Checking for non-preferred file/folder path names (may take a long time depending on the number of files/folders) ...

Database of Implemented Stormwater Controls (DISC)


Authors:
Owners: This resource does not have an owner who is an active HydroShare user. Contact CUAHSI (help@cuahsi.org) for information on this resource.
Type: Resource
Storage: The size of this resource is 1.4 GB
Created: Feb 01, 2021 at 9:36 p.m.
Last updated: Jun 18, 2024 at 2:36 p.m.
Citation: See how to cite this resource
Sharing Status: Public
Views: 2487
Downloads: 164
+1 Votes: Be the first one to 
 this.
Comments: 5 comments

Abstract

The data available here in the Database of Implemented Stormwater Controls (DISC) is a product of two manuscripts. 1. Synthesizing Stormwater Infrastructure in United States Cities: Are we speaking the same language? and 2. A cross-city comparison to understand selection of stormwater controls in United States cities. Not all cities included in the analyses presented in those papers allowed data to be shared, so spatial data of stormwater control measures (SCMs) is available via this resource for 17 of the 23 cities. Another city allowed spatial data to be shared directly with other researchers but not publicly, and two additional cities allowed for lists of their SCMs to be shared publicly, but not their spatial data.

The data as we received it from various sources is available and may include data other than SCM data (e.g., pipe network data). There is also a geodatabase available that contains SCMs clipped to city boundaries. This is the data we used in the manuscripts mentioned above. We did not standardize the datasets to contain the same data nor format of data.

We hope that this database of implemented stormwater controls (DISC) will be expanded upon by contributions from other individuals.

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1828902.
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

We are extremely grateful to those who were able and willing to share their data with us. I will work to include acknowledgments for all cities that provided data and for all online resources we used.
Here is a start:
- Thank you to the City of Austin for making your data publically available at : https://data.austintexas.gov/browse?q=UTILITIESCOMMUNICATION_stormwater_control

Subject Keywords

Coverage

Temporal

Start Date:
End Date:

Content

ReadMe.txt

**Note: We do not claim nor expect that the data presented here is a complete representation of the stormwater controls in the represented cities.

The data available here in the Database of Implemented Stormwater Controls (DISC) is a product of two manuscripts. 
1. Synthesizing Stormwater Infrastructure in United States Cities: Are we speaking the same language? and 
2. A cross-city comparison to understand selection of stormwater controls in United States cities. 
Not all cities included in the analyses presented in those papers allowed data to be shared, 
so spatial data of stormwater control measures (SCMs) is available via this resource for 17 of the 23 cities. 
Another city allowed spatial data to be shared directly with other researchers but not publicly, and two additional 
cities allowed for lists of their SCMs to be shared publicly, but not their spatial data.

The data as we received it from various sources is available and may include data other than SCM data (e.g., pipe network data). 
There is also a geodatabase available that contains SCMs clipped to city boundaries. This is the data we used in the manuscripts mentioned above.  
We did not standardize the datasets to contain the same data nor format of data. 

We hope that this database of implemented stormwater controls (DISC) will be expanded upon by contributions from other individuals. 

Beyond spatial datasets we have provided a Microsoft Excel '.xlsx' file that contains lists of SCMs, how we re-categorized those SCMs 
in the two manuscripts mentioned above, and what data is available for the different cities. We hope that seeing the inconsistencies 
in data will encourage better and more standardized record keeping of SCM inventories and data.

We also provide a ".csv" file that includes all explanatory variables used in the manuscripts mentioned above and ".csv" 
files with SCM counts for each of the SCM grouping conventions used in the mentioned manuscripts.  

Cities with SCM spatial data available via HydroShare include:
Austin, TX; Baltimore, MD; Bozeman, MT; Cary, NC; Denver, CO; Fayetteveille, AR; Grand Rapids, MI; Los Angeles, CA; New York City, 
NY; Philadelphia, PA; Pittsburgh, PA; Sacramento, CA; San Francisco, CA; Seattle, WA; Springfield, MO; Tucson, AZ; and Washington, D.C.

Cities for which spatial data can be attained by emailing Ben Choat (bchoat@colostate.edu or bchoat@rams.colostate.edu) include:
Portland, OR

Cities for which only lists of SCMs are available include:
Fort Collins, CO; Phoenix, AZ, and Pocatello, ID

Cities that do not allow any sharing of data include:
Lincoln, NE; and Phoenix, AZ

File descriptions:
In folder 'CSVs':
SCMComparison_ExplanatoryVars.csv: explanatory variables used in analyses from papers mentioned above.
SCMComparison_MOPall.multsep.csv: SCM counts for each city with SCM types based on "all" unit processes (see table of unit processes WEF and ASCE (2012))
SCMComparison_MOPbio.multsep.csv: SCM counts for each city with SCM types based on "biological" unit processes (see table 4.2 of unit processes WEF and ASCE (2012))
SCMComparison_MOPother.multsep.csv: SCM counts for each city with SCM types based on "other" unit processes (see table 4.2 of unit processes WEF and ASCE (2012))
SCMComparison_MOPpollutant.multsep.csv: SCM counts for each city with SCM types based on "pollutant" unit processes (see table 4.2 of unit processes WEF and ASCE (2012))
SCMComparison_MOPquant.multsep.csv: SCM counts for each city with SCM types based on "quantity" unit processes (see table 4.2 of unit processes WEF and ASCE (2012))
SCMComparison_MOPHR.multsep.csv: SCM counts for each city with SCM types based on fine resolution SCM names (see table 4.2 of unit processes WEF and ASCE (2012))
SCMComparison_MOPLR.mulstsep.csv: SCM counts for each city with SCM types based on coarse resolution SCM names (see table 4.2 of unit processes WEF and ASCE (2012))
SCM_Classifications_MOP.csv: Processes provided by different SCM types based on ASCE and WEF (2012) Table 4.2. 
			    This.csv was used for K-Means clustering. 
			    We recomend using the functions listed in this .CSV file as a basis when recording an inventory of SCMs and the functions they provide.

In folder 'ExcelFiles':
SCMComparison_CitySCMs_Hydroshare.xlsx: Microsoft Excel file holding lists of SCMs in each city and how they were reclassified, and other data that was available. 
Also contains lists of different SCM groups based on different unit processes.
SCMComparison_ListsForReclassification.xlsx: Just a table containing the SCM terms reported by all cities and how we reclassified them based on WEF and ASCE (2012)

Folder 'R_SCMs':
Contains relevant R code used for processing data for the analysis prensented in the two mentioned manuscripts.
There is a ReadMe.txt file in the folder describing for what each file.R was used.

SCMs_Raw_Shareable: Folder containing SCM spatial data as we received it.

SCMsClippedShare.gdb: A geodatabase of the SCM data clipped to city boundaries.

Press, W. E. F. "Design of urban stormwater controls." ASCE, 2012.

Credits

Funding Agencies

This resource was created using funding from the following sources:
Agency Name Award Title Award Number
National Science Foundation InTERFEWS 1828902

How to Cite

Choat, B., A. Pulido, A. S. Bhaskar, R. Hale, H. Zhang, T. Meixner, L. McPhillips, K. Hopkins, J. Cherrier, C. Cheng (2024). Database of Implemented Stormwater Controls (DISC), HydroShare, http://www.hydroshare.org/resource/9b2572b9ee58484483d539051adc019a

This resource is shared under the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
CC-BY

Comments

Robert Clayton 1 year, 1 month ago

Thank you for the report. While not required - it would be a courtesy to provide a credit for the source data for the municipalities whose work you are aggregating (like in the readme.txt in the zipped folder). There's a lot of painstaking work put in by a lot of people to collect and shepherd this data. Austin TX data can be credited as City of Austin Watershed Protection Department and be accessed here:

https://data.austintexas.gov/browse?q=UTILITIESCOMMUNICATION_stormwater_control

Reply
+1 Votes: 1 other +1 this

Benjamin Choat 1 year, 1 month ago

Hello Robert, Thank you for bringing this to my attention! I and the other coauthors are incredibly thankful to all of those who put in the painstaking work collecting and organizing the data, on which we developed our analysis and modified datasets. We especially applaud those cities such as Austin that have gone the extra mile, creating openly available and well organized SCM databases!! Regarding SCM data management, such cities are blazing the trail that hopefully many other cities will follow.

I will work to update the ReadMe.txt as suggested, providing credit where credit is due, beginning with Austin.
-Ben

Reply
+1 Votes: 1 other +1 this

Robert Clayton 1 year, 1 month ago

Hey - thanks Benjamin!

Reply
+1 Votes: Be the first one to 
 this.

New Comment

required