Stream Restoration Projects: A Critical Analysis of Urban Greening

Moran, Sharon

doi:10.1080/13549830601133151

Cited by 18 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From 1990 to 2003, approximately 37,100 such projects were initiated in the USA as inventoried by the National River Restoration Science Synthesis (NRRSS) (Bernhardt et al ). While the NRRSS contained no official statistics for the proportion of urban efforts undertaken, other publications synthesizing restoration activities have generally shown that the number of projects taking place in rural areas greatly outweighs those in urban settings (Kondolf et al ; Moran ; Sudduth et al ). Such an imbalance may be due to factors including the ease of land acquisition or land availability, the presence of ecologically undisturbed or less‐disturbed reference reaches, the linear extent of streambank that is pragmatically feasible to alter, fewer complications related to human health, safety, and risk to property, and fewer professionals who are suitably trained to resolve the complexities inherent in the rehabilitation of urban rivers (Moran ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…What makes restoration amidst urban development both interesting and unique is, among other factors, the opportunity to involve communities affected by these stream channels (Moran ; Riley ). In cities, such practices might promote certain educational or outreach programs associated with restoration implementation, thereby expanding on more commonly technical aspects of project planning.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing the Practice and Challenges of Stream Restoration in Urbanized Environments of the USA

Shoredits

Clayton

2013

Geography Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We identify several common characteristics of urbanized watersheds in the USA and discuss some of the challenges frequently encountered with urban stream restoration projects. These projects necessarily differ in many respects compared with watershed restoration practices employed in less developed locations. The stream condition, common in urbanized watersheds, is not easily rehabilitated even with more contemporary bioengineering practices replacing traditional ‘harder’ engineering practices. Major challenges for restoration projects in these settings include (i) the increased efficiency with which runoff and pollutants are routed into streams by means of impervious surface cover and storm drains; (ii) a poor understanding of sediment sources and transport relations; and (iii) the general paucity of documented projects with sufficient long‐term monitoring to guide ongoing and future efforts. To succeed in this field may require (i) a more complete database of project characteristics that can be used for adaptive management, (ii) a broader watershed‐scale restoration approach, and (iii) an improved understanding of geomorphologic and ecological processes relevant to urban streams. Recent examples of urban stream projects in the USA highlight the diversity of site‐specific circumstances and considerations that accompany each project.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Practice and Challenges of Stream Restoration in Urbanized Environments of the USA

Shoredits

Clayton

2013

Geography Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They explain that ‘some of these factors are abundantly obvious and include, for example, water quality and erosion, while others are more obscure and less tangible, such as social and indirect economic benefits, but are often equally important’. Material and rhetorical dimensions of stream restoration endeavours may be undermining the larger goals and thus stream restoration initiatives should be revised to address the human dimensions of the urban environment in a more comprehensive and equitable way (Moran, 2007). Asakawa et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public perception of landscape restoration along a degraded urban streamside

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Restoration of degraded lands in urban areas increases the ecologic, aesthetic and economic value of these areas and contributes to quality of life in cities. This study explores public attitudes towards restoration of a derelict urban streamside corridor. Data for this study were collected using a social survey among users and neighbourhood residents of the Ç ayboyu area in Isparta, Turkey. The survey compared the previous and present situation of the survey site in order to reveal the influence of stream restorations on public perception and use of derelict urban landscapes. The results identified a dramatic change in public perceptions between the previous and present situation of the area. Following the restoration works, the Ç ayboyu area has become one of the most popular and intensively used green spaces in the city. The survey results suggest that restoration of derelict lands increases the value of such areas for people and enhances their uses for recreational purposes in urban areas. Therefore, it is vital that urban planners and local authorities should encourage restoration of derelict and unused urban areas and preserve them as green spaces to meet the amenity needs of urban people.

show abstract

“…Large rivers are often more apparent within cities and more easily noticed by residents than smaller streams, which often are buried (Elmore andKaushal 2008, Broadhead et al 2013). Comparably fewer streams are found in urban than rural landscapes (Moran 2007), and remnant aboveground reaches often flow behind buildings and other infrastructure where they are inconspicuous and often neglected (Booth et al 2004). Urban streams may either positively or negatively affect property values depending on their aesthetic and other physical properties (Kulshreshtha andGillies 1993, Mooney andEisgruber 2001).…”

Section: Ecological and Societal Characteristics Of Urban Streamsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our primary objective was to develop a flexible alternative to ecologically focused restoration that would provide options for short-and long-term improvements to urban streams that may be pervasively impaired by human actions. As part of this primary objective, we intended to challenge the philosophy that restoration projects are futile unless they are able to address all the 'causes' of the urban stream syndrome (e.g., excess stormwater runoff; Moran 2007, Roy et al 2008, Walsh et al 2012. In so doing, we discussed the merits of a framework based on an integrated approach that considers both 'ecological' and 'societal' (Table 1) perspectives for achieving long-term improvements in ecosystem structure and function.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban stream renovation: incorporating societal objectives to achieve ecological improvements

Smith¹,

Hawley²,

Neale

et al. 2016

Freshwater Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pervasive human impacts on urban streams make restoration to predisturbance conditions unlikely. The effectiveness of ecologically focused restoration approaches typically is limited in urban settings because of the use of a reference-condition approach, mismatches between the temporal and spatial scales of impacts and restoration activities, and lack of an integrative approach that incorporates ecological and societal objectives. Developers of new frameworks are recognizing the opportunities for and benefits from incorporating societal outcomes into urban stream restoration projects. Social, economic, cultural, or other benefits to local communities are often opportunistic or arise indirectly from actions intended to achieve ecological outcomes. We propose urban stream renovation as a flexible stream improvement framework in which short-term ecological and societal outcomes are leveraged to achieve long-term ecological objectives. The framework is designed to provide additional opportunities for beneficial outcomes that are often unattainable from ecologically focused restoration approaches. Urban stream renovation uses an iterative process whereby short-term ecological and societal outcomes generate public support for future actions, which may provide opportunities to address catchment-level causes of impairment that often exist across broad temporal scales. Adaptive management, education, and outreach are needed to maintain long-term public engagement. Thus, future work should focus on understanding how ecological and societal contexts interact, how to assess societal outcomes to maintain stewardship, developing new methods for effective education and outreach, and multidisciplinary collaborations. We discuss potential abuses and the importance of linking societal outcomes to long-term ecological objectives.

show abstract

Stream Restoration Projects: A Critical Analysis of Urban Greening

Cited by 18 publications

References 23 publications

Assessing the Practice and Challenges of Stream Restoration in Urbanized Environments of the USA

Assessing the Practice and Challenges of Stream Restoration in Urbanized Environments of the USA

Public perception of landscape restoration along a degraded urban streamside

Urban stream renovation: incorporating societal objectives to achieve ecological improvements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About