INTERVIEW WITH URBAN OMNIBUS


Eric Rothstein was profiled in Urban Omnibus in January 2015 in an article entitled “Mitigate, Design, Restore: A Conversation on Hydrology and Habitat.”

In the interview, Mr. Rothstein discusses how he chose his line of work, some of eDesign Dynamics projects and collaborations in NYC, and the benefits - and challenges - of green infrastructure and habitat restoration.

Read an excerpt from the interview below:

How does restoration in an urban area like New York City differ from elsewhere?

Traditional restoration work is often led by ecologists and biologists because they know what they need to create. But in the urban, post-industrial setting, the foundations of ecosystems are basically screwed up. These soils are high in nutrients and pH because of all the concrete, so they favor weedy species instead of our native species, which thrive in lower nutrient and more acidic soils. Then there is the poor water quality of the runoff, which includes oil, metals, and various other contaminants. Aligned with that is the issue of “flashy” hydrology: we get much more runoff and we get it a lot faster. So before you can establish a sustainable ecosystem, you need to fix the soils, the hydrologic regime, and the water quality.

Do you have any particular hopes for further integration of ecological ideas into urban development?

To be truly green would be to design everything so that on balance it has a net positive effect on the planet. It’s really hard to offset the negative impact of a building, because of all the materials brought in and the pollution caused by construction and people living there. Most people say that the next best step is to do everything that’s feasible within the budget to have as little an impact as possible. I still struggle with the building scale. With park development, however, you’re taking something with no habitat value and creating both that value and an amenity for the community.

 The full article can be found HERE >

 

ALLEY POND PARK IN THE NEW YORK TIMES


The New York Times recently featured an article on Dr. Franco Montalto’s work in monitoring the ecology of Alley Pond Park and its recent inclusion in the US Forest Services Smart Forest program. The data being collected is part of his efforts in cooperation with the NYC Parks Department for city-wide monitoring of NYC Greenstreets and green stormwater infrastructure.

Franco A. Montalto, an associate professor in Drexel’s department of civil, architectural and environmental engineering, said that the availability of affordable digital sensors made it possible for him to gain access to that day’s recordings from Alley Pond Park on his iPad and instantly compare them with data from the two experimental storm-water runoff sites in the city.

But despite the high-tech tools, Dr. Montalto insists on having eyes and ears verify the data. To that end, more than a dozen high school, college and graduate students have periodically trekked to the site at Alley Pond to sift soil through their fingers and take photos.

“To believe the sensors, you need validation,” he said. “Bad data is worse than no data.”

Eventually, scientists working at Alley Pond Park would like local schools to make the research part of their lessons.

Read the full article at the New York Times HERE >

MORE RAIN THAN WE CAN HANDLE


Dr. Franco Montalto was interviewed by reporter Stephen Nessen of WNYC for their recent NYC 2050 series exploring the impact of climate change on New York City and beyond. Mr. Nessen’s report explores the implications of, and possible solutions to increases in the frequency of intense rain storms.

Speaking on the effectiveness of green infrastructure in the context of New York City’s Greenstreets program, Mr. Nessen reports:

According to Franco Montalto, a professor at Drexel University, who works with the city on its Greenstreets project, if placed in the right location, with curb cuts to allow water in, using sturdy plants that can withstand long droughts and long periods of heavy rain, and with add several layers of engineered soil, bioswales can absorb far more than an inch of rain water (which is what the city hopes they can absorb).

At a Greenstreets in Cambria Heights, Queens, Montalto outfitted the plot with sensitive measuring devices. He found during Sandy and Irene, this plot of land absorbed all the rain water that flowed in, more than seven inches, and didn’t dump any of it into the streets or sewers.

See Mr. Nessen's report at WNYC HERE >

TNOC GLOBAL ROUNDTABLE


Franco Montalto

In March, 2014, The Nature of Cities blog launched their monthly global round table seeking to have industry experts and professionals answer specific questions pertinent to the expansion and improvement of green spaces in urban environments.

This month’s question, on which Dr. Franco Montalto weighed in, was:

Many believe that better information on the monetary value of ecosystem services is critical for getting cities to adopt more green infrastructure solutions to issues such as storm water management, heat island, storm surge, etc. True? What are the key knowledge gaps for convincing cities to invest in ecosystems services?

Dr. Montalto's response below:

Decision makers (and individuals) always try to get the most out of their money. However, I believe that we could generate a lot more public support and associated investment in ecosystem services if they were better calibrated to the values, needs, and goals of diverse urban residents.

By modifying the configuration of urban spaces, we can change what happens there, i.e. we add and subtract functions to that particular urban space. A small but rapidly growing body of researchers from different disciplines (including yours truly) are working in lock step with practitioners to study these projects. I am confident that this work, though in its early stages, will ultimately produce robust empirical, statistical, or physical representations of these dynamic conditions, enabling us eventually to predict the various functions obtained from discreet modifications to urban space.

A related, and much more fundamental question, however, is why and how we modify urban spaces in the first place. Stated differently, given that there are an infinite number of ways that we can design/redesign/modify a space, be it a living room, a rooftop, or a wall, how do we settle on any one concept? Research here is less prevalent.

I believe that many green infrastructure advocates often mistakenly assume that a common set of values underlies such decisions, and expect that consensus regarding ecosystem service goals should follow. In my opinion, there is absolutely no reason to believe that such assumptions would be true. Anyone who grew up in a city remembers how differently you perceived the kids from your block compared to the kids on the next one. Even if you grew up in the suburbs, you remember how different the neighborhood on your side of the tracks was from the one on the other side. Our cities are dynamic networks of enclaves (voluntary clustering for example by ethnicity, lifestyle, or sexual orientation) and ghettos (default and/or imposed involuntary segregation of minority groups). In the US, zoning and other land use policies have also segmented our cities into commercial, residential and industrial areas, and physically separated high income from low income households on parcels of different sizes. We’ve got neighborhoods that are “where it is at”, neighborhoods that are “up and coming”, and neighborhoods that may- or may never- be; we’ve got contested, dangerous, sacred, and safe spaces; and both public and private land. The folks who live, work, and circulate through urban neighborhoods see different opportunities, face different challenges, have different goals, and, therefore, desire radically different things from the spaces around them. As any community planning meeting will demonstrate, most proposed changes to communities generate debate. If the transition to more enhanced urban ecosystem services is to be meaningful in scale and impact, it too will generate significant debate and discussion, and different strategies will emerge in different places.

I suppose that on a very basic level, it is safe to assume that we all want cleaner, healthier, more efficient cities, and broad typologies of ecosystem services (e.g. clean air, clean water, etc.) can be mapped to these goals. But in this usage, the ecosystem service concept is, to me, too general to be actionable and will therefore only generate lackluster support from the public. On the other hand, if the growing body of ecosystem service practitioners is willing to get down and dirty, more nuanced (and therefore more relevant = politically powerful) ecosystem service goals that address the real needs, goals, and aspirations of community residents can be developed. If you were a city council person, would you expect more phone calls from your constituents if you touted the need for cleaner water, or if instead you articulated your support to efforts that would create opportunities for gardening for local seniors; cut off the ability of thieves to access the backs of our houses; and eliminate persistent puddling in the streets after rainstorms?

The challenge is that as diverse as our communities are, is as diverse as these customized ecosystem service goals will be. It takes time and effort to inventory community needs, and the responsibility for doing so does not fall squarely on a water department, a public works department, or even on local politicians. Yet, by definition, ecosystem service goals need to be elicited directly from the public. They will be varied and responsive to the needs of different urban constituencies. They will vary from community to community, and from city to city. They will need to be adapted and changed over time, as communities change.

I am suggesting that instead of viewing ecosystem services as some new, noble, post-Brundtland, 21st century, game changing theoretical concept, let’s just think of this term as a name for our ever-improving multi-faceted abilities to map local to global, built to natural, and people to nature. If we can demonstrate the relevance of the concept in this way, very little convincing of the need for investment in ecosystem services will be required. It will be obvious.

The complete list of responses may be found at The Nature of Cities HERE >

QUANTIFYING GREEN ROOF BENEFITS


Dr. Franco Montalto and his team of researchers at Drexel University were recently featured in an article in The Environmental Monitor detailing their work in quantifying the many benefits of green roofs in urban environments. The article details their work in monitoring a green roof in the Bronx, New York, and how with their findings they have been able to develop specific urban crop equations for the estimation of evapotranspiration for engineering design.

Below is an excerpt from the article:

As it turns out, a key metric to charting urban green roof success is evapotranspiration, a combination of evaporation and plant transpiration. To learn more about ET and establish better procedures to estimate ET from green roofs, a group of researchers from Drexel University set up an experiment in Bronx, N.Y. Their work, published in the American Society of Civil Engineers’ journal, will make ET estimates for urban green spaces more accurate.

“There are different ways of estimating evapotranspiration. Many of the empirical methods are based on energy and water balance computations, and use crop coefficients to consider variability due to plant type,” said Franco Montalto, associate professor of civil, architectural and environmental engineering at Drexel University. “A big question is whether these equations are appropriate for green roofs and other urban green spaces.”

The full article may be found at The Environmental Monitor HERE >

INTERVIEW WITH CWPA


Franco Montalto

For their Spring 2013 Watershed Science Bulletin, the Center for Watershed Protection interviewed Dr. Franco Montalto about his experience researching, developing, and monitoring green infrastructure within urban watersheds.

Interview excerpt below:

Q: How do you define GI?

A: I define GI broadly as decentralized engineering, enhancement, or protection of multifunctional landscape features. Although the principal driver for, and characteristics of, each GI project will differ based on local conditions, all GI projects provide multiple benefits.

I wear three hats that include practitioner, researcher, and community stakeholder. As a practitioner at EDD, I am typically tasked with developing GI designs that reduce the rate and volume of runoff generated on urban catchments. However, these same designs can also provide new urban microhabitats; become a source of nonpotable water; remove pollutants; or aesthetically enhance a streetscape, alley, courtyard, playground, or park. As a researcher, I quantify how much water directed to specific GI facilities evaporates, replenishes the soil moisture, or infiltrates. These hydrologic processes underlie many important ecosystem services. Urban evapotranspiration, for example, wicks heat away from the city, mitigating the urban heat island effect. By replenishing soil moisture, GI practices can enhance the ability of urban vegetation to sustain prolonged droughts, though they can also create waterlogged conditions that are detrimental to certain types of vegetation. Infiltration can recharge local aquifers but, if promoted in the wrong places, can also create basement flooding problems or otherwise interfere with the functioning of underground infrastructure, such as buried utilities or subway tunnels.

Read the full article HERE >

DR. MONTALTO ON MORNING EDITION


Dr. Franco Montalto commentated in a report by Christopher Joyce on NPR’s Morning Edition to discuss the use of green infrastructure in protecting the New York metropolitan area from high energy storms such as November’s Hurricane Sandy.

Transcript excerpt:

Engineer Franco Montalto of Drexel University says [beaches] could be “nourished” — built up with sand or sediment to create dunes that hold back the water. “And the evidence seems to be that places that had rehabilitated beaches suffered less damage than places that didn’t,” Montalto says. For years, the Army Corps of Engineers has built sand dunes along East Coast beaches. Although many got swept away by Sandy, they’re relatively cheap to rebuild. It’s the kind of defense that Montalto calls “green infrastructure.” He says the green strategy has multiple benefits.“You know, a beach nourishment project could have value in terms of protecting houses, it could add habitat and could sort of enhance the value of this beach,” Montalto says. New York is seeking about $10 billion to prepare for the next big storm. Some experts, like Montalto, say you get more bang for your buck with a “distributed” defense — dunes, wetlands, bigger stormwater culverts, even urban parks that slow down the flow of water. They’re cheaper and designed to fit the needs of a particular community.

BRONX STORMWATER PLANTERS


Last summer, EDD and the NYC Soil & Water Conservation District (NYCSWCD) designed and constructed stormwater planters in the Bronx.

In the video below, Eric Rothstein and Shino Tanikawa (District Manager for the NYCSWCD) walk us through the design and explain how the hybrid retention and detention system works. Eric and Shino discuss the multiple benefits of green infrastructure, primarily CSO abatement and the resulting water quality improvement off-site in the rivers and bays of New York City.

Read more here in our PROJECTS >

Video courtesy of the Lower Hudson Coalition of Conservation Districts.

HABANA RESTROOM = WORLD CLASS


eDesign Dynamics' work at Habana Outpost was listed as one of the top reasons to live in New York City!

New York Magazine’s annual “Reasons to Love NY” lists Habana Outpost’s restroom as one of the best in the country out of 250 million public toilets. eDesign Dynamics designed the toilet flushing reuse system that first captures roof rainwater, filters the water via a green gutter system, and deposits the water in a storage tank.

See the article at New York Magazine HERE >

See more in our PROJECTS >

HRWA ANNUAL CONFERENCE – LIDRA


Franco Montalto was the opening plenary speaker for the sixth annual Hudson River Watershed Alliance (HRWA) Conference in Hyde Park, NY.

Franco also ran a workshop with Eric Rothstein on the utility of Low Impact Development Rapid Assessment (LIDRA) as a new tool for green infrastructure (GI) planning. LIDRA is a computer model that compares the cost-effectiveness of reducing runoff with different GI technologies. A neighborhood in the Fall Kill watershed served as a case study for the demonstration of LIDRA. The LIDRA model evaluated the performance of GI in the watershed over a 30 year period and tracked the total annual expenditures and life cycle costs of GI implementation.

The conference program can be found on the HRWA website HERE >

1 2 3