Premium
Determination of subcatchment and watershed boundaries in a complex and highly urbanized landscape
Author(s) -
Kayembe Aimé,
Mitchell Carl P. J.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
hydrological processes
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.222
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1099-1085
pISSN - 0885-6087
DOI - 10.1002/hyp.13229
Subject(s) - impervious surface , watershed , hydrology (agriculture) , streams , digital elevation model , environmental science , watershed area , drainage basin , surface runoff , stormwater , land cover , storm , streamflow , time of concentration , drainage , land use , geology , remote sensing , geography , cartography , ecology , computer network , oceanography , geotechnical engineering , machine learning , computer science , biology , civil engineering , engineering
Urban development significantly alters the landscape by introducing widespread impervious surfaces, which quickly convey surface run‐off to streams via stormwater sewer networks, resulting in “flashy” hydrological responses. Here, we present the inadequacies of using raster‐based digital elevation models and flow‐direction algorithms to delineate large and highly urbanized watersheds and propose an alternative approach that accounts for the influence of anthropogenically modified land cover. We use a semi‐automated approach that incorporates conventional drainage networks into overland flow paths and define the maximal run‐off contributing area. In this approach, stormwater pipes are clustered according to their slope attributes, which define flow direction. Land areas drained by each cluster and contributing (or exporting) flow to a topographically delineated catchment were determined. These land masses were subsequently added or removed from the catchment, modifying both the shape and the size. Our results in a highly urbanized Toronto, Canada, area watershed indicate a moderate net increase in the directly connected watershed area by 3% relative to a topographically forced method; however, differences across three smaller scale subcatchments are greater. Compared to topographic delineation, the directly connected watershed areas of both the upper and middle subcatchments decrease by 5% and 8%, respectively, whereas the lower subcatchment area increases by 15%. This is directly related to subsurface storm sewer pipes that cross topographic boundaries. When directly connected subcatchment area is plotted against total streamflow and flashiness indices using this method, the coefficients of variation are greater (0.93 to 0.97) compared to the use of digital elevation model‐derived subcatchment areas (0.78 to 0.85). The accurate identification of watershed and subcatchment boundaries should incorporate ancillary data such as stormwater sewer networks and retention basin drainage areas to reduce water budget errors in urban systems.