Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16COMPREHENSIVE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE NETWORK Map 3 combines the riparian buffer system with areas of high biodiversity as indicated in the Massachusetts BioMap2 study, and areas of high geophysical diversity identified in the TNC Resilient Landscapes work to create the comprehensive green infrastructure network. The inclusion of areas of high geo- physical diversity is one approach to maintaining biodiversity as the climate warms and the distribution of species on the landscape is altered. Approximately 64% of the combined network is both undeveloped and unprotected, a situation that underscores the importance of future land use decisions. QUALITATIVE COMPARISON OF BENEFITS OF GREEN AND GRAY INFRASTRUCTURE APPROACHES Table 1 compares two hypothetical future land use scenarios for the watershed. The first option involves protection of the currently undeveloped areas of the network and reestablish- ment of vegetated buffers in 50% of the currently developed riparian corridors. The second option involves development of 50% of the unprotected areas in the network and implementa- tion of gray stormwater infrastructure (i.e. culverts and deten- tion structures) to meet regulatory requirements. Achieving the benefits indicated in land use Scenario 1 would be contingent on intelligent design of the green infra- structure features. In particular, the physical and mental health benefits are dependent on the inclusion of features that are conducive to increased walking, biking, and community inter- action in community gathering and recreation areas. This analytic approach leads to a stacking of benefits and an ability to make qualitative comparisons between green and gray infrastructure approaches to watershed planning and manage- ment. This type of qualitative comparison is a first step toward the holistic evaluation of alternatives, and in some situations may be sufficient to inform decision making. However, many situations require a more detailed analysis and the ability to quantify costs and benefits. MODELING OF ALTERNATIVE FUTURE SCENARIOS Manomet is partnering with EPA in applying the Watershed Management Optimization Support Tool (WMOST) to quantify several of the benefit comparisons shown in Table 1. While still a work in progress, we are evaluating the water bal- ance, nonpoint source pollution, and flood ramifications of the two hypothetical future land use scenarios. Both effectiveness and cost will be quantified, and alternatives will be compared, providing an improved base of information for decision making. LOCAL ENGAGEMENT Once the mapping, modeling, and case studies are complete, they will all be used as inputs to the curriculum that is being developed for local stakeholder engagement. The curriculum will be tested and refined with a set of localities in the water- shed in the second year of the project. The goal for training sessions is to get the information into the hands of those who are responsible for land use decisions at the local level. A broad cross-section of local leaders including elected officials, board members, local planning, zoning, public works and utilities staff, and community leaders will be invited to participate in a series of workshops. The workshops will be structured to dem- onstrate the role that green infrastructure can play in regulatory compliance, limiting nonpoint source waters pollution, limiting flood threat, improving quality of life for citizens, and provid- ing cost savings. We are partnering with the Massachusetts Citizen Planner Training Collaborative to expand the reach of the training program beyond the Taunton watershed once the pilot phase is complete. FUTURE DIRECTIONS The challenges and opportunities in the Taunton watershed are present in many of the communities fronting the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. Manomet is currently involved in the planning and discussions on additional efforts that would apply the tools, techniques, and stakeholder engagement approach developed in the Taunton watershed to other coastal zone communities in New England. Our goal is to make consideration of green infrastructure solutions a standard feature of local and regional planning as these communities confront rising seas. With 39% of the U.S. population living in coastal counties, and growing, this will be one of our biggest challenges in the 21st century. 1 For more information on the Taunton watershed project and other nature-based infrastructure projects, please contact Eric Walberg at 1 Benefit Categories Benefits provided in this category ? Benefits depend on design details Degradation likely TABLE 1: QUALITATIVE COMPARISON OF HYPOTHETICAL FUTURE LAND USE SCENARIOS SCENARIO 1: GI Network that protects designated green infrastructure and restores 50% of developed riparian buffers LIMIT INCREASE IN THERMAL WATER POLLUTION   LIMIT NONPOINT SOURCE WATER POLLUTION  ? LIMIT INCREASE IN FRESHWATER FLOODING  ? LIMIT INCREASE IN SEVERITY OF STORM SURGE FLOODING   ENHANCE GROUNDWATER RECHARGE  ? LIMIT BIODIVERSITY LOSS   ENHANCE TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEM RESILIENCY   ENHANCE AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESILIENCY   LIMIT CITIZEN VULNERABILITY TO CLIMATE HAZARDS   ENHANCE PHYSICAL HEALTH OF CITIZENS   ENHANCE MENTAL HEALTH OF CITIZENS   ENHANCE VALUE OF SURROUNDING LANDS   SCENARIO 2: Development of 50% of currently unprotected green infrastructure network and implementation of gray infrastructure solutions to address stormwater management 6 | Manomet Partnerships for Sustainability • Fall / Winter 2016-17