollutant loading during snowmelt can be significant and can vary considerably during the course of the melt event (NYDEC, 2001).  For example, a majority of the hydrocarbon load from snowmelt occurs during the last 10 percent of the event and towards the end of the snowmelt season (Oberts, 1994).  Similarly, PAHs, which are hydrophobic materials, remain in the snowpack until the end of the snowmelt season, resulting in highly concentrated loadings (Metropolitan Council, 2001).


Trash and Debris

Trash and debris are washed off of the land surface by stormwater runoff and can accumulate in storm drainage systems and receiving waters.  Litter detracts from the aesthetic value of water bodies and can harm aquatic life either directly (by being mistaken for food) or indirectly (by habitat modification).  Sources of trash and debris in urban stormwater runoff include residential yard waste, commercial parking lots, street refuse, combined sewers, illegal dumping, and industrial refuse.


Freshwater Impacts

Discharge of freshwater, including stormwater, into brackish and tidal wetlands can alter the salinity and hydroperiod of these environments, which can encourage the invasion of brackish or freshwater wetland species such as Phragmites.


Thermal Impacts

Impervious surfaces may increase temperatures of stormwater runoff and receiving waters.  Roads and other impervious surfaces heated by sunlight may transport thermal energy to a stream during storm events.  Direct exposure of sunlight to shallow ponds and impoundments as well as unshaded streams may further elevate water temperatures.  Elevated water temperatures can exceed fish and invertebrate tolerance limits, reducing survival and lowering resistance to disease. Coldwater fish such as trout may be eliminated, or the habitat may become marginally supportive of coldwater species. Elevated water temperatures also contribute to decreased oxygen levels in water bodies and dissolution of solutes.


Concentrations of pollutants in stormwater runoff vary considerably between sites and storm events.  Typical average pollutant concentrations in urban stormwater runoff in the Northeast United States are summarized in Table 2-4.


Table 2‑4. Average Pollutant Concentrations in Urban Stormwater Runoff








Total Suspended Solids1 mg/l 54.5
Total Phosphorus1 mg/l 0.26
Soluble Phosphorus1 mg/l 0.10
Total Nitrogen1 mg/l 2.00
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen1 mg/l 1.47
Nitrite and Nitrate1 mg/l 0.53
Copper1 mg/l 11.1
Lead1 mg/l 50.7
Zinc1 mg/l 129
BOD1 mg/l 11.5
COD1 mg/l 44.7
Organic Carbon2 mg/l 11.9
PAH3 mg/l 3.5
Oil and Grease4 mg/l 3.0
Fecal Coliform5 Colonies/100 ml 15,000
Fecal Strep5 Colonies/100 ml 35,400
Chloride (snowmelt)6 mg/l 116

Source: Adapted from NYDEC, 2001; original sources are listed below.

1Pooled Nationwide Urban Runoff Program/USGS (Smullen and Cave, 1998)

2Derived from National Pollutant Removal Database (Winer, 2000)

3Rabanal and Grizzard, 1996

4Crunkilton et al., 1996

5Schueler, 1999

6Oberts, 1994

mg/l = milligrams per liter

mg/l= micrograms per liter

2.5      Habitat and Ecological Impacts

Changes in hydrology, stream morphology, and water quality that accompany the development process can also impact stream habitat and ecology.  A large body of research has demonstrated the relationship between urbanization and impacts to aquatic habitat and organisms (Table 2-5). Habitat and ecological impacts may include:


  • A shift from external (leaf matter) to internal (algal organic matter) stream production
  • Reduction in the diversity, richness, and abundance of the stream community (aquatic insects, fish, amphibians)
  • Destruction of freshwater wetlands, riparian buffers, and springs
  • Creation of barriers to fish migration

2.6      Impacts on Other Receiving Environments

The majority of research on the ecological impacts of urbanization has focused on streams.  However, urban stormwater runoff has also been shown to adversely impact other receiving environments such as wetlands, lakes, and estuaries.  Development alters the physical, geochemical, and biological characteristics of wetland systems.  Lakes, ponds, wetlands, and SAV are impacted through deposition of sediment and particulate pollutant loads, as well as accelerated eutrophication caused by increases in nutrient loadings.  Estuaries experience increased sedimentation and pollutant loads, and more extreme salinity swings caused by increased runoff and reduced baseflow.  Table 2-5 summarizes the effects of urbanization on these receiving environments.



Table 2‑5. Effects of Urbanization on Other Receiving Environments


Receiving Environment





·       Changes in hydrology and hydrogeology

·       Increased nutrient and other contaminant loads

·       Compaction and destruction of wetland soil

·       Changes in wetland vegetation

·       Changes in or loss of habitat

·       Changes in the community (diversity, richness, and abundance) of organisms

·       Loss of particular biota

·       Permanent loss of wetlands

Lakes and Ponds

·       Impacts to biota on the lake bottom due to sedimentation

·       Contamination of lake sediments

·       Water column turbidity

·       Aesthetic impairment due to floatables and trash

·       Increased algal blooms and depleted oxygen levels due to nutrient enrichment, resulting in an aquatic environment with decreased diversity

·       Contaminated drinking water supplies


·       Sedimentation in estuarial streams and SAV beds

·       Altered hydroperiod of brackish and tidal wetlands, which results from larger, more frequent pulses of fresh water and longer exposure to saline waters because of reduced baseflow

·       Hypoxia

·       Turbidity

·       Bio-accumulation

·       Loss of SAV due to nutrient enrichment

·       Scour of tidal wetlands and SAV

·       Short-term salinity swings in small estuaries caused by the increased volume of runoff which can impact key reproduction areas for aquatic organisms

Source: Adapted from WEF and ASCE, 1998.


Arnold, C.L., Jr., and C.J. Gibbons. 1996. “Impervious Surface Coverage: The Emergence of a Key Environmental Indicator”. Journal of the American Planning Association. Vol. 62, No. 2.


Barron, T. 2000. Architectural Uses of Copper: An Evaluation of Stormwater Pollution Loads and Best Management Practices. Prepared for the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant.


Booth, D.B. and L.E. Reinelt. 1993. “Consequences of Urbanization on Aquatic Systems - Measured Effects, Degradation Thresholds, and Corrective Strategies”, in Proceedings of the Watershed ‘93 Conference. Alexandria, Virginia.


Brant, T.R. 1999. “Community Perceptions of Water Quality and Management Measures in the Naamans Creek Watershed”. Masters Thesis for the Degree of Master of Marine Policy.


Center for Watershed Protection. 2003. Impacts of Impervious Cover on Aquatic Systems. Watershed Protection Research Monograph No. 1. March 2003.


Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). 1995. Assessment of Nonpoint Sources of Pollution in Urbanized Watersheds: A Guidance Document for Municipal Officials, DEP Bulletin #22. Bureau of Water Management, Planning and Standards Division, Hartford, Connecticut.


Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). 2002 draft. 2002 List of Connecticut Waterbodies Not Meeting Water Quality Standards.


Crunkilton, R. et al. 1996. “Assessment of the Response of Aquatic Organisms to Long-term Insitu Exposures of Urban Runoff”, in Effects of Watershed Development and Management on Aquatic Ecosystems Proceedings of an Engineering Foundation Conference. Snowbird, Utah.


Deegan, L., A. A. Wright, S. G. Ayvazian, J. T. Finn, H. Golden, R. R. Merson, and J. Harrison. 2002. Nitrogen loading alters seagrass ecosystem structure and support of higher trophic levels. Aquatic Conservation. 12(2): p. 193-212. March-April, 2002.


Mas, D.M.L., Curtis, M.D., and E.V. Mas. 2001. “Investigation of Toxicity Relationships in Industrial Stormwater Discharges”, presented at New England Water Environment Association 2001 Annual Conference, Boston, MA.


Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP) and the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management. 1997. Stormwater Management, Volume Two: Stormwater Technical Handbook. Boston, Massachusetts.


Metropolitan Council. 2001. Minnesota Urban Small Sites BMP Manual: Stormwater Best Management Practices for Cold Climates, prepared by Barr Engineering Company, St. Paul, Minnesota.


Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). 1999. Stormwater Strategies: Community Responses to Runoff Pollution.


New England Bioassay, Inc. 2001. Final Report on Stormwater Toxicity Identification Evaluations (TIE) at Industrial Sites. Prepared for the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection.


New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYDEC). 2001. New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual. Prepared by Center for Watershed Protection. Albany, New York.


Oberts, G. 1994. “Influence of Snowmelt Dynamics on Stormwater Runoff Quality”. Watershed Protection Techniques. Vol. 1, No. 2.


Pitt, R., Field, R., Lalor, M., and M. Brown. 1995. “Urban Stormwater Toxic Pollutants: Assessment, Sources, and Treatability”. Water Environment Research. Vol. 67, No. 3.


Prince George’s County, Maryland. 1999. Low-Impact Development Design Strategies: An Integrated Design Approach. Prince George’s County Department of Environmental Resources Programs and Planning Division.


Rabanal, F. and T. Grizzard. 1995. “Concentrations of Selected Constituents in Runoff from Impervious Surfaces in Four Urban Land Use Catchments of Different Land Use”. In Proceedings of the 4th Biennial Stormwater Research Conference, Clearwater, Florida.


Sailer Environmental, Inc. 2000. Final Report on the Alternative Stormwater Sampling for CMTA Members. Prepared for Connecticut Marine Trades Association.


Schueler, T.R. 1994. “The Importance of Imperviousness”. Watershed Protection Techniques. Vol. 1, No. 3.


Schueler, T.R. 1995. Site Planning for Urban Stream Protection. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. Washington, D.C.


Schueler, T.R. 1999. “Microbes and Urban Watersheds”. Watershed Protection Techniques. Vol. 3, No. 1.


Schueler, T.R., Kumble, P.A., and M.A. Heraty. 1992. A Current Assessment of Urban Best Management Practices: Techniques for Reducing Non-Point Source Pollution in the Coastal Zone. Department of Environmental Programs, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments.


Shaver, E.J. and J.R. Maxted. 1996. “Technical Note 72 Habitat and Biological Monitoring Reveals Headwater Stream Impairment in Delaware’s Piedmont”. Watershed Protection Techniques. Vol. 2, No. 2.


Smullen, J. and K. Cave. 1998. “Updating the U.S. Nationwide Urban Runoff Quality Database”. 3rd International Conference on Diffuse Pollution, August 31 – September 4, 1998. Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, Edinburg, Scotland.


Soil Conservation Service. 1975. Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, USDA Soil Conservation Service Technical Release No. 55. Washington, D.C.


Tobiason, S. 2001. “Trickle Down Effect”. Industrial Wastewater. Water Environment Federation. Vol. 9, No. 6.


United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1983. Results of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program, Volume 1, Final Report. Water Planning Division. Washington, D.C. NTIS No. PB 84-185 552.


United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2000. National Coastal Condition Report. EPA841-R-00-001. Office of Water, Washington, D.C.


United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2001. National Water Quality Inventory: 1998 Report to Congress. EPA620-R-01-005. Office of Water, Washington, D.C.


Water Environment Federation (WEF) and American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). 1998. Urban Runoff Quality Management (WEF Manual of Practice No. 23 and ASCE Manual and Report on Engineering Practice No. 87).


Watershed Management Institute, Inc. 1997. Operation, Maintenance, and Management of Stormwater Management Systems. In cooperation with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. Washington, D.C.


Winer, R. 2000. National Pollutant Removal Database for Stormwater Treatment Practices, 2nd Edition. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, Maryland.


Woodward-Clyde Consultants. 1990. Urban targeting and BMP Selection: An Information and Guidance Manual for State NPS Program Staff Engineers and Managers, Final Report.