Developing a methodology for community engagement with an emphasis on stormwater management preferences

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Developing a methodology for community engagement with an emphasis on stormwater management preferences
Physical Description:
Project in lieu of thesis
Language:
English
Creator:
Requesens, Mia Daniela
Publisher:
School of Landscape Architecture and Planning, College of Design, Construction and Planning, University of Florida
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, FL
Publication Date:

Notes

Abstract:
The purpose of this project was to develop a methodology for effective community engagement with an emphasis on stormwater management. This methodology would assist landscape architects and city planners in communicating the benefits of modern stormwater practices while simultaneously gaining community input on the visual and ecological needs of stormwater management strategies at the local scale. Through qualitative research, I analyzed and synthesized: 1.) historical perspectives on stormwater; 2.) stormwater management concerns; 3.) management needs and trends; 4.) community planning and design theories; 5.) visual preference models; and 6.) design guideline approaches. This literature review created the groundwork for the development of a stormwater visual preference survey which served as a tool for initiating a dialogue between professionals and local residents. During the Alachua Harvest Festival, a stormwater booth invited Alachua County residents to participate in taking the visual preference survey in addition to discussing their thoughts and concerns with stormwater management. The survey consisted of 8 different stormwater scenarios, each containing 3 alternatives with varied degrees of water treatment. Participants were instructed to choose their preferred alternative based on aesthetic preference and what they believe to be the most ecologically friendly. Then, participants were educated about each alternative to see if their opinions would change following their understanding of how the water was being treated on-site. Participants were asked to re-select a stormwater alternative for each scenario, this time based on aesthetics, ecology, and maintenance. A series of demographic and knowledge-based questions were also asked to evaluate significant differences in the results. From the 78 participants, the survey results revealed: 1.) a strong desire to see more creative stormwater design solutions in their community; 2.) an interest in landscapes that showcase the technology of stormwater management; and 3.) landscapes that are more ecologically sensitive. A preference for weir systems, green roofs, rain barrels, bioswales and sidewalk planters in conjunction with a diverse selection of plants was desired over traditional stormwater management techniques of piping water offsite. However, the survey also presented an even greater opportunity for participants to vocalize thoughts about local water quality, the cost and benefits of stormwater management, and the effects such designs could have on a growing community. As a result, a methodology that highlights using a stormwater visual preference survey as part of a community engagement effort not only creates a foundation for communities to explore stormwater design options, but it allows a water-sensitive conversation to begin within communities. With this methodology, professionals will better understand how to create visual, interactive, socially friendly gatherings that will better involve and engage community members on stormwater design in their area. From this information, communities can then consider the formation of design guidelines that incorporate the community engagement findings in a way that best suits the needs of that community. Understanding and communicating stormwater management within a community will hopefully lead to more sustainable, functional, and aesthetically pleasing designs.
General Note:
Landscape Architecture terminal project

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida Institutional Repository
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID:
AA00016059:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

By MIA DANIELA REQUESENS FACULTY ADVISORS: SARA KATHERINE KAY WILLIAMS, CHAIR KEVIN THOMPSON, CO CHAIR A THESIS PROJECT PRE SENTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTERS OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2013

PAGE 2

1 2013 Mia Daniela Requ esens

PAGE 3

2 To Kathy and Saul

PAGE 4

3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I first and foremost would like to thank my family for t heir love and support throughout my college career. My parents, Kathy and Saul R equesens, who have above a ll been my biggest supporters; I could not have easily accomplished my dreams without them. A special thanks to my committee, Kay Williams and Kevin Thompson for generously sharing their expertise and for me nto ring me during this project. Their guidance and critiques always motivated and inspired me. To Mayor Gib Coerper of the City of Alachua for personally being involved with my research and for making sure I had whatever I needed to continue my project. To Author Larry May s for setting aside time to speak with me about stormwater guidelines, and for his valuable suggestions. To Dr. Mark Clark of the UF Soil and Water Science Department for his advice on stormwater management as well as his insight on stormwater related pla ns in the City of Alachua. I also would like to thank all of the Alachua County participants who contributed their opinions to my survey during the Alachua Fall Festival. It is their thoughts that truly impacted my research. I also would like to thank the Department of Landscape Architecture, and the following mentors and professionals for their each individual contributions to my career : Michelle Park of Gainesville's Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Affairs Department Leda Kobziar of the UF Fire Scien ce Lab Dawn Lucas of the UF Soil and Water Science Lab and Kathryn Frank of the UF Planning Department Thank you to my best friends amazing classmates, and colleagues who have always been there for me and have made these past few years truly unforget table. Finally, I want to thank my boyfriend Jay Lee. One, for his graphic and technological support throughout this project. But most of all for his unconditional encouragement love and patience.

PAGE 5

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Dedication ........ ........................................................................................................ ...... 2 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... 3 Li st of Figures ............................................................... ............. ................................... 7 Abstract .......................................................................................................... ................ 10 Chapter Summary ................................................................... ............................. ......... 12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................... ........................... 18 1.1 Hi storical Perspective of Urban Water Management ................................. 20 Ancient Water Management American Water Management and Regulation Summary 1.2 Concerns Associated with Stormwa ter ......................................................... 30 Environmental and Urban Interface Health, Safety and Welfare of the Public Aesthetic and Emotional Appeal 1.3 Chapter Summary ........................................... .............................................. 51 2 BACKGROUND ...................................................................... ............................... 52 2.1 Stormwater Management Needs and Trends ............... ...... ......................... 54 Urban Effects Public Awareness and Values 2.2 Planning Stormwater in our Communities ....................................... ........... 58 A Water Relationship Community Engagement Studies Water Manageme nt Planning Communities and Environments Christopher Alexander Joan Nassauer Robert Thayer Kaplan and Kaplan 2.3 Visual Preference Models of Management Strategies ... .............................. 96

PAGE 6

5 PAGE 2.4 Design Guidelines ........................................................................................... 105 Purpose and Function Interview Stormwater Specialist, Larry W. Mays Development Methods Distribution and Use 2.5 Chapter Summary ..... ...................................................................................... 111 3 METHODS AND APPROACH ............................................................................... 112 3.1 Purpose and Intended Result ........ ................................................................. 114 City of Alachua Overview 3.2 Research Methodology ................................................................................. 117 Mixed Methods Approach Visual Pr eference Survey Approach 3.3 Community Engagement / Survey .................................................................. 120 Qualitative Research Visual Preference Survey Procedure 3.4 Quantitative Results (Groups #1 8) ..................... ........................................... 131 3.5 Demographics and Knowledge Based Questions Observations and Participant Reactions 3.6 Chapter Summary .......................................................................... ................ 154 4 FINDINGS ........................................................................................................... 156 4.1 Findings and Concerns ................................ ................................... ............... 158 161 4.3 Stormwater Design Guidelines ..................................................... 167 A Pattern Language of Stormwate r Introductory Guidelines City of Alachua 4.4 Chapter Summary .............................................................. ................ .............. 177 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................... ............... 178 5.1 Discussion on Stormwater Design and Community Engagement .......... ........ 180 Research Conclusion Conclusions from Community Engagement Concluding Discussion 5.2 Future Research Implications and Recommendations ... ................................. 186 WORKS CITED ........................................................................................... ... ........... 189

PAGE 7

6 PAGE APPENDICES Appendix A : Stormwater Visual Preference Survey .......... ................ ............................ 194 Appendix B : Informed Consent Documentation .............................. ............................ .. 201 Appendix C : Interview Questions ............................................... .... ........................ ....... 205 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results ......... ........................... ...... 206

PAGE 8

7 LIST OF FIGURES ITEM PAGE 1.1 Knossos drainage system 20 1.2 Knossos rainwater channel and desilting basin 21 1.3 Early cistern design and rain gutters 22 1.4 Curvilinear form of drainage at The Great Theater at Ephesus 23 1.5 Canal built during Industrial Revolution 24 1.6 Environmental Water Cycle 31 1.7 Pre urban hydrologic system 32 1.8 Post urban hydrologic system 33 1.9 Effects on water runoff pre and post development 35 1.10 Effects on runoff and infiltrations rates with development 36 1.11 Urban stormwater flow chart 40 1.12 Master plan of Riv erside 44 1.13 BMP catch basin filter 46 1.14 48 2.1 Projected water cycle changes in the United States 55 2 .2 Malm, Sweden 61 2.3 Traditional Planning Approach, Sweden 62 2.4 Vision to Realization Process sustainable stormwater project, Sweden 62 2.5 Swedish public exhibit on community sustai nability 63 2.6 Swedish values associated with sustainable stormwater drainage systems 64 2.7 Stormwater management values in Malm, Sweden 65 2.8 Housing complex designed to manage stormwater in Malm, Sweden 65 2.9 68 2.10 IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation 69 2.11 Transition to a Water Sensitive City 73 2.12 Pattern Language Grap hic Example: Subculture Boundaries 77 2.13 Pattern Language Graphic Example: Raised Walk 77 2.14 Pattern Language Graphic Example: Quiet Backs 77 2.15 Pattern Language Graphic Example: Pools and Strea ms 77 2.16 Phalen Wetland Park Master Plan 82 2.17 Triangle of Conflict in the American landscape 85 2.18 86 2.19 Responses to current state of dissonance between nature and technology in the landscape 87 2.20 Surface and core properties of landscapes 88 2.21 Surface and core relationships 89 2.22 2 D and 3 D Preference Matrix 91 2.23 Familiarity and Preference matrix 92 2.24 Community festival with photo boards 94 2.25 Alternative plaza designs with and without a proposed sculpture 95 2.26 Peachtree Visual Preference Survey Sample 99 2.27 Public Comment Board 100

PAGE 9

8 ITEM PAGE 2.28 Example of one image used in the visual preference survey, comments included 101 2.29 Visual Preference Survey with Group Discussion 102 2.30 Visual Preference Survey display boards 103 2.31 104 2.32 St ormwater design guidelines for LID 108 3.1 City of Alachua, Florida 114 3.2 Mill Creek Watershed and Cellon Creek Watershed 115 3.3 n to the Santa Fe River, Future Stormwater Park Future Walmart location, and Future Residential Housing 116 3.4 Research Methodology Diagram 119 3.5 Groups 1 8 of the Visual Preference Stormwater Post ers 122 125 3.6 Pilot Test of Visual Preference Survey 3 Images from UF Architecture Hallway 126 3.7 Edits to Group 2 and 6 of the Visual Preference Stormwater Posters 127 3.8 Images from the Alachua Harve st Festival Distribution of the Stormwater Visual Preference Survey 128 129 3.9 Most and Least Preferred Stormwater Management Scenarios 155 4.1 4 Sets of Images: Least preferred vs. Most preferred 158 159 4.2 Community Engagement Methodology Diagram 163 4.3 Stormwater Categories 168 4.4 Integrated Stormwater Design vs. Undesired Stormwater Design 170 4.5 Green Roof Design Options for City of Alachu a: Accessibility and Visibility 171 4.6 Water Edge with Vegetated Depressions Before and After 171 4.7 Residential Lawn with Rain Gardens and a Diverse Selection of Plants Before and After 172 4.8 Residential Rain Barrel Style Option 1 with Rain Chains 172 4.9 Residential Rain Barrel Style Option 2, with Artistic Design Element and a Poor Barrel Design 172 4.10 Weir System Placement betwe en building and street 173 4.11 Weir System Placement next to street, away from building 173 4.12 Weir System Commercial Design: Pedestrian Friendly Access with sidewalks, shade, and vegetation 174 4 .13 Weir System Residential Design: Pedestrian Friendly Access with sidewalks, shade, and vegetation 175 4.14 Weir System Crossing Points: Benefits to Visual Appeal, Safety, Visibility and Maintenance 175 4.15 Above Ground Weir System Design: Accessibility and Function 176 4.16 Design Element that masks the function of the Weir System 176 4.17 Design Option for Above Ground Weir System 176

PAGE 10

9 All photos and graphics are by Mia Requesens unless otherwise specified

PAGE 11

10 ABSTRACT The purpose of this project was to develop a methodology for effective community engagement with an emphasis on stormwater management. This met hodology would assist landscape architects and city planners in communicating the benefits of modern stormwater practices while simultaneously gaining community input on the visual and ecological needs of stormwater management strategies at the local scale Through qualitative research, I analyzed and synthesized: 1.) historical perspectives on stormwater ; 2.) stormwater management concerns ; 3.) management needs and trends; 4.) community planning and design theories; 5 .) visual preference m odels; and 6.) d esign guideline approaches This literature review created the groundwork for the development of a stormwater visual preference survey which served as a tool for initiating a dialogue between professionals and local residents. During the Alachua Harvest F estival, a stormwater booth invited Alachua County resid ents to participate in taking the visual preference survey in addition to discuss ing their thoughts and concerns with stormwater management The survey consisted of 8 different stormwater scenarios, each containing 3 alternatives with varied degrees of water treatment. P articipants were instructed to choose their preferred alternative based on aesthetic preference and what they believe to be the most ecologically friendly. Then, participants were ed ucated about each alternative to see if their opinions would change following their understanding of how the water was being treated on site. Participants were asked to re select a stormwater alternative for each scenario, this time based on aesthetics, ecology, and maintenance. A series of demographic and knowledge based questions were also asked to evaluate significant differences in the results. From the 78 participants, the survey results revealed: 1.) a strong desire to see more creative stormwate r design solutions in their community; 2.) an interest in landscapes that showcase the technology of stormwater management ; and 3.) landscapes that ar e more ecologically sensitive. A preference for weir systems, green roofs, rain barrels bioswales and si dewalk planters in conjunction with a diverse selection of plants was desired over traditional stormwater management techniques of piping

PAGE 12

11 water offsite. H owever, the survey also presented an even greater opportunity for participants to vocalize thoughts a bout local water quality, the cost and benefits of stormwater management, and the effects such designs could have on a growing community As a result, a methodology that highlights using a stormwater visual preference survey as part of a community engage ment effort not only creates a foundation for communities to explore s tormwater design options, but it allows a water sensitive conversation to begin within communities. With this methodology, professionals will better understand how to create visual, int eractive, socially friendly gatherings that will better involve and engage community members on stormwater design in their area. From this information, communities can then consider the formation of design guidelines that incorporate the community engagem ent findings in a way that best suits the needs of that community. Understanding and communicating stormwater management within a community will hopefully lead to more sustainable, functional, an d aesthetically pleasing designs

PAGE 13

12 CH APTER SUMMARY

PAGE 14

13 "Water is the most critical resource issue of our lifetime and our children's lifetime. The health of our waters is the principal measure of how we live on the land." Luna B. Leopold Former USG S Chief Hydrologist

PAGE 15

14 INTENDED VALUE This research attempts to understand the visual preferences for various stormwater solutions in the built environment, and how these preferences can influence future development plans for commun ities. My research is intended to provoke stormwater awareness at the community scale. Stormwater management often deals with pollutants such as sediments, nutrients, and pathogens; often undesirable and misunderstood components of daily life. My resea rch asks the question, "In what way can landscape architects and city planners turn stormwater management into a participatory community effort that utilizes local resources in an attempt to two separate sources: 1.) qualitative research and 2.) community input from my home town of Alachua a methodology could be created that includes a series of guideline examples that follow recogni tion of patterns in the landscape. The value of this methodology would be to initiate a dialogue within communities on stormwater management, and hopefully begin to reintegrate the technology of management strategies into the aesthetic of the land. It wo uld not be enough to suggest guidelines for developing stormwater management designs in community public spaces without first addressing a community's environmental awareness and visual preferences. Chapter Summary

PAGE 16

15 In considering how to best communicate stormwater manage ment techniques in your community, you may want to use this publication as a starting point for figuring out how to merge local opinions with the unique design character of stormwater management Together, the opinions and concerns of a community can pro duce a clearer idea of how water is integrated into the public realm It is my hope that you develop a curiosity about how we as growing societies can influence and equally be influenced by the water around us. .. in particular, stormwater. I now encoura ge you to read through the following outline which briefly explains what you will find in each chapter of this publication FIVE MAIN CHAPTERS TO THIS PUBLICATION: 1. The Introduction This chapter creates the ground plane for u nderstanding the concerns wit h stor mwater design as well as how it s historical applications have evolved to how we manage water today. In addition to a historical perspective, this chapter also aims to look at concerns associated with water in the urban environment. P resent day stor mwater techniques and the relationship of these techniques to the h ealth, safety, and welfare of humans is a major concern when interacting with potentially polluted water sourc es. S o understanding what dictates the design of stormwater systems and how th ey are managed is critical for Chapter Summary

PAGE 17

16 implementing management strategies. As concerns with stormwater affect how people react to local water the aesthetic and emotional appeal of stormwater is also examined. Together, these topic s provide valuable information that lead into the communication of stormwater in Chapter T wo 2. Background This chapter explores some of the current needs and trends of stormwater usage in the urban environment, the rhetoric of stormwater in our communities, theories of planning and ec ology, visual preference models and the basics of design g uidelines. This chapter addresses s pecific works by Christopher Alexander Joan Nassauer, Robert Thayer, and Kaplan and Kaplan which explain patterns, theories ecological awareness, and communicat ion. Together, these works can be applicable toward creating spaces that encourage the protection of local water resources. 3. Methods and Approach Chapter T hree of this thesis addresses the methodology and approach of this project. A variety of qual itative and exploratory research approaches are used. These approaches involve research and public involvement as necessary factors in developing a methodology for Chapter Summary

PAGE 18

17 community engagement. This chapter also delves into of a stormwat er visual preference survey that was conducted in the City of Alachua, as well as how community guidelines benefit from such research This chapter concludes with the results o f the survey and the community engagement process as a whole. 4. Findings In this chapter I discuss the findings visual preference survey and community interactions. In addition, I attempt to create local level advocacy for the p reservation, conservation, enhancement, and management of water by formulating introd uctory guidelines for stormwater management in areas becoming urbanized. My overarching vision is that communities utilize the results from their community engagement to formulate their own forms of guidelines with this chapter acting as a base for inspi ration. 5. Discussion and Conclusions In this final chapter, I discuss the practicalities of public input in the design of stormwater systems within growing communities, and the future research implications and recommend ations for this subject area. Chapter Summary

PAGE 19

18 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

PAGE 20

19 The need to improve water resources management relates to the more general issues of how conscious social choice can or should be used to direct the development and adop tion of technological innovation and of how to improve the probability that the social choices will turn out to be truly in the best long run interest of mankind ." L. Douglas James, Man and Water 1974

PAGE 21

20 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF UR BAN WATER MANAGEMENT The purpose of this section is to give a brief perspective on the origin of urban water management design practices a s well as significant events that have shaped how we experience water in our communities today An emphasis on ima ge and is also addressed in relation to the historic design responses societies have had on their surroundings. Ancient Water Management Water management has been an essential practice to the survival of societies throughout the course of history. Spawning from a need to collect drinking water, irrigate crops, prevent flooding, and dispose of human waste, e arly Mesopotamians were among the first to recognize and respect the limited supply of water that was availa bl e to them (Barlow, 2002 ). As their cities grew in size, t hey became masters of the "hydr aulic arts of controlling water (Solomon, 2010 )." This art was a careful FIGURE 1.1 Kn ossos drainage system (Source: Mays, 2013) "Since the first successful efforts to control the flow of water... a very rich history of hydraulics has evolved" Mays, 2001 Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 22

21 balance between sustaining life and understanding the importance of water within a city (Bar low, 2002). However, it was n't until the second millennium B.C. where the Minoan civilization of Crete learned to collect rain water and used extensive drainage systems to transport th e water over various topographic terrain (Mays, 2001). Knossos the modern capitol of Crete was known for these early forms of drainage and began experimenting with various design forms (See Figs. 1.1 and 1.2 ) These designs were created for efficiency and served a strictly functional purpose of conveying water throu ghout their built structures. In many cases, rainwater desilting basins were places in walkways to allow debris and soil particles to settle out. The aesthetics of these systems were often linear in form and were not typically thought of as 'unique' unti l drains were incorporated into th e design of drainage systems. O nly Minoan palaces were known to have had drains at this time which enabled storm water to be less visible in their living environments (Mays, 2001) Non visible water systems was a 'desig n luxury' for those who could afford it Drains were rediscovered by the Greeks around 700 B.C. and were no longer simply a luxury, but were modified to be a part of urban design (Mays, 2001) Still designed to be more functional than aesthetic, "c ompone nts of the drainage systems FIGURE 1.2 Knossos rainwater channel and desilting basin (Source: Mays, 2013) Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 23

22 included eavetroughs for individual buildings, drain pipes through walls or foundation of indi vidua l houses, collector channels in neighborhoods, and drains in public areas (Mays, 2001)." Having these systems as public co mmodi ties made these communities more efficient in design. In addition, water quality and living standards in these communities significantly improved. The Roman Empire eventually took control of many of the Greek cities but were less educated about drain age systems when constructing new ones. Earlier cities such as Pompeii did not have a full network of storm drains, nor did they have a sense of effective urban planning (Mayes, 2001). As time progressed, newer parts of the cities branched away from havi ng no city planning strategy and began following a square grid street pattern instead Stone storm drains manholes, and sidewalk curb and gutter systems were applied in logical gradient situations S imple design strategies such as stepping stones across streets began to show signs of public safety as people interacted with the stormwater around them Cisterns were another revelation during this time, as rain gutters collected much of the runoff from roofs and other built structures (Mayes, 2001) (See Fi g 1.3 ). Even well designed drainage channels were incorporated into large structures such as The FIGURE 1.3 Early cistern design and rain gutters (Source: Mayes, 2013) Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 24

23 Great T heater at Ephesus (Mayes, 2001) (See Fig 1.4 ). The aesthetics of such a design was unique in its curvilinear form as it spanned across the floor of this theater which could hold 24,000 spectators (Mayes, 2001). The drainage channels beca me an amenity to the theater molding to the form of its surroundings. The Romans marked a exceptional time of stormwater innovation and design. Unfortunately, w ater management declined during the Dark Ages of the Roman Empire (Mayes, 2001) After the fall of the Romans, s anitation and hygiene became serious concerns The design of stormwater systems began to fail as human and animal waste mixed with local wat er supplies. Europe suffered greatly from this lack of water management, and p olluted water was the cause of many disease outbreaks It took roughly a millennium to reestablish a fully functional hydrologic system within the urban environment (Mayes, 2 001 ) American Water Management and Regulation Centuries after ancient stormwater drainage systems were developed, t he Industrial Revolution marked a time where water became a tool, as well as a disposable commodity. Controlling water for the good of de velopment was something that especially played a key role in both Europe and the United FIGURE 1.4 Curvilinear form of drainage at The Great Theater at Ephesus (Source: Mays, 2001) Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 25

24 States from 1760 to the mid 1800's (Solomon 2010 ) Sewers and municipal water supply systems were created, and a round this same time, "people recognized that communi ty health could be improve d by discharging human waste into the storm sewers for rapid removal (Kemp, 2009) Not knowing the implications of these actions, 25,000 miles of sewer lines were constructed by 1910 and directed to the closest water body as a me ans of "disposal by dilution" (Kemp, 2009). During the 18th and 19th century, c anals were another technological advancement that drastically altered water flow. They were constructed to further expand the travel and trade options (Solomon 2010 ) In addition, t hey also served as a means of water conveyance, delivering potable water to cities and for agricultural irrigation ; similarly to how ancient societies used water for power and city use The modern industrial society had emerged with new frontie rs in water supply, energy, and production. With this plentiful supply of water, also came unforeseen consequences. "Industrial steam power and large manufactory production had promoted rapid urban concentration (Solomon, 2010 )" resulting in concerns aro und sewage disposal, sanitary drinking water, runoff pollution, and dropping aquifer levels. FIGURE 1.5 Canal built during Industrial Revolution. (Source: http://socialstudiesmms.wikispac es.com/Indu strial+Revolution ) Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 26

25 Runoff p ollution as well as wastewater pollution was the product of "non existent regulations, little scientific knowledge of negative ecological and health rela ted effects, and lack of construction funding (Kemp, 2009)." However, water pollution began raising governmental concerns as the necessity for water treatment became apparent O rganization s and new government laws were established to protect the country' s degrading water supply Degrading water quality was "an environmental byproduct of the urbanization that accompanied early industri alization (Solomon, 2010 )." Bodies of water began receiving more runo ff from urban expansion, which a ffected much of the surroundings landscapes. Wetlands were especially a ffected as their numbers rapidly decreased. Wetland ecosystems were often viewed as disease ridden wastelands of horror, instead of indispensable kidneys of the landscape (Giblett, 1996). With this kin d of perception, wetland ecosystems merely became obstacles that could easily be drained and turned into rich agricultural land. Acting as ecotones, the wetland acted as a "transition between two diverse communities (Outwater, 1996 )," water and land. Wit hout that transition, the biodiversity and productivity of life in and around those areas decrease, water is not as thoroughly cleansed, and erosion is more likely. Both natural and manmade wetlands served as essential systems for cleansing stormwater run off, but were not often desired in the urban setting. "In 1948, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act was instituted...the first major U.S. law to address water pollution" EPA Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 27

26 By 1937, wetland and water quality issues had gained national recognition. From these issues, Ducks Unlimited was founded, which became "the leading waterfowl and wetlands conservation entity in No rth America (Cech, 2010)." Protecting waterfowl meant protecting their habitats, the natural wetland. By this time, over fifty percent of wetlands in America were "destroyed or degraded with continued loss estimated at over 55 ,000 acres per year (Cech, 2010 )." However, through the Duck Unlimited organization, wetlands began making a significant comeback. By 1948, The Federal Water Pollution Control Act was instituted. This act was the "first major U.S. law to address wate r pollution (EPA 2013 )," as i t enabled states to more effectively regulate pollution causing sources and protect their water resources During the 1950s and 1960s, the U.S. government supplied funds for constructing municipal waste treatment plants, water pollution research, and te chnical training and assistance (Kemp, 2009)." However, the population was booming and d espite those efforts, pollution and environmental health concerns increased This environmental degradation brought about the greatest public outcry on water quality and corresponding legislative and executive response in U.S. history (Kemp, 2009)." In 1967, several organizations were well established to protect America's wi ldlife and water resources. Some of these organizations included the National Audubon Society, the "The environment, however, paid a price, bringing abou t the greatest public outcry on water quality -and corresponding legislative and executive response -in U.S. history" Kemp Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 28

27 National Wildlife Fund, the Nature Conservancy, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Sierra Club, Trout Unlimited, and the Wilderness Society. The Sierra Club, known for it's mission of "exploration, enjoyment, and protection of w ild p laces on Earth (Cech, 2010 )," was founded by John Muir in order to promote "responsible use of ecosystems and resources, education and the use of all lawful means to carry o ut these objectives (Cech, 2010 ). In 1970, Earth Day was recognized for the fir st time, followed by the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Muir's message of responsibility and knowledge is vital to how stormwater should be treated in society. In 1972, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act was amended to what is commonly known as the Clean Water Act (CWA) (Kemp, 2009). This act had six defining amendments: "1.) Established the basic structure for regulating pollutants discharges into the water of the United States, 2.) Gave the EPA the authority to imple ment pollution control programs such as setting wastewater standards for industry, 3.) Maintained existing requirements to set water quality standards for all contaminants in surface waters, 4.) Made it unlawful for any person to discharge any pollutant fr om a point source into navigable waters, unless a permit was obtained under its provisions, 5.) Funded the construction of sewage treatment plants under the construction grants program, and 6.) Recognized the need for planning to address the critical probl ems posed by nonpoint source pollution (EPA, 2013 )." These amendments were major breakthroughs for America as far as how urban water was managed. Stormwater was more heavily regulated from a point source standpoint, but non point Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 29

28 source pollution still remained an issue. Planning for reduced amounts of non point source pollution was difficult, and even more difficult to control. In 1974, The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was enacted which became one of the most "aggressive attempts at managing land u se at the local level of government (Kemp, 2009)." This local level of government regulation helped establish the Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP), which required each state to provide information regarding the identification of potential water cont amination sources, strategies for delineation, groundwater susceptibility, and public awareness (Kemp, 2009). This local level of government regulation more easily allows for in depth analysis of water management strategies, and public involvement. The m ore the public knows, the more active people will become within their communities in protecting water resources. Summary From the engineering feats that history has produced from water management, there has been min imal attempts at incorporating function al yet visually pleasing wate r management systems that become integrated into the landscape. Image was a major influence on design decisions of both wastewater and stormwater. Historically, people have put a strong emphasis on the power of image, from dr ain systems to wetlands. As a result, the landscape changed. Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 30

29 In many cases, water has been channeled and piped in ways that separate the water from its natural environment. Through the centuries, societies have struggled politically militarily, and e conomically to control the world's water wealth: to erect cities around it, to transport good upon it, to harness its latent energy in various forms, to utilize it as a vital input of agriculture and industry, and to extract political advantage from it. ... t oday, there is hardly an accessible freshwater resource on the planet that is not being engineered, often monumentally, by man (Solomon, 2010 )." Societies have found ways to be efficient in the management of water in and around the urban setting. This is a product of necessity. Population grows, urban environments expand, and we must quickly adapt to our surroundings. Unfortunately, the water resources in and around us become manipulated, and often times polluted. Organizations, laws, and regulatio ns have helped in the management of water resources, yet we are still on the cutting edge of sustainable, water management design. T hrough this efficiency and sustainable design era there are still quality and quantity concerns image concerns, and emoti onal concerns that repea tedly find themselves apparent. To understand what is needed from stormwater management, one must first understand the present day concerns. "Today, there is hardly an accessible freshw ater resource on the planet that is not being engineered, often monumentally, by man." Solomon Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 31

30 CONCERNS ASSOCIATED WITH STORMWATER The purpose of this section is to highlight some of the contemporar y issues and concerns associated with stormwater at the community scale Historically, the design of water systems within societies were driven by need, necessity, and image. Today, w ater also tends to connect with the public realm on an environmental, physical, social, and emotional level. This section will therefore look specifically at the relationship between cities and nature, the health, safety and welfare of the public, and finally the aesthetic and emotional appeal of stormwate r in general. Environmental and Urban Interface The interface between the natural environment and an urban environment greatly differ in hydrologic characteristics, presenting a series of concerns associated with water quantity, quality, and infrastruct ure. The human influence over stormwater design has changed the way water moves throughout its environment. This is why g rowing societies must understand the hydrology of the watersheds in their area and plan for effective stormwater networks Hydrology as defined by the U.S. National Research Council (1991) is T he science that treats waters of the earth, their occurrence, circulation, and distribution, their c hemical and physical properties and their reaction with the environment, including the relation to living things. The domain of hydrology embraces the full life history of water on Earth ( Mays 2001 ) Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 32

31 This life history of water becomes more and more complex as urbanization occurs and as the relationship with living things shifts to include more human interaction H ydrology function s within t he hydrologic cycle This hydrologic cycle is a relatively complex system of water that is often taught in its most basic form; condensation, precipitation, surface runof f, and evaporation or t ranspiration (See Fig 1.6). The cycle is continuous and stormwater is a key component that is associated with surface runoff. If runoff is altered, the entire cycle is altered. The environmental water cycle contains a wide variety of inputs and outp uts from groundwater infiltration to surface water evaporation Within this cycle are also multiple hydrologic system s A hydrologic system is defined by Chow, FIGURE 1.6 Environmental Water Cycle (Source: Mays, 2001) Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 33

32 Maidment and Mays (1988) as "a structure or volume in space, surrounded by a boundary, that a ccepts water and other inputs, operates on them internally, and produces them as outputs (Chow, 1988). Th ese hydrologic system s work to cleanse the water as it moves through the various stages. This natural purification process is what sustains life on this planet. However, the number of inputs and outputs increase from a pre urbanized environment to a post urbanized environment. T he distinction between a pre urbanized hydrologic system and an urbanized hydrologic system is centered on each part of t he definition of hydrology; the physical, chemical, and environmental relationships The complexities of a pre urban hydrologic system (See Fig. 1.7 ) are represented below, highlighting a direct connection between the land surface, bodies of water and how the water infiltrates into the ground. In this naturalistic environment, water precipitates on land or is intercepted by tree canopies. Tree canopies are essential for FIGURE 1.7 Pre ur ban hydrologic system (Source: Mays, 2001) Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 34

33 slowing runoff, as a mature tree with a 30 foot crown can intercept over 700 gallons of rainfall annually ( City of Portland 2013 ). The water that makes its way past the vegetation turns into surface runoff or infiltrates into the ground, becoming part of a subsurfac e flow ( interflow ) or groundwater flow ( baseflow ) (Davis and McCuen, 200 5) Natural buffers, topographic treatment trains, and underground water tables allow water to make a journey across the land and runoff into larger bo dies of water for evaporation (Mays 2001). A cyclic balance of water movement allows water to complete the natural hydrologic system. In a post urbanized, developed environment, stormw ater patterns flow rates and infiltration rates drastically change (See Fig. 1.8 ). The web like matrix of water becomes even more FIGURE 1.8 Post urban hydrologic system (Source: Mays, 2001) Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 35

34 complex, disrupting the natural fl ow of water in cities. Direct runoff still travels to bodies of surface water. However, this stage is manipulated, forcing runoff to take a variety of other man directed paths such as storm drainage, wells, and retention basins. Development also reduces tree canopy coverage and changes the topography of the land to accommodate man made structures such as buildings, roads, and parking lots. As a result, the quantity of surface water runoff increases, and the loss of topography eliminates effective water h olding depressions such as wetlands. Infiltration rates and subsurface interflow rates also decrease (Davis and McCuen, 2005). According to discussions from the Emergent Urban Stormwater Conference held in 2001, the following hydrologic changes are some of the specific quantity and quality issues associated with urbanization (Urbonas, 2002) : 1 Changes in Stormwater Runoff Quantity 1. Increased runoff rates and volumes 2. Increased frequency of runoff 3. Changes in dry weather flow rates 4. Cha nges in groundwater levels and hydrology 5. Increased wet weather flow rates 6. Increased "flashiness" of flows 2 Changes in Stormwater Runoff Quality 1. Constituent concentrations and loads 2. Water toxicity 3. Temperature Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 36

35 4. Suspended sol ids concentrations and loads 5. Litter, debris and floatables 6. Pathogens 7. Oxygen demand and availability during dry and wet weather periods 8. Impacts on attainment of designated uses under state and federal water quality classific ations and standards (Urbonas, 200 2 ) Together, these issues create serious concerns for communities wanting to protect their water reso urces. Both quantity and quality issues directly affect the surface water runoff as well as the water that infiltr ates into the ground. The graphic below illustrates the changes in the flow of surface and ground water by increasing or reducing the sizes of arrows from the pre to post landscapes (See Fig. 1.9 ). In a p re development scenario, 70 % to 90 % of the rainf all is able to infiltrate naturally FIGURE 1.9 Effects on water runoff pre and post development. (So urce: Davis and McCuen, 2005) Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 37

36 into the ground (Davis and McCuen, 2005). In a post development scenario, anywhere from 10 95% of rainfall becomes impermeable runoff, mea ning it is unable to infiltrate into the ground (Davis and McCuen, 2005). There fore, post developm ent scenarios no t only have to address increased runoff rates, but must address how to keep from reducing the amount of water that reaches the subsurface water systems. The subsurface water includes interflow baseflows and groundwate r The interflow and baseflow are the two zones above the groundwater table that serve as a direct linkage to surface water Interflow is the lateral movement of shallow subsurface water that feeds directly into surface bodies of water ( Linsley, et.al, 1 964 ). Baseflow is a deeper lateral movement of water, before reaching the groundwater (Wikipedia, 2011 ). The following graphic illustrates the amount of water that can FIGURE 1.10 Effects on runoff and infiltrations rates with development (Source: NRCS, USDA) Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 38

37 actually infiltrate into these shallow and deeper flow zones (See Fig. 1.10 ) The he avier the development, the less water is able to infiltrate, which in turn affects the natural hydrology of a settlement. Infrastructure Another major stormwater concern and perhaps one that is not often discussed, is infrastructure Water and waste water systems are ag ing, causing man made stormwater networks to slowly become inadequate. These systems mainly include pipes, canals, sewer systems, and water treatment facilities. Water and wastewater utilities in the United States alone make up more t han 800,000 miles of water pipe and more than 600,000 miles of sewer line, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (Kemp, 2009). The problem is somewhat a hidden issue, but will surface in time... both literally and figuratively as one thi rd of utilities and one in five pipelines are reaching the end of their structural life (Kemp, 2009). Professional and advo cacy groups have identified America's aging water and wastewater infrastructure as a top concern (Kemp, 2009). However, the funds to repair such an elaborate system of pipes, culverts and water treatment facilities are extensive. Federal funds reach deep into the pockets of local communities (Kemp, 2009). Communities that cherish their local water resources, yet are often unaware o f stormwater Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 39

38 alternatives. Robert McMill i on, former assistant water director of Fort Worth, Texas and former president of WEF stated There is no doubt that water and wastewater services help protect public health and the environment, but the water quality community is in an unsustainable position. We are faced with a mandate to protect water resources with aging, capacity limited or nonexistent infrastructure assets, and diminishing financial resources and commitments. Locally, and across the nation, we need to determine w here the funding will be found (Kemp, 2009). McMillion highlights a very key issue of how the water quality community is in an unsustainable position He bases this assumption off of the growing demand of new infrastr ucture and the dwindling resources needed to produce them (Kemp, 2009). C ommunities are presented with a financial burden when wanting to adopt m ore sustainable water practices, even after m ore than 8 in 10 Americans believe that clean water is a nationa l issue th at deserves federal investment (Kemp, 2009). The development of a strategy for infrastructure sustainability is growing interest among local and federal level interest groups, and will continue to be a headlining issue as more and more infrastru cture failures occur (Kemp, 2009). Tim Williams, director of government affairs at the Alexandria, Va. based Water Environmen t Federation (WEF) stated that, Overall, there appears to be a general understanding of the infrastructure issue... however, c onsidering the magnitude of this problem, [water quality professionals] need to be more proactive in educating public policy makers, local legislators and the general public about the implications of not making investment a priority (Kemp, 2009)." Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 40

39 Public education of stormwater concerns leads to more elections of policy makers that care about local water issues. Are stormwater concerns being properly educated to the public? Is the communication of stormwater the bigger issue? The answer to stor m water management does not include creating bigger and more expensive storm water management systems. Rather, it means changing our philosophy and methods to implement true water management systems that actually prevent and treat storm water pollutants ( Kemp, 2009)." Changing the philosophy and methods of stormwater management requires a closer look at how communities interact with their local water supply. Health, Safety, and Welfare of the Public Stormwater management is more than just a quantity, q uality, and infrastructure concern. The health, safety, and welfare of th e public is equally a concern worth taking into account With a variety of impervious surfaces throughout urban environments, the general public is more closely exposed to contamina nts in stormwater and groundwater (See Fig. 1.11 ). The quantity and quality of our nation's fresh water supply is not just a pollution and treatment concern, it presents growing concerns with the health of communities as a whole Pollutants are mainly c onsidered to be a water quality concern, however, the relationship people have to these chemicals could potentially affect people in ways that are Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 41

40 difficult to regulate. M eeting the current national, local, city and watershed rules and regulations pose t he greatest challenge in stormwater management practices and nitrates and phosphates are at the forefront of concern (Kemp, 2009)." Nitrates are soluble in water, can travel great distances through soil and groundwater supplies, and are often due to fert ilizer leaching or automobile byproducts (Kemp, 2009). Phosphates are known to bind to soil particles and are often a key component in agricultural soil (Kemp, 2009). Heavy rain events and erosion can cause rapid spread for both nitrates and phosphates across the landscape and inadvertently into the groundwater supply. The health of the public heavily relies on water quality and a clean aquifer, which often falls victim to nitrate and phosphate pollution. This is often the case in the state of Flori da where groundwater is clearly becoming compromised. As one article from the Gainesville Sun phrases it, "We're at a crossroads. It's time for us to command Florida's best future. Let's use inspiration and creativity as our springboards of choice FIGURE 1.11 Urban stormwater flow chart Chapter One: Introduction FIGURE 1.11 Urban stormwater flow chart. (Source: Mays, 2001)

PAGE 42

41 to c reate a paradigm shift in how we live and make a living," as it refers specifically to the dropping levels in the Florida aquifer, the loss of natural springs, and the dangerous rise of nutrient levels (Pais, 2012). The article concludes by stating that without the valiant and responsible effort of elected officials, citizens and the business community, we may los e this priceless legacy [Florid an Aquifer] that we love and depend on for our livelihood (Dame, 2012)." The close interconnectivity of people to our water bodies goes beyond pollution and runoff rates. The very welfare of our landscapes depends on how we manage our water. From proper management comes healthier ecosystems, safer drinking water, and stormwater that is no longer a hazard, but a natural amenity to the public. Water Management Strategies We ow e it to ourselves, our communities our state and our country to protect our water resources, from how it moves across urban environments to how it infiltrates into the ground. Stormwater p ractices directly affect the groundwater and surrounding water resources, so Best Management Practices ( BMPs ) were developed to help regulate water management practices BMPs work to correct some of the management issues surrounding water, yet stormwater is still often treated as a constantly moving waste product (Kemp, 2009). This means "Let's use imagination and creativity as our springboards of choice to create a paradigm shift in how we live" Pais, The Gainesville Sun Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 43

42 that water is transported across rooftops, roadways, parking lots, curb and gutter systems, drains, a nd sewers, collecting and redistributing pollutants across the land scape. One answer to stormwater management does not include creating bigger and more expensive stormwater management systems ... r ather, it means changing our philosophy and methods to implement true water management systems that actually prevent and trea t stormwater pollutants (Kemp, 2009)." The welfare of the public not only centers on clean water, but maintaining healthy practices that encourage active stormwater management In reference to Florida's water management, Paul Owens of the Orlando Sentine l stated, "Environmental groups and state officials have been sparring for more than a decade over whether Florida is doing enough to protect the stat e 's waterways from pollution. The stakes are huge: The quality of Florida's rivers and springs is critic al to the state's environmen t, economy and water supply... b ut environmental groups contend that the state rules aren't stringent enough to restore Florida waterways degraded by pollution, especially from nutrients in run off from streets, storm drains and septic tanks (Owens 2012) ." Many states across the country are experiencing similar water issues, and it's a concern that affects the public. Former Senator Ed Muskie of Maine made this statement regarding water and our need to restore it: "Can we a fford clean water? Can we afford rivers and lakes and streams and oceans which continue to make possible life on this planet? Can we afford life itself? Those questions were never asked as we destroyed the waters of our nation, and they deserve no answe rs as we finally move to restore and renew them. These questions answer themselves." Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 44

43 Senator Ed Muskie of Maine, arguing for the passage of the Clean Water Act in 1972 The EPA's approach to stormwater management is driven by internal goals and federal requirements ," and they have developed strategies that guide the stormwater related actions EPA takes and help produce results such as reductions in site runoff volumes and improved stormwater quality." (EPA 2012 ) However, the positive effects of such strategies are just beginning to show. Are there more local and proactive approaches to implementing stormwater management strategies that engage community members to the efffects of BMPs? Today, Low Impact Development (LID) strategies have been added to the list of approaches to stormwater management and design as a way to better the health, safety and welfare of the public in a way that is both functional and beneficial to the environment. The aesthetic component of such strategies is still being ad dressed, as there are more and more innovative designs that are beginning to surface. Aesthetic and Emotional Appeal Stormwater is a component of both natural and urban environments that we recognized and experience on a daily basis. Yet, the question of how stormwater contributes to the aesthetics of the landscape is something that is given little thought. History has dictated that stormwater is a byproduct of Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 45

44 urban growth. The more we build, the more stormw ater runoff becomes a nuisance. In 186 9 Frederick Law Olmsted became a p ion eer of stormwater conveyance, when he implemented it in the new c ommunity of Riverside, Illinois (Ferguson and Debo, 1990)." Riverside is a 1600 acre community known for its early design innovations of successful su burbs ( 2011). Scenic views, open space for recreation, curvilinear streets and slopes made for an exceptional living area ( 2011). At the time cars were not yet invented, and horse manure and mud cr eated difficulties for people walking ( Ferguson and Debo, 1990) Olmsted stated there was a nuisance problem, an aesthetic p roblem, a public health problem" and that the "better alternative was to drop the stormwater and all the filth it carried off the streets, into a system of buried pipes (Ferguson and Debo, 1990 ). This water management technique of buried pipes was a state of the art solution to large areas of development. Unfortunately, these pipes discharged into the Des Plaines River (Ferguson a nd Debo, 1990). From the historical overview section, it was learned that m any developments across the country began mimicking the practice by directing pipes to the closest water body (Kemp, 2009). The effects of these actions FIGURE 1.12 Mast er plan of Riverside FIGURE 1.12 Master plan of Riverside. (Source: http://www.riverside.il.us/ ) Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 46

45 t emporarily solved the aesthetic nuisance of standing water in new developments, yet merely redirected the nuisance of pollution to another location Riverside as well as other nearby establishments, eventually contributed to The Des Plaines River becomi ng listed under the Clean Water Act as an impaired water due to urban runoff (EPA Illinois, 2012 ) The appeal of piping the stormwater away was a type of management that is still regularly taught in design more than a century l ater (Ferguson and Debo, 1990). Although our methods of piping stormwater have drastically improved due to our understanding of pollutants and the regulati ons that support clean water, there still seems to be a greater appeal of piping water rather than exposing it. Designs of stormwater control systems are mainly based on high flow rain events and have been "inadequate for mitigating" urban runoff (Davis and McCuen, 2005). Overall, these systems have the purpose of removing and conveying runoff from the site as quickly as poss ible (Davis and McCuen, 2005). In the case of the Des Plaines River and other similar sites across the country BMPs were later enacted, which significantly changed how runoff was managed before discharging int o river s (EPA, Illinois, 2012 ). BMPs have evolved toward crafting devices that filter and capture floating debris or gross visible pollutants with additions such as catch basin inserts, traps, filters, vortex cyclone flow devices, in line Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 47

46 diversion screens, manhole baffles, capture screens and fl oating barriers (Kemp, 2009) (See Fig. 1.13 ). As effective as these systems are with small rain events, they often produce maintenance issues during heavier rain events, which in turn produces a visually unappealing overflow of debris. Filters also hav e to be checked, cleaned, and often replaced over time. Detention and retention basins are larger structures that attempt to comp ensate for larger storm events. A detention basin is an area where excess stormwater is stored or held temporarily and then slowly drains when water levels in the receiving channel recede ( Brayes, 2010 ). A retention basin also stores stormwater, but the storage of the stormwater would be on a more permanent basis This differs greatly from a detention basin, which typically d rains after the peak of the storm flow has passed, sometimes while it is still raining ( Brayes, 2010 ). Retention and detention basins are useful in storing water, yet can often produce concerns to the public. They are often "expensive to build and to ma intain, they tend to control real estate, stir up material during construction, pose liability FIGURE 1.13 BMP catch basin filter before (left) and after (right). (Source: WBjournal, 2012) and (Source: Stormwater BMP Decision Support Tool, 2013) Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 48

47 hazards, are aesthetically unappealing, create mosquito breeding habitat, provide minimal recharge to groundwater, and they promote the re suspens ion of polluta unappealing aesthetics of the basins often come from the nature in which they are designed. Often designed to meet the minimum design requirements, much of the aesthetic and ecological needs of these systems get overlooked. Storm water basins that are designed within the National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) are better suited to BMP standards, yet "fail to attempt to address, much less change, the foundational philosoph aesthetics of BMP standards requires more than just an understanding of the technical and physical changes, it also requires a closer look at the relationships we have with ourselves and the surrounding environment. Aesthetics and Life Essentials The philosophy of stormw ater BMP systems directly relates to what Thayer describes as being a part a human life essentials triangle ( Thayer 1994)." This triangle outlines three essentials of the context, means, and rea sons for living ( See Fig. 1.14 ). All of the essential e lements within our lives that contribute to why, how, and where we live are key to understanding the basic needs of a fulfilling environment. By applying stormwater to this triangle, we begin to see and Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 49

48 understand a n aesthetic and emotional disconnect bet ween our lives and the water that we interact with. One corner of Thayer's human life essentials triangle is the "means for living and survival, first encompassing utilitarian tool use and ultimately, all of technology (Thayer, 1994)." The technology t hat stormwater uses is centered around function; f unction and conveyance. Stormwater is indeed a piece of how we live, yet is not a means for living with water Hidden and misunderstood "the landscape we now inhabit betrays the migration of technology a nd nature away from each other, and away from the center of our collective being (Thayer, 1994). Water within nature, and the technology used to manage it coincide. Visually, this connection is not always effective, but "at the root of technology may lie a hard wired human predisposition to invent tools and use them creatively to solve FIGURE 1.14 and Reasons for Living. (Source: Thayer, 1994) Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 50

49 problems (Thayer, 1994)." Problems, such as water pollution and management. Another corner of the triangle is the "context for life, encompassing our relationship to the earth, atmosphere, artifactual environment, and other living things and beings (ecology in the broadest sense) (Thayer, 1994)." Water sustains life and is a key ingredient in the natural environment. The ecology of our urban environment is fragile, a s we as societies work to design environments that refrain from deterioration. How st ormwater fits within the urban ecological network has proved to be difficult. Increased knowledge of stormwater management has allowed more of an understanding of the re lationship between cities and the natural environment (Davis and McCuen, 2005). However, "costs, current regulations, and public a designs from being implemented (Davis and McCuen, 2005)." Connecting how the technolo gy of stormwater management relates with the context of the urban ecology is a possible reason why public acceptance is not occurring T he means for living and the context for life are some of the more prevalent issues when discussing the success of an ur ban society; however these factors are often so far stretched from each other that the motive for living is lost (Thayer, 1994). It's this motive th at innately drives the public to appreciate their environment. The final corner of the human life ess entials triangle encompasses the "reasons, or motivations for living, including "At the root of technology may lie a hard wired human predisposition to invent tools and use them creatively to so lve problems" Thayer Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 51

50 aesthetic experience, art, and other affective states relating to the quality of our existence (Thayer, 1994)." It is this aesthetic appreciation for stormwater management th at fails to answer why We understand what stormwater does, where it goes, and how it becomes polluted, but do we truly understand why it's not a more omnipresent characteristic in the urban landscape? Could an aesthetic, artistic, and slightly more phil osophical design approach to stormwater management change how societies view water in the landscape? Thayer particularly addresses our connection in the natural landscape by stating, American landscape simultaneously reflects our deep reverence for o ur natural context, our ingrained tendency to solve problems creatively to survive, as well as our discomfort with and apparent inability to tolerate living in a physical world comprised largely of the products of our own creation (Thayer, 1994). Solving problems with stormwater management in creative, visually pleasing ways could indivertibly reconnect Thayer's triangle of life essentials. such similarly innate human mechanism for living in a world of our own creation." Thayer Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 52

51 CHAPTER SUMMARY The historical applications of stormwater management as well as the health, quality, and a esthetic concerns with water management helps to further understand how we as a society address environmental issues in our communities. Our past shows that there have been great technological and governmental strides that push towards a better future for water management. From basic water storage and conveyance through pipes, to the use of BMPs to help regulate some of the stormwater systems, water management is viewed as a necessity for the health, safety and welfare of the public. Water quality and qu antity continue to raise their own sets of concerns as societies increase in size, yet the aesthetic and emotional appeal of our environments also play a significant role in how we make water related decisions. Cities are growing, yet our understanding of stormwater grows with them, leading to more technological advancements, environmental awareness, and ecological benefits. Yet, how do these changes relate to current needs and trends of stormwater in our urban environments? Are cities integrating storm water management into the planning and ecology of the public domain? The following chapter will explore some of the trends, theories, and methods that encompass the planning of stormwater management at the community scale. Chapter One: Introduction

PAGE 53

52 CHAPTER TW O: BACKGROUND

PAGE 54

53 "In the end we will conserve only what we love; we will love only what we understand and we will understand only what we are taught." Babe Dioum Environmentalist,1968

PAGE 55

54 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT NEEDS AND TRENDS The purpose of this section is to give a brief overview on the some of the current needs and trends of stormwater usage and management in the urban environment. How the public responds to these trends, as well as how soc ieties are predicted to adapt to the needs of stormwater is also addressed Urban Effects Stormwater management is regularly impacted by population and urban growth creating a number of different management needs and trends. According to the U.S. Bureau of the Census, the world population is expected to increase from it s currently estimated 7 billion to over 9 billion by 2050 ( U.S. Bureau of the Ce nsus, 2013 ) With this increase in population, Earth's resources are to become more and more strained driv ing societies to reexamine their management strategies. In addition to population, "s everal trends are putting increasing pressure on water supplies: income growth, spatial concentration s of people, the widening range of uses to which water is put, and the need to disperse and to transport waste products of all kinds ( Chrisholm, 2013 ). With all of these population influenced trends combined t he management of water resources will become increasingly complex, especially in regions where precipitation is low, highly seasonal and/or variable ( Chrisholm, 2013 ) T hese regional water resource concerns are mainly centered around the unpredictability of rain "...the management of water resources will become increasingly complex..." Humanity Development Library Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 56

55 and weather events, which makes the design of effective w ater management more difficult. The Nat ional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) recreated the water cycl e based on these predicted changes in the United States and produced a graphic that demonstrates some of these hydrologic changes (See Fig 2.1). Depending on the region, rain events and atmospheric changes greatly impact the amount of sediment and runoff that travels across the landscape. It is difficult to predict exactly when these changes will occur, although understanding the tren ds of water management will help dictate how we as growing societies will address some of these concerns. In addition, understanding the values of societies, and how much they understand these changes is equally as critical. FIGURE 2.1 Projected water cycle changes in the United States. (Source: U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2009) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 57

56 Public Awareness and Values Forty years ago, t he focus of what people want ed from resources management shifted Societies began to move away from the physical performance that enginee rs [ had ] b een trained to provide (James, 1974 ). Instead of this traditional approach there was a new emphasis on social and environmental values that was introduced, creating an interdisciplinary flavor into the water planning efforts in the federal agenci es (James, 1974)." Today, this stands true as the management of water resources is requirin g more creative design s olutions within urban planning. In order to maintain healthy ecosystems, the needs of both urban and rural water requirements "will require hard thought about the priorities for water use ( Chrisholm, 2013 ) ." Having an interdiscipl inary design team of engineers, landscape architects, soil scientists, hydrologists, and other water specialists all focused on these priorities for water is developing into a more common practice. The needs of urban communities require "safety of life an d property from floods, flowing streams for amenity and the environment, and secure quality and quantity of water supplies It is not enough to dispose surface waters into streams during storms... on site stormwater must be managed ( Ferguson and Debo, 199 0)." As a means to protect the quality of local water resources, s tormwater is becoming more integrated into the public realm. Stormwater in public parks is becoming a key design element, in addition to being an amenity. This trend is a Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 58

57 unique way of h andling stormwater management, and "t here is no question that the marriage of stormwater retention and parks will become more com mon in the coming decades, for both ecological and economic reasons (Harnik, 2010)." Stormwater parks as a management solution and recreational location is a relatively new concept that is gaining recognition throughout communities Public awareness of stormwater is one of the main drivers for successful stormwater designs. As this awareness increases, "potentially even more could be done... in some cases boardwalks, benches, and interpretive signage could be added to these natural and manmade marshy areas to put them to double use for walking running, and cycling (Harnik, 2010)." Simple design additions like these attract th e interests of growing communities concerned with local water resources New trends in multipurpose stormwater parks are just recently exploring new approaches such as using these areas for weather playing fields or skateboard parks if they are fitte d with proper warning signage, fencing, and a commitment to hosing down residue following each high water incident (Harnik, 2010)." Other design enhancements are following the "green movement," which includes green roof design, green streets, water storag e, and more permeable surfaces. Especially in America, "cities are today on an upward trajectory... [cities] are enormous and intricate economic engines, but ultimately they are creatures of human free will and respond to people's desires for livable Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 59

58 env ironments (Harnik, 2010)." Growing cities are to be better designed with stormwater in mind and are following a "path toward making modern cities, softer, more beautiful, more sociable more fun, more ecologically sound, and more successful (Harnik, 2010) ." Public amenities with a focus on stormwater are a great benefit, as "s everal writers stress greater citizen awareness and participation as critical to effic ient water resource use (James 1974)." One particular study of the Delaware Basin listed fo ur keys to maintaining effective public participation in the development of water resources as 1) real problems, 2) concerned citizenry, 3) dynamic leadership, and 4) cooperative agencies (James 1974, pg.169)." Public participation is a common practice when creating local awareness on water quality and resource concerns, however, including the public in the design and management of stormwater specifically is not as apparent. PLANNING OF STORMWATER IN OUR COMMUNITIES The purpose of this section is to g ive a brief overview on how societies ethically relate to water concerns, the communication process of engaging the public, and various perspectives on planning communities and environments. S everal successful community engagement studies are discussed th at deal with planning stormwater strategies. In addition "there is no question that the marriage of stormwater retention and parks will become more common in the coming decades... Harnik Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 60

59 several literary dialogues on the pattern language of design, environmental ecology, bioregional thought, and visual communication are related back to methods of effective stormwater design at the community scale. A Water Relationship There is a strong disconnect between water and the human understanding of how we impact water based systems On global, provincial, and community scale s water related issue s often have similar problems of pollutio n, management, regulation, usage, communication, and awareness. Stormwater management is particularly important because it is heavily, if not completely, governed by the practices of humans. Well desig ned stormwater spaces and water based community progr ams that are directly connected to storm water systems can act as frameworks for connecting people to their watersheds. While communities are becoming more urbanized, it is the responsibility of planners and designers to not only focus on stormwater manage ment design, but to involve and engage community members to the effects of such a design. Author Cynthia Barnett references local awareness by stating: "Local water leads to wiser, more ethical use, and makes us good neighbors. But it is also key to the blue revolution for closing the distance between Americans and their water. It reconnects us to water and watersheds --the land that drains to streams and rivers --in the same way Saturday morning farmers' markets have reconnected us to local produce and the men and women who grow it. (Barnett 2011 pg. 223). Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 61

60 Being able to create wiser, more ethical uses of stormwater in a community through design is not a new procedure. However, being able to do so in a manner that promotes interactive and current technologies, is ecologically effective, and is aesthetically pleasing, is. Understanding different societies and how they manage their stormwater within populated areas while integrating community involvement could provide some interesting conclusions. The following passage is taken from the book Man and Water and it introduces this section to our relationship as people to our management of water: "Water resources management suffers as alternatives are overlooked, consequences are unforeseen, the wishe s of the people are misunderstood, formulated policy is ineffectively implemented, or the consequences of installed projects are not recognized. Social scientists need to determine how to do a better job of defining alternatives, predicting consequences, remaining responsive to current objectives, implementing policy, and monitoring effects of implemented policy. The need to express their findings in a manner that effectively communicates with practicing planners and to train working technicians to make t he day to day applications. The planners need to digest the findings, abstract the implications to their work, and change policy as appropriate. The need to improve water resources management relates to the more general issues of how conscious social ch oice can or should be used to direct the development and adoption of technological innovation and of how to improve the probability that the social choices will turn out to be truly in the best long run interest of mankind. Blending the contributions into practical applications will be required, but the most difficult task of all may be getting people from diverse backgrounds to work together. No exercise such as this can hope to do more than provide a pause to reflect and then a little help for doing a f ew things better (James, 1974 pg. 30)." Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 62

61 Improving our water resources comes with the idea that we need to understa nd the importance of management and incorporate public opinion. in the design process. Understanding various means of community engagement, as well as the philosophies of planning communities and natural environments can begin to shape how to apply better stormwater management guidelines. Community Engagement Studies Water Management Study 1: Malm Sweden The City of Malm Sweden i s known for its unique, co operation strateg ies of stormwater BMPs Since the late 1980's, this community has been actively using BMPs but it wasn't until the late 1990's where inhabitants in the Augustenborg started playing a very active role in the pla nning and the design of new s tormwater systems (Urbonas, 2002 ). Stemming from a conc ern for surface water quality, all new developments in Malm are currently planned with special consideration of the drainage of stormwater (Urbonas, 2002 ). Stormwater is viewed as a 'positive resource' in the urban environment, rather than a hinder. However, what makes this notion so successful are the consideration of aesthetics, multiple use and public acceptance of the techn ical solutions (Urbonas, 2002 ). FIGURE 2.2 Malm, Swed en (Source: Courtesy of Google maps) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 63

62 S ustainable stormwater management is a phrase that is commonly used throughout Europe as an aesthetic solution to water quantity and qua lity concerns (Urbonas, 2002 ). Malm was able to carry this concept further by incorporating public participation in th e policy, design, planning and management of stormwater. They developed an official policy document that outlined strategies that supported their stormwater goals. Based o n this document, they invented a new process "from vision to realization of a typi cal sustainable stormwater proj ect in the city (Urbonas, 2002 ), which differs from the more traditional planning approach that was previously used by the city ( See Figure 2.3 and 2.4 ). Various branches of the Swedish city government s including city plan ning, parks, water and FIGURE 2.3 Traditional Planning Approach, Sweden. (Source: Stahre and Geldof 2003) FIGURE 2.4 Vision to Realization Process sustainable stormwater project, Sweden. (Source: Stahre and Geldof, 2003) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 64

63 wastewater branches, all work together to create site specific objectives. Once these objectives are fully integrated in an initial master plan phase, public participation is then integrated into the early stages of design Durin g the design and impleme ntation phase, Malm prioritizes public participation as an important factor to the success of the projects. They seek support from "citizens, schools, and other pressure groups in the area" in addition to "a humble attitude to pub lic demands and requests that will fa cilitate the public acceptance" of a design (Urbonas, 2002 ). Additionally, Malm extends public awareness of their projects by incorporating local media in the promotion of the sustainable stormwater management ideas ( Urbonas, 2002 ). Using the local media, Malm is able to properly promote city meetings, public exhibits and events (See Fig. 2.5 ). This ensures that families, students, public officials, and local organizations are fully aware of the developments that h appen in and around their community. Together, these strategies formulate an integrated planning approached to sustainable stormwater design within Malm (See Fig. 2.4 ). Malm prides itself for recognizing that science an d practice interact intensively [and] science from a distance is not sufficient FIGURE 2.5 Swedish public exhibit on community sustainability. (Source: Lund University, 2013) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 65

64 (Stahre All of these values that contribute to planning process, and are key elements to communicate to the public. Formulating a vision from t people enthusiastic, like citizens, politicians, and people from This integration initiates collaborative discussion, a collective sense of value, a clear understanding of local ecology and aesthetic preferences, and in turn, a successful, sustainable, stormwater management design (See Fig. 2. 6 ). By incorporating aesthetic values into the integrated planning process, Malm is able unite the city planning departments, ci ty environmental departments, the park departments, and the recreation departme nts on a common visual vision for the community before confr onting the public (See Fig. 2.7 community is something that effectively creates city spaces that are ecologically functional, profitable, technologically advance, recreational, and aesth etically pleasing (See Fig. 2.8 ). FIGURE 2.6 Swedish values associated with sustainable stormwater drainage systems. (Source: Stahre and Geldof, 2003) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 66

65 FIGURE 2.7 Stormwater management values in Malm, Sweden (Source: Urbonas, 2002) FIGURE 2.8 Housing complex designed to manage stormwater in Malm, Sweden (Source: Courtesy of International Sustainable Solutions. < http://www.djc.com/news/ae/11165761.html >) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 67

66 Study 2: Australian Water Research Facility The International Water Center conduc ted a study in 2008 on public participation and community engagement for water resource management in the Pacific. This report specifically addresses community engagement as a key element in collaborative w ater management for government agencies and non g overnment organizations for cities. As a result, this study sheds light on how to have an effective participation process. Public participation and community engagement are two phrases that are often used interchangeably. However, there are some slight differences worth noting. According to the International Water Centre, p phrase of involving the public, and referred mainly to decision making roles with the public ( Ross, Powel, and Hoverman might not be the sole decision maker or manager (Ross, Powel, The public has a much larg er voice in community engagement situations, where there is a stronger focus on process and practices (Aslin and Brown, 2005). There guided by a commitment to a common set of values, principles an d criteria and particularly on motiv ating the public to take action, thus motivating people to do more than just share a decision [and] g overnment is not the sole decision maker (Aslin Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 68

67 and Brown, 2005). Community engagement, in turn, has a strong influe nce of the success of water management plans due to its ability to involve people at the community scale. Involving people in the design and management of water allows for: the opportunity to make better decisions, better public acceptance and complian ce with the decisions made, and social justice (Ross, Powel, and Hoverman, 2008). These reasons for public participation expand upon the process by which communities grow. With a range of public opinions and ublic to go beyond participation in a decision to be made by government, to become motivated to support a new perspective or issue and take People tend to take ownership of their own creations or contr ibutions. It also brings about a strong sense of community pride that otherwise would have been more difficult to achieve. However, a question of how much public participation is needed wit h decisions is often a concern when trying to make well planned r esults The ladder of public participation is a concept developed by American Planner, Sherry Arnstein. (See Fig. 2.9) Arnstein attempted to create a scale that shows the level of citizen power. This concept explores a range government consulting to the public but not necessarily heeding The "Community engagement enables the public to go beyond participation in a becom e motivated to support a new Ross, Powel, and Hoverman Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 69

68 problem exists in the extremity of such an outline of shared power and roles. The idea of manipulation to citizen control suggests that there is less of a balance of participatory government and public should vary according to the issue and circumstances (Ross Powel, and Hoverman, 2008). Another approach, created by the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2), presents a unique public impact as the processes move from informing through consulting, involving, to collaborating and empowering. (See Fig. 2.10 ). From inform to empower, t his approach more FIGURE 2.9 Participation. (Source: Ross, Powel and Hoverman, 2008) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 70

69 effectively addresses the possible levels of involvement, in addition to how the public should be treated during each. As previ ously mentioned, the level of public participation may depend on the project, but it is also important to know how to properly engage the public. Organization, clear goals, and genuine interest in public opinions will drive the engagement process. Howeve r, other k ey considerations when engaging the public include the following: 1. Be inclusive all members of society should be open to participate, no matter the age, race, social or cultural differences. The engagement process should be held in locations where they feel at ease to speak freely. FIGURE 2.10 IAP2 Spectrum of Public P articipation. (Source: Ross, Powel and Hoverman, 2008) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 71

70 2. Balance out differences in power facilitate discussions to encourage the less advantaged to speak out. 3. Allow enough time give people time, or extra time if needed, to understand what is asked of them. This all ows more opinions to be heard 4. Facilitation place a neutral facilitator, or team of facilitators, with skills and knowledge of the issue, at the location of engagement to assist the process. 5. Capacity building provide briefing and discussion to all par ties involved. This allows for more effective participation 6. Identifying benefits for participants consider all perspectives; why should they participate, how can they gain from having a say. 7. Sufficient resourcing enable people to participate. This m ay include travel costs, replaced wages if taking off work, child care, etc. (Ross, Powel, and Hoverman, 2008) These considerations are some of the basic requirements needed for a succes sful public participation event; single recipe for a good participation process: it is best to useful to seek and accept local advice while designing the Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 72

71 community engagement for sto rmwater management, it would be best to figure out exactly what kind of information is being sought and keeping it clear and simplified for a range of people to effectively voice their opinions. The amount of public involvement of an issue may depend on t he situation, but t he provide would prove to be useful when attempting to get the most amount of information out of participants in a given timeframe. Study 3: Albury, Wodonga, Australia A ccording to the Water Sensitive Urban Design Program, Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) is about construction and retrofitting of urbanized landscapes are more sensitive to the natural water cycle (WSUD 2013 the United States Low Impact Development (LID) design approach, or the Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) of the United Kingdom, WSUD is specific to Australia. In Albury Wodonga, Australia, community engagement is begi nning to play an important role in the success of WSUD. The technologies that expand the success of water sensitive cit i es research on how to engage with and support our communities in the area of WSUD at a [small scale] has been done to date Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 73

72 (Dahlenburg and Morison, 2009 ). The mentality that solves complex problems. and professionals with our communities need to be broadened found ), made more collaborative, and allow the community to influence and participate in deriv ing locally appropriate solutions a range of complex, water issues. No matter the geographic location, communities are facing the need for more community interaction. Whether WSUD, LID, or SUDS, community engagement in the realm of water management is a necessity across the world. Transitioning to a water sensitive city is a process, and is graphically represented in the following diagram (See Fig. 2.11 ). If communities can work toward th e integration of public ideas to achieve community goals of better water management, there would be a greater outcome of cities successfully managing water resources. Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 74

73 FIGURE 2.11 Transition to a Water Sensitive City. (Source: Dahlenburg and Morison, 2009) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 75

74 Planning Communities and Environments From the previous case studies, one learns that there are several effective means for cities to utilize cooperative approaches of community stormwater design. Yet, to understand what prompts these cooperative efforts, the following perspectives give a bit of insight into the collective understandi ng of why people relate so passionately to a place, how patterns emerge from a place, and the relationship of ecology and visual preference to a p lace. Christopher Alexander A Pattern Language Communities consist of a wide variety of design elements. T hese elements contribute to social, environmental, or physical needs of society, and in turn can begin to create a series of design patterns. According to architect and professor, Christopher Alexander, t ogether these patterns can create a language for de sign. Alexander is most known for his architectural accomplishments literature philosophie s, and viewpoints on design. He recognized the need for a pattern language and emphasized how nature based relations and solutions are found within individu al patt erns (Alexander, 1977) The language, as he described it, is a common pattern language that all people in society share when making towns and buildings become alive (Alexander, 1977) The elements in this language are entit ies or patterns that describe pr oblem s that occurs repeatedly throughout society Combi ned, all of the entities have Chapter T wo: Background

PAGE 76

75 corresponding design solutions that intertwine with each other in a dynamic that communicates an entire language (Alexander, 1977 ) This common pattern language is a si ngular suggestion of an ever evolving language that society can manipulate accordingly. This method of creating patterns that can combine together to make an entire language of design patterns is an extremely beneficial tool to have in design, especially when designing guidelines for communities. Alexander makes a one suggestion of a language. From research and observation, this was the most complete basic set of a pattern language he could produce for towns, buildings, and other public spaces However, improve these patterns will put their energy to work, in this task of finding more true, more profound invariants and hope that gradually these more true patterns, which are slowly discovered, as time goes on, will enter a common language, ke a framework, these patterns are th e foundation for what environments are evolving to become. The abilit y for these patterns to change can not only challenge communities, but others have indeed built upon this language, generally for a specific focus. build a thing you cannot merely build that think in isolation, but must also repair the world around it, and within it, so that the larger world at that one place becomes more coherent, and more Christopher Alexander Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 77

76 When b uilding spaces, one must merg e patterns in combinations that make an environment functional. Alexander expands upon this branching th ing you cannot merely build that thing in isolation, but must also repair the world around it, and within it, so that the larger world at that one place becomes more coherent, and more whole; and the thing which you make takes its place in the web of natu Designs are not meant to be separate entities within communities. Communities are spaces to live and interact with society, which designs that merge from one environment to another. these patterns allows for a natural building of ideas as he breaks down various scales of design patterns from regional, to community, and down to individual elements. Depending on what the user is looking for, one could easily flip through these patterns and begin to formulate a language that is specific to the design challenge at hand. A series of loosely created g raphic drawings accompany (See Fig. 2.12 15 ) Stormwater is an integral part o f design at every scale, from regional runoff to residential runoff. Stormwater is a part of communities and has a unique set of patterns of its own when integrated in society. Alexander briefly covers various water pattern within the language of buildin g and planning. Some of these patterns include access to water, green streets, pools and streams, still water, and roof gardens (See Fig. Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 78

77 2.15 ). However, this portion of his langu age could be expanded further t o relate directly to some of the present d ay concerns with stormwater. The potential to improve upon these patterns gives a crucial angle to a pattern language of community water management. FIGURE 2.12 Pattern Language Graphic Example: Subculture Boundaries (Source: Alexander, 1977) FI GURE 2.13 Pattern Language Graphic Example: Raised Walk (Source: Alexander, 1977) FIGURE 2.14 Pattern Language Graphic Example: Quiet Backs (Source: Alexander, 1977) FIGURE 2.15 Pattern Language Graphic Example: Pools and Streams (Source: Alexander, 1977) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 79

78 Joan Nassauer Landscape Ecology Ecology and aesthetics are closely interrelated within envir onments. Joan Nassauer, a professor and expert in Landscape Architecture and landscape ecology, explores unique linkages between communities and how aesthetics play a role in design. Nassauer ecause aesthetic experience has so deeply and persistently influenced nearly experience can provide penetrating insights into why people make cer tain landscape patterns (Nassauer, 1997). The evolution of these landscape patte rns through the course of history has indeed changed how our present day society treats our water within the landscape. As Christopher Alexander has mentioned, these patterns build the language of the land which can be expressed at different s cales. At t he community scale, e see aesthetic tradition as the embodiment of community values and, consequently, the basis for a language that can be used to provoke change and sustain ecological quality (Nassauer, Both Alexander and Nassauer acknowledge a pattern language in our societies. However, it is Nassauer that expands upon this strategic lever for changing landscape patterns (Nassauer, 1997) in The maintenance a nd care of our landscapes is part of our aesthetic based culture. Our s cenic landscapes can often be described as being ecologically healthy, when they are instead "We see aesthetic tradition as the embodiment of co mmunity values and, consequently, the basis for a language that can be used to provoke change and sustain ecological Joan Nassauer Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 80

7 9 care and landscape mainte and social meaning: stewardship, a work ethic, personal pride, the ecological knowledge to support care related decisions, our landscape ecology suffers. Th ere are benefits in knowledge that greatly enhances the aesthetic experience of landscapes, whether in the urban or natural setting. The more people understand their environment and the degree of care that it needs, the greater the success of cultural sus tainability will occur. So how do the impacts of stormwater contribute to the ecology of water in an urban environment? Can cultural sustainability guide runo ff innovations that not only attract human attention, but maintain the care and interest of people in their everyday lives? Nassauer also evoke enjoyment and approval, are more likely to be health of the landscape requires that humans enjoy and take care potential to take ownership of their landscapes by appreciating the ecological contributions that stormwater could have, and the A sense of ownership over our land, streets, neighborhoods, parks, and towns equally prompt landscape Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 81

80 aesthetics to go b eyond the acceptable tending of the land so that aesthetic decisions can become intrinsically ecological decisions (Nassauer, 1997) People care about the land and want good ecological health for their communities. There is nobod y who would want the opposite. Yet, ecological decisions are difficult. When attempting to align aesthetics and ecology in landscape design, the two most significant intrinsic properties of landscapes are landscape scale and landscape change (Nassauer, 1 997). concept of landscape be large enough to accommodate flow of energy, materials, or species among heterogeneous ecosystems She uses the example of wetlands to explain how a wetland does little good by itself, but connected to the surrounding water bodies and uplands, it is one of the most important elements to most small and larger scale natural processes (Nassauer, 1997). A connective landscape is critical for the entire ec ology of a region. from one ecosystem to another and to the growth and inevitable deaths of some individuals and communities and their Ecosystems are evo lving lifecycles, full of natural changes. This presents an aesthetic challenge for those wanting an unobstructed, scenic landscape. Nature is normally perceived as messy, while community aesthetic values tend to encourage green lawns, Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 82

81 minimal weeds, ra ked open spaces and no standing water. So what modifies this community aesthetic? Nassauer highlights care and management of the landscape as the key to an evolving community aesthetic. Intelligent care require s knowledge of ecological health, but vivid care signifies the existence of ecological health by its attractiveness (Nassauer, 1997). So, in order to align aesthetics and ecology, we must incorporate care into the design strategies, landscapes, and policy with an awareness of what people enjoy and value in the appearance of the landscape now (Nassauer, 1997). People care fort what they love. If water is an essential aesthetic and ecological benefit to a community, people will do more to care for it. To recognize the awareness of what people enj oy and value takes understanding the human connection to water. This If stormwater was more effectively revealed in the landscape as an e cological benefit and protected from methods of conveyance that add to pollution, perhaps the aesthetic of stormwater innovations will evolve to be a part of the community aestheti c. ecological fun ction, and the landscape architects have these actions toward ecological function to protect it or to reveal it advances the evolution of new aesthetic conventions art has aimed to rev eal ecological function, and the landscape architects have emphasized ecological revelation in their Joan Nassauer Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 83

82 for the landscape (Nass The effectiveness of this new genre is spurring ecological changes across the country. A successful case of evolving community aesthetics occurred in the regions surrounding the Phalen Chain of Lakes in Minnesota. The need for better water quality created both vivid and intelligent care changes in the urban landscapes from a new watershed ecosystem management plan developed by six different municipalities (Nassauer, 1997) Stormwater was designed to be reintegrated into the urban landscape through gardens that demonstrate the cleaning of water before entering wetlands (Nassauer, 1997) The public was able to visually see and understand the processes being used to change the water quality issues of the area, giving knowledge to ecological e ffects. Wetland parks were also designed to further build connections to the landscapes at a larger scale ( See Fig. 2.16 ) L andscape architects worked with residents to have stormwa ter infiltrate into the ground at smaller scales thus empowering people to take ownership of water on their own properties (Nassauer, 1997). Schools, families, and FIGURE 2.16 Phalen Wetland Park Master Plan (Source: Nassauer, 1997) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 84

83 children are all benefitting from the cultural aesthetic that is evolving around a water quality caus e in this area. Socially, people are compelled to follow th e trends set by ecological significance and aesthetic expectations (Nassauer, 1997). This same practice can develop in communities everywhere, adding to a continuous evolution of an ecological pattern language. Especially in rural communities, maintainin g an ecological and cultural resource system can be accomplished (2) education of the general public toward understanding the rural landscape, and (3) visionary legislation and effective loc al land use guidelines with innovative implementation (Coen, Therefore, growing communities can benefit from guidelines that address the knowledge of local ecology, the innovative approaches to design, and the evolving patter ns of stormwater. Robert Thayer Bioregional Culture, Technology, and Nature The challenges with water at the local scale is that p eople should know more about it, where it comes from, where Lan dscape Architect Robert Thayer talked about bioregional thinking in his book Life Place and addressed the idea of bioregional culture, celebrating the spirit of place, spreading local wisdom, and taking personal responsibility for our surroundings (Thayer 2003). Thayer overlaps upon a strong Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 85

84 message that Nassauer stressed, by affirming how take care of places, one place at a time, are key to the future of humanity and all livi Thayer elaborates on Putah Creek country, California and his personal connection to the land there, something in which many people have to areas that mean the most to them. For Thayer, his life place was in Putah Creek count ry Thayer defines a life place or bioregion as a place that connects natural place, awareness, knowledge, wisdom, affection, stewardship, sustainability, and, most important, action, A nother reoccurring theme is the connection from caring about a place and the action of managing the land. E very region has an obligation to their place and the water within that place. Sustainable water management is only the first step for a urban envi ronment s. Having people play a role in the design and management of their local stormwater is a way of merging participation and place. therefore, is a very general hypothesis: that a mutually sustainable future for hum ans, other life forms, and earthly systems can best be achieved by means of a spatial framework in which people live as rooted, active, participating members of a reasonably scaled, naturally bounded, ecologically defined territory, or life place (Thayer, Are there factors that Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 86

85 are preventing humans from achieving this kind of connection to the land? earlier book, Grey World, Green Heart landscape image is addressed in terms of the human love of the ations, actions, and reactions to everyday surroundings. mentioned in the previous chapter, integrates technology as a logy and the a esthetics of that environment (Thayer, 1994). Technology alters landscapes and has become a part of our lives, either in technophilia, technology is associated with our technological connections to or away from nature (See Fig. 2.17 ). FIGURE 2.17 Triangle of Conflict in the American landscape. (Source: Thayer, 1994) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 87

86 The evolution of this Triangle of Conflict is a product of our own evolution from nature to technology, as expressed in the following timeline (See Fig. 2.18 ). As this timeline explains, our relationship to technology is often times disconnected from earlier views of technology being a part of design. Reestablishing the post modern triangle into effective design practices requires a further breakdown of possibil ities. FIGURE 2.18 technology. (Source: Thayer, 1994) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 88

87 The human response to the post modern triangle dilemma of nature and technology has three possible outcomes according to Thayer : denial, accep tance, and action (See Fig. 2.19 ). The outcome of action is the preferred choice when wanting to inco rporate technology into a means of sustainable landscape design through transparent means (Thayer, 1994). In other words, technology could be used to enhance the nature of stormwater in a way that encourages people to conserve runoff water and avoid the c ontinual pollution of water. Designing for stormwater would then require a clear understanding of how technology is viewed. FIGURE 2.19 Responses to current state of dissonance between nature and technology in the landscape. (Source: Thayer, 1994) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 89

88 There are two main values that Thayer discusses: surface and core. that one can readily see and sense the interaction by which one engages the landscape at its most immediate level (Thayer, ecological properties of the landscape, or the way in which the landsc ape operatively connects with the larger ecological (See Fig. 2.20 and 2.21 ). The core values are what drive us to stay connected to the landscape, and enable a life pl ace to form. However, if core pro perties are visible but inaccessible, landscapes become transparent (Thayer, 1994). This would be the same as seeing the ecological benefits of low impact design in an urban setting, yet not being able to enact the practices. Opaque landscapes are differ ent in that they occur when the ecological and technological functions are both inaccessible (Thayer, 1994). An example of this would be seeing a fence that separates you from an enhanced wetland. You could see the FIGURE 2.20 Surface and core properties of landscapes. (Source: Thayer, 1994) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 90

89 wetland through the fence, but know no thing about its benefits. Congruent landscapes are where the surface and core values intertwine, and what is seen does not contradict with what one ge ts from it (Thayer, 1994) In terms of effective stormwater design, this kind of landscape actually invo lves the viewer in understanding the small scale and large scale benefits. A green roof, for instance would visibly become part of a roof and lowers the temperature of the building from the inside, but reaches the core understanding of water collection an d ecological connectivity. The final type of landscape is incongruent landscapes where surface and core properties are incompatible FIGURE 2.21 Surface and core relationships. (Source: Thayer, 1994) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 91

90 and contradictory to each other. This could be explained with the design of a weir system in which people do not under stand the benefits of such technology. Stormwater management and design should work to create congruent landscapes that engage the public in aesthetic and sensory values while simultaneously allowing ecological and technological properties to be apparen t. The historic increase in complexity of core, as described from th e water droplet model (Fig. 2.18 Thayer, 1994), as well as an increase in the incongruity of modern landscapes is creating visual and knowledge based crisis (Thayer, 1994). It is the co re values that keep our society moving in a sustainable living lifestyle, yet there is a growing demand for more surface values (Thayer, 1994) Communities must therefore strive to maintain a balance of these two values in order for our natural environmen t to flourish with our built environments Kaplan and Kaplan Design with People The works of Kaplan and Kaplan focus on the relationships of people to nature, design and management opportunities to bridge the gap between these two, and the process by wh ich de signers can engage the public ( Kaplan, of patterns in the landscape was revisited by Kaplan, Kaplan and the environment and how people experience or react to them Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 92

91 (Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, 1998). explored possible design solutions that are appropriate to locally based themes and problems. Similarly to Alexander, the language of patterns are intend ed to be combined together to produce solutions that are specific to any given scenario (Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, 1998). In addition to the varieties of patterns, Kaplan, Kaplan and Ryan elaborate on preferences and the importance of understanding the ne eds of the public. One design and management approach that Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan developed is using preference to evaluate environmental scenes and natural settings. A preference matrix shown in the following graphic, is used in th eir approach to un derstand and explore the information that can be extracted from a scene with two dimensional and three dimensional qualities (See Fig. 2.22 ). In a two dimen sional plane, people can view a particular image and quickly assess the basics of grouping, numbers and placement (Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, 1998) In a three dimensional plane, people look deeper into an image to allow themselves to imagine what it would be like to be part of that scene (Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, 1998) Coherence FIGURE 2.22 2 D and 3 D Preference Matrix. (Source: Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, 1998) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 93

92 and legibility are used to understand an environment in terms of organization and distinctiveness (Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, 1998) Complexity and mystery contains information in the image that provokes further exploration, either by the variety of elements or the cues that are visible (Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, 1998) This preference matrix begins to suggest the complexity of analyzing images. However, it also highlights images as being tools for understanding how people think and feel abou t a scene. Images are a power re sources for collecting public preferences, but familiarity is another factor that residents of a particular space must also recognize. When it comes to building spaces bas ed off of preferred scenes, it is important to u nderstanding the relationship betwe en the different levels of preference and familiarity (See Fig. 2.23 ). When a particular scene is highly preferred, it can either attract a FIGURE 2 .23 Familiarity and Preference matrix. (Source: Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, 1982) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 94

93 sense of amazement and intrigue or a sense of comfort and identity. Much like how Robert Thayer described a life place as being an area you physically and emotionally identify with, it is the combination of high preference and high familiarity that begins to create that sense. Otherwise, spaces either become foreign and strange or boring and unat tractive. Kaplan an d Kaplan elaborate on familiarity and preference by stating, familiarity, the mental en tities become increasingly compact, increasingly discrete and increasingly responsive t activation in the absence of what they rearrangement and recombination of the elements of thought that we tend to associate with insight and By creating environments that are highly preferred and familiar from the act of exploration, play can be introduced as one of the most beneficial outcomes for public spaces Knowing how to collect preferences for various environments is something Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan also thought to be equally as important as analyzing the results. the exchange of information [which includes] findin g out about Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 95

94 outdoor experiences satisfying (Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, The exchange of information is key to collecting the opinions of the public, educating the public on current is sues, and relating the information learned from the public back to those who make design decisions. Challenges to recognize in this process include: 1.) relation of information to what the individual already knows; 2.) dealing with information that may be upsetting; and 3.) quantity and quality of information (Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, 1998). Communication works in all forms of interactions. If you are telling a story, the listener is story that is of interest to them, and if you keep it fairly short and to the point. When engaging the public, gaining feedback should be an enjoyable process for the participant. The method must be and one must find ways to obta in public input that are strengths and concerns (Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, to where the people are king residents to FIGURE 2.24 Community festival with photo boards. (Source: Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, 1998) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 96

95 participation. (See Fig. 2.24 ). V isual forms of information not only support the verbal forms communication, but th ey attract interest. Photographs present various solutions and options to citizens, when desiring public preference (Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, 1998). Through this citizens can learn about the range of possibilities and can contribute their concern s (Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, This range of possibilities can be expressed with photo questionnaires or visual alternatives of the same scene. Visual alternatives help communicate design issues and scenarios instead of Kaplan, and Ryan, 1998). (See Fig. 2.25) By having these Visual preference surve ys can differ in style, but are often used effectively to have citizens rank photographs based on a preference scale from a high preference to a low preference. FIGUR E 2.25 Alternative plaza designs with and without a proposed sculpture. (Source: Kaplan, Kaplan, and Ryan, 1998) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 97

96 In the case of stormwater management, it is an important step to gauge the community prefere nce of various stormwater techniques. Feedback from residents can not only reveal design patterns that emerge from visual preference surveys and visual alternative scenarios, but it can simultaneously educate the public on possibilities within their commu nity. VISUAL PREFERENCE MODELS OF MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES Based on the community engagement studies and perspectives of pattern language, ecology, bioregionalism and designs with people in mind, a curiosity of visual preference models might emerge. Kapl an and Kaplan spoke specifically about engaging the public to understand a collective community preference on a subject. Therefore, this section evaluates some successful examples of cities that used a visual preference survey with their community engagem ent efforts in hopes of better understanding the thoughts and opinions of their citizens. Study 1: Peachtree City, Georgia Peachtree City, Georgia decided to use a Visual Preference Survey as one of th e tools for the public to supply feedback on city planning and design alternatives (Peachtree Comp. Plan, 2007). This approach was highly successful and proved to be an excellent model for developing design guidelines for the city. Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 98

97 However, what made th is approach so successful was their methodology of collecting information from kick off meetings, to the use of a Visual Preference Survey, and finally with Comment Boards. On seven separate occasions during 2007, public forums were held in each of the Pe achtree which allowed the community to understand the need for updating the Comprehensive Plan. At these public forums, community members gathered together and were able to voice their opinions at a kick off meeting then take a the Visual Pre ference Survey designed by urban designers and landscape architects in Virginia. (See Fig 2.26 ). The survey consisted of a series of images used to illustrate various options for development, infrastructure, streetscapes, screening, landscape features, and other elements which might be found in the villages of Aberdeen, Glenloch, Braelinn, Kedron, West, and Industrial Park (Peachtree Comp Plan, 2007). The city recognized the value of this kind of survey as being able to gather a range of opinions, a s hared common ground of interests, and community desires with the objective of defining a vision for the future (Peachtree Comp. Plan, 2007). The Visual Preference Survey presented a total of 26 questions, with the last 20 questions asking participants each of a series of photos in a common category, on a scale of 3 images that were used for this portion of the survey effectively Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 99

98 demonstrated a range of design possibilities rangin g from subtle designs to more prominent ones (Peachtree Comp. Plan, 2007). An online version of the survey was also available to citizens via the city website, resulting in a total of 137 participant responses. The following data demonstr ates how the pho tos were ranked: 1. Photo rankings were shown using three figures. The sum simply adds (or subtracts) 137 completed surveys, the highest sum possible would be 411 (+3*137), the lowest 411 ( 3*137). 2. When a neutral value of 0 is entered, it neither adds to nor subtracts from the sum. 3. The mode is the numerical ranking ( 3, 2, 1, 0, +1, +2, or +3) selected the most number of times. While this is helpful in seeing a majority preference it does not show the second or third most common ranking, which may be an opposing preference. 4. The mean or average, divides the sum by the total number of responses, giving an accurate reading of overall preference on the scale 3 to +3. Some results show clear or negative or posit ive responses (as demonstrated by a mean closer to 3 or +3), Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 100

99 while others show either a neutral or polarized response (as demonst rated by a mean closer to zero) (Peachtree Comp. Plan, 2007) This particular method of photo rankings seemed to be one of the most effective ways of analyzing the response. In the survey results, multi use paths, open spaces, and neighborhoods ranked the highest following recreation, shopping, and the workplace. Other visual preference rankings revealed pedestrian scaled environments that encourage social a nd environmental interactions, as well as promote small town character. This survey did more than just acquire visual FIGURE 2.26 Peachtree Visual Preference Survey Sample (Source: Peachtree Comp. Plan, 2007) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 101

100 preferences for the community; it brought attention to some of the design considerations that were happening locally. By doing so, the city also wanted to collect any additional concerns citizens had regarding certain imag es or topics pertaining to these images. O ne of the unique characteristics of this particular means of public participation includ es the use of a Comment Board. At each public meeting, community members were able to add additional comments to a 4 x 8 foot Comment Board with 26 different topic blocks. Some of these topics included natural resource management, streetscapes, redevelop ment, recreational facilities, and buffers and landscaping. Based on these topics, the survey, and the kickoff meeting presentations, participants were encouraged to comment on any concerns or thoughts they may have. These written comments provided usefu l feedback which reflected the majority of public opinions. Some of the feedback that was provided on this board included additional places citizens liked or dislike, thoughts on future development, requirements that developers and builders should or shou ld not do, as well as proposed themes for the city. Due to the range of comments, both positive and negative, this comment board added an extremely useful means of collecting FIGURE 2.27 Public Comment Board (Source: Peachtree Comp. Plan, 2007) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 102

101 community preference information. (Peachtree Comp. Plan, 2007) Overall, the vis ual preference survey and the comment board enabled Peachtree City to have a thorough understanding of the community needs and concerns, in additional to a better Comprehensive Plan. Study 2: Somerville, Massachusetts In Somerville, Massachusetts, a clos er look was given to local planning and building development appearances. In an attempt to get more community input, the city initiated a kick off meeting on October 17 th 2012, with the title of Somerville by Design At this meeting, a visual preference survey was The survey generated over seventy responses from community members The way this visual preference survey was structured was unique in its execution. While sitting at tables, p articipants were asked to sort through sixty photographs of urban buildings and streetscapes and evaluate the images based on preference (Somerville, 2012) (See Fig. 2.28 ). The photos were arranged in a series of ca tegories based on building type: 1 story commercial, 2 story mixed use, 3 story mixed use, commercial house, and infill housing (Somerville, 2012). The sorting of the photos required participants to group the images into two piles of preferred and not pre ferred for their neighborhood In addition, FIGURE 2.28 Example of one image used in the visual preference survey, comment s included. (Source: Somerville, 2012) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 103

102 they were asked to write comments about why those images (See Fig. 2.29 ). Engaging the community in a way that was comfortable, fun and above all, simple in approach, allowed the cit y to begin a better urban design framework for each neighborhood. The question of why was key to understanding trends in preferences and clarified any misconceptions as to the decisions the participants made. In designing a visual preference survey that caters to the design needs of stormwater management, answering the questions of why people prefer one image over another is a useful element to then creating effective management guidelines. Also, by allowing people to have a limited number of choices to classify the images, cuts down on confusion and allows for more time to leave thoughtful comments. Study 3: Lick Run: Cincinnati, Ohio Protection of the Lick Run watershed around Cincinnati, Ohio required input from the use of a visual preference survey a and priorities for proposed solutions in the watershed ( Cincinnati 2011). Currently, about 1.7 billion gallons of raw FIGURE 2.29 Visual Preference Survey with Group Discussion. (Source: Somerville, 2012) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 104

103 sewage and stormwater overflow into local creek systems in the Lick Run wate rshed. The opinions of community members needed to be heard in order to move forward with new water management strategies. Thanks to new regulations, community outreach, and design changes, a new master plan for Lick Run is now implemented. The commu nity outreach was overwhelmingly successful for the project, especially with the use of display boards that visually explained issues with the watershed and an additional visual pre ference survey. (See Fig. 2.30 ). Over 300 participants were able to voice their opinions and multiple showed trends of desired natural ecology and stormwater sp ecific designs. (See Fig. 2.31 presentation was one of the most awe inspirin g in terms of collecting community input. FIGURE 2.30 Visual Preference Survey display boards. (Source: Cincinnati, 2011) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 105

104 FIGURE 2.31 Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 106

105 DESIGN GUIDELINES Visual preference surveys have the ability to reveal patterns and design preferences that can lead to the creation of better design guidelines for communiti es. This section will give an overview of the purpose and function of guidelines, how to develop and distribute them, as well as a summary from an interview conducted with author and stormwater specialist Larry W. Mays. Purpose and Function According a consistent framework for high quality development and environment. However the purpose of stormwater guidelines is more specific. These guidelin es are normally made to educate the user on the design possibilities that surround the implementation of drainage systems, either in urban or non urban environments. S tormwater design guidelines can function as anything from highly technical hydraulic cal culations to Interview Stormwater Specialist Larry W. Mays In hopes of gaining more insight on the process of deve loping stormwater guidelines, a telephone interview was conducted with author and stormwater specialist, Larry W. Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 107

106 Mays, on February 13, 2013. Mays is the author of Stormwater Collection Systems Design Handbook and Urban Stormwater Management Tools as well as several other research publications. (See Appendix C for Interview Ques tions). In speaking with Mays, it was clear that the main function of design guidelines caters to the needs of the user, students (Mays Interview 2013). Mays wrote his stormwater books with engineers in mind, covering as many technical aspects of stormwater design as possible. However, after learning the specifics of my research, he recognized that an audience of government officials and landscape architects would need a different set of tools. For my research it was am I trying to achieve ? what does the user need from the guidelines ? (Mays Interview, 2013) Do I want to inspire new stormwater des igns with graphic illustrations or direct the use rs to the next step of technical information elsewhere? Mays suggested that a slight combination of the two would be interesting to explore: an informative set of guidelines that walk city planners through approaches of stormwater (both historically and currently) as well as a graphic source of ideas that somewhat inspire landscape architects and planners to want to look further into how it could be done (Mays Interview, 2013). When asked how to begin the guideline writing process, he mentioned that t ailo ring the information in guidelines or in Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 108

107 handbooks to a specific audience is extremely beneficial, not only for the user, but to the writer as well (Mays Interview, 2013). Once you have your user clearly defined, writer for the most part a s how to proceed. There is no right or wrong way to create guidelines, it just depends on what works best for obtaining the information you need and reformatting that information into a usable tool (Mays Interview, 2013). In captivating an audience, May s mentioned that m ore so than often, stormwater handbooks are all pretty much the Interview 2013). If the function is to provide engineers with detailed guidelines that meet city regulations, you need it to be this way (Mays I nterview, 2013). However, for wanting to better communicate the possibilities of stormwater, g uide lines can equally function as more graphic sources of stimulus to provoke ideas (Mays Interview, 2013). It just depends on the goals and objectives of a par ticular handbook of guidelines. In reference to visual preference surveys, Mays found the process to be a creative approach to not only developing guidelines, but also as a means to educate the users in a creative fashion. By this, Mays imagined the po ssibilities of introducing guidelines with a historical outlook on stormwater management, followed by guidelines that encompass some of the strategies found in the visual preference survey. Overall, M ays was a useful source in understanding how stormwater guidelines could be created and used with an Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 109

108 approach that caters to the needs of the user was an interesting basis to continue with. Not only does this approach keep the user in mind, but it doe s not restrict the writer to a pre developed notion of the guideline writing process. Development Methods D evelop ing stormwater guidelines for communities can be a flexible process he bottom line is, you learn by doing (Mays Interview, 2 combination of different sources, including already existing guidelines or literature, community surveys, master plans, or handbooks. In the case of stormwater design guidelines for the City of San Francisco, these gui delines emerged from Better Streets Plan and the Sewer System Master Plan. (San Francisco 2009 ). (See Fig. 2.32). Local storm drainage technical as hydraulic manuals can sometimes be, however, looking through exist ing urban drainage documents can kick start some of the design basics needed when presenting stormwater innovations to the public (Mays Interview, 2013). FIGURE 2.32 Stormwater design guid elines for LID. (Source: San Francisco, 2009) Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 110

109 Distribution and Use Stormwater design handbooks are not often used by city planners or landscape architects as a means to understand how to incorporate public opinion in the design of stormwater systems Highly technical guidelines dominate the market of stormwater handbooks simply due to their effectiveness in allowing engineers and designers to des ign safe, functional systems in and around city structures. However, the distribution of a graphic stormwater handbook that specifically recognizes patterns from a visual preference standpoint is something that is much less common, and somewhat more practi cal for communities wanting ideas that not only benefit the ecology of an area but also contributing to the overall aesthetic. A Methodology Guidebook A handbook of this nature could recognize a unique methodology for city planners and landscape architect s to use when engaging the public, as well as provide source material that can be regularly updated with new and innovative stormwater management techniques. Beginning the dialogue of stormwater management within communities through the initial use of a visual preference survey, could begin to formulate guidelines desire for people to expand upon a pattern language, guidelines coul d be developed that are meant to encourage additions. To Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 111

110 better assist the user, a methodology guide book could be distributed on city websites for community officials, landscape architects, and residents to view and comment on. The book could be printe d as a h ardcopy to regularly reference as well. Guidelines, these guidelines elaborate on the requirements for stormwater management within the city and give developers the tools to achieve compliance (San Francisco, 2011) The Commission (San Francisco, 2011) structural design of stormwater systems. Yet, if thes e guidelines were formatted to encompass community engage ment suggestions and design ideas city planners and landscape architects alike could benefit from this material in a completely different way than typical stormwater guidebooks. Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 112

111 CHAPTER SUMMARY The human relationship with stormwater can ofte n be complex. Creating a means to better educate the public, city officials, and landscape architects on the design potentials of stormwater management can even be more complex. This chapter evaluated some of the needs and trends of stormwater management literary perspectives on various planning and ecological theories, cases studies on community engagement and visual preference models, as well as the creation of stormwater guidelines as they pertain to different audiences. From this information, a rese arch question evolved: "In what way can landscape architects and city planners turn stormwater management into a participatory community effort that utilizes local resources in an attempt to protect quality of local ected in both Chapter 1 and Chapter 2, I begin to explore the answer by merging the findings of two separate sources: 1.) qualitative research and 2.) community input from my home town of Alachua. From this research, I hope to create a methodology that in cludes a series of guideline examples that follow the framework of Christopher landscape. Chapter Two: Background

PAGE 113

112 CHAPTER THREE: METHODS AND APPROACH

PAGE 114

113 "The crisis of our diminishing water resources is just as severe (if less obviously immediate) as any wartime crisis we have ever faced. Our survival is just as much at stake as it was at the time of Pearl Harbor, or Argonne, or Gettysburg, or Saratoga." Jim Wright, Fo rmer Democratic U.S. Congressman from Texas The Coming Famine, 1966

PAGE 115

114 PURPOSE AND INTENDED RESULT This section begins to formulate the purpose of my research project as it pertains to the City of Alachua A variety of qualitative and exploratory research approaches are used involving research and public involvement as necessary factors in developing a methodology for community engagement. City of Alachua Overview This terminal project was inspired by the City of Alachua, a sm all community with a population over 9,000 people according the 2010 U.S. Census. After living within this c ommunit y for over twenty years, Alachua has become my personal life place. (See Fig. 3.1). I have developed a strong connection to the culture, ecology, and public spaces that are integrated within the landscape of this area. Water has also been an integral part of this community, with several creeks, lakes, and sinkholes that provide clean sources of water for the surrounding ecosystems. Growi ng up here I have explored most of these water resources, not knowing whethe r or not they needed protecting or water management could be improved. FIGURE 3.1 City of Alachua, Florida. (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaine sville,_Florid a ) Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 116

115 how stormwater has affected Alachua Heavy rain event s have caused massive amounts of floodin g in streets and neighborhoods. Impermeable surfaces transport water swiftly to the nearest retention basin or low point, and there is little design emphasis to slow this process down or to cleanse the storm water al ong the way Mill Creek is one example of a water body that directly feeds into Mill Creek Sink, previously known as Alachua Sink. The water that flows into Mill Creek Sink travels through a series of underground cave systems, and partially connects to t he Santa Fe River. Dye tests have proven this six mile long trek, which further brings up concerns on water quality connectivity Due to the sensitivity of the land around this area, I began my FIGURE 3.2 Mill Creek Watershed (Top Right) and Cellon Creek Watershed (Bottom Right). (Source: Base map courtesy of Google Maps) (Source of Top Right: Mill Creek, 2013) (Source of Bottom Right: Cellon Creek, 201 3) Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 117

116 research with the intended purpose of understanding the rel ationship local residents had with the water in their own community. I was especially curious if people understood their local watersheds and how stormwater design could affect the health of water and bring about community awareness. The community of Alac hua is growing, and the watersheds around the Mill Creek Watershed and Cellon Creek Watershed could be drastically af fected. (See Fig. 3.2 ) Alachua is planning for more urban development near its c ommercial intensive district. The plan includes r esiden tial housing, a Walmart Supercenter and retail outparcel, and a stormwater park at the southe ast corner of I 75 and U.S. 441 (See Fig. 3.3). Stormwater management is an extremely important component for this plan in order to maintain a healthy watershed f or the area. However, after speaking with the Mayor Gib Coerper there was a clear interest in learning what a how stormwater could be FIGURE 3.3 Alachua Florida Mill Creek Sink (Top River (Blue Arrow), Future Stormwater Park (Bottom Star) Future Walmart location (Left Square), and Future Residential Hou sing (Right Square) (Source: Adapted from base map provided by Google Maps) Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 118

117 better integrated within the entire community. The City of Alachua is a prime ex ample of rapidly gr owing communities that want to protect their local water resources, as well as maintain a visually pleasing lifestyle. I realized that there may be of potential for innovative stormwater management approaches that fit within the pattern language of community water. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Mixed Methods Approach The purpose of this thesis project i s to develop guidelines that assist landscape architects, planners, designers, and residents of rural communities in creating functional and aes thetic spaces for stormwater management. A mixed methods approach was used to develop these guidelines, which included 1.) qualitative research and 2.) community input. Through qualitative research, I analyzed and synthesized: 1.) historical perspectives on stormwater ; 2.) stormwater management concerns ; 3.) management needs and trends; 4.) community planning and design theories; 5 .) visual preference models; and 6.) design guidelines This literature review created the groundwork for the development of a stormwater visual preference survey that assessed the aesthetic and ecological needs of communiti es facing rapid urbanization. (See Fig. 3.4 ). Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 119

118 Visual Preference Survey Approach A visual preference survey was developed in order to collect valuable com munity input on the aesthetics of stormwater management Specifically, I was interested in finding out if community members in the City of Alachua were interested in seeing more creative and ecologically viable stormwater design solutions, compared to mor e standard stormwater design approaches that involve piping water offsite. The framework of the survey was developed to allow community members to easily analyze the visual and ecological benefits of different stormwater scenarios. The survey was modeled combined methods for engaging the public, creating visual alternatives, and providing a preference survey. The visual preference survey and the methods for engaging the public were submitted for approval by the University of Fl compliance with the IRB, each survey contained an Informed purpose, brief methodology, researchers contact information and affiliation, and the rights of t he participant ( See Appendix B). Participants were asked to give their consent by signing the document and dating it. These forms were given separately in order to protect the anonymity of the participants. IRB also approved permission to have audio and visual records of the visual preference survey community interaction process. Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 120

119 FIGURE 3.4 Research Methodology Diagram (Source: M. Requesens) Chapter Three: Methods and Approac h

PAGE 121

120 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT/ SURVEY Qualitative Research Engaging the community and distributing a visual preference survey is a part of the qualitative research process that ena bled me to effectively create initial community guidelines specific to the City of Alachua According to the Department of Public Policy and Administration qualitative research is defined as, gaining a deep understanding of a specific organ ization or event, rather a than surface description of a large sample of a population. It aims to provide an explicit rendering of the structure, order, and broad patterns found among a group of participants. It is also called ethnomethodology or field res earch. It generates data about human groups in social se ttings. [It] does not introduce treatments or manipulate variables, or impose the researcher's operational definitions of variables on the participants. Rather, it lets the meaning emerge from the pa rticipants. It is more flexible in that it can adjust to the setting. Concepts, data collection tools, and data collection methods can be adjus ted as the research It ] aims to understand how the participants derive meaning from their surroundin gs, and how their mea nin g influences their behavior (PPA, 2012 It is through qualitative research that allows a unique insight into the meaning behind decisions made about stormwater management. By understanding the thought process of the general publ ic, research can reveal patterns needed to further better our environments. Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 122

121 Visual Preference Survey Procedure Method In an effort to simultaneously engage the public in a comfortable surrounding while collecting valuable visual preference data, I develo ped a visual preference survey that would be suited for a street festival (See Appendix A) This survey would aim to engage residents of the City of Alachua in a method that involved 1.) the selection of a visual stormwater alternative based on ecological and aesthetic properties, 2.) an educational review of the alternatives, and 3.) a reselection of an alternative with the consideration of maintenance included. By public, I decided to administer a n interactive version of a standard visual preference survey to community members of all ages during the Alachua Harvest Festival within the City of Alachua. This festival occurred on November 11, 2012 from 11 a.m. to 5 th that allowed community members to enter and participate in the survey. Design The visual preference survey was designed to reference a series of different stormwater scenarios. The process by which these scenarios were created involved extensive re search of modern and innovative stormwater management approaches. A selection process then began in order to narrow down the choices to a number that effectively gave a range of options without Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 123

122 overwhelming the participant. The selection process reduced the number of design choice s to 10 management options that ranged in complexity and location. After closer analysis, the 10 scenarios were further narrowed to 8, eliminating repeating ideas and overly simple solutions. The visual preference survey t herefore referenced 8 different stormwater scenarios, each containing 3 alternatives with vari ed degrees of water treatment. Each stormwater scenario and alternative was a digitally created using Adobe Photoshop CS5 Extended, and represented an effective range of stormwater management techniques. Each scenario contained 3 stormwater solution options ( labeled A, B, or C) based on management: Minimal impact to stormwater management Partial impact to stormwater management Most effective impact to stormwate r management Each scenario also focused on a singular urban environment, whether it was: Commercial and Industrial Residential ( Single Family or Multifamily ) Stormwater Ponds Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 124

123 Together, the following 8 stormwater scenarios were created (See Fig. 3.5 ) : 1. Parking Lot Median 2. Public Sidewalk 3. Waterfront/ Stormwater Pond Edge 4. Roadside Swale 5. Roofwater Collection / Greenroof 6. Rainwater at Home / Rainbarrel 7. Public Green Space 8. Residential Lawn During the Alachua Harvest Festival, poster bo ards display ed the scenarios with the 3 stormwater solution alternatives per board A corresponding visual preference survey handout was designed to be given to participants in reference to the poster boards. This survey would act as a catalyst for parti cipants to begin discussing the stormwater scenarios with volunteers. The visual preference survey handout was divided into three parts: 1.) Initial Preference Questions 2.) Educated Preference Questions and 3.) Demographic and Knowledge Based Questions Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 125

124 In Part 1 of the survey, participants were asked to observe the scenarios and choose the images that best answer the following questions: 1. Which image is the most Visually Appealing ? 2. Which image seems to be the most Ecologically Friendly ? For this po rtion of the survey, p articipants were not informed as to which stormwater category or which sto rmwater solution option they were observing. In Part 2 of the survey, participants were asked to read additional information provided on the various stormwat er management scenarios and then choose the image that they would want to have at their home, business, or community based on the following considerations: 1.) aesthetic preference, 2.) ecological benefits, and 3.) maintenance. In Part 3 of the survey, p articipants were asked to answer a series of 10 demographic and knowledge based questions. The first four questions were demographic questions about gender, age, residency, and ethnicity T he next five questions attempted to better understand the audienc Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 126

125 2.) personal water conservation practices, 3.) concerns people may have about water quality in their community, 4.) the Floridan Aquifer, and 5.) the roles of community members in protecting watersheds from pollution. The final question asked whether or not participants would like to be added to an email list for research progress updates and an invitation to the public presentation. Pilot Test Before engaging the community of Alachua during the Alachua H arvest Festival, I conducted a Pilot Test with students and professors at the University of Florida. (See Fig. 3.6 ). For one week I displayed the 8 stormwater scenario poster boards and the corresponding surveys in the 4 th Floor hallway of the UF Archite cture Building. A total of 11 surveys were filled out, each with answers and comments pertaining to the design of the survey. On average participants noted that the survey took roughly 8 minutes to complete. Two of the main graphic suggestions that parti cipants commented on were the following: 1. Group #2 It is likely that nobody will prefer choice A due to its excessive flooding on the sidewalk. Perhaps this alternative could simply represent traditional drainage and green lawn, rather than flooding. FIGURE 3.5 Groups 1 8 of the Vi sual Preference Stormwater Posters. (Source: M. Requesens) Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 127

126 2. G roup #6 The concept of a rain barrel is highly attractive from a water conservation standpoint, but this particular rain barrel looks more like a trashcan. Could there be another rain barrel design? 3. Group #8 messy, perhaps use a better rain garden example? Based on these comments, Group #2 and Group #6 were adjusted to allow for a clear depiction of the various forms of stormwater management. As it was not my intention to manipulate responses based solely on appea l, changing the visual appeal of the rain barrel simply allowed this feature to be more apparent as to its function. I did not change the visual appeal of the rain garden on the residential lawn due to the fact that I was more curious about how people wou ld respond to the connectivity or isolation of individual gardens rather than the design of the garden itself. (See Fig. 3.7 ). FIGURE 3.6 Pilot Test of Visual Preference Survey 3 Images from UF Architecture Hallway (Source: Kay Williams) Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 128

127 Distribution On the day of the Alachua Harvest Festival, City of Alachua participants were invited to en ter a covered booth, greeted by myself and trained volunteers, to participate in a stormwater visual preference survey. Several posters describing the purpose of my research as well as images and aerial photographs of future development sites in Alachua were key elements in attracting the interest of residents. After signing a an informed consent document, participants were able to take a clipboard containing the survey, and walk through the booth to view the posters as they filled out their answers. A s eparate area of the booth was designated the F IGURE 3.7 Edits to Group 2 and 6 of the Visual Preference Stormwater Posters (Source: M. Requesens) Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 129

128 comfortably take a survey while their k ids were occupied with markers. This was a creative management approach to the design of the booth. Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 130

129 FIGURE 3.8 Images from the Alachua Harvest Festival Distribution of the Sto rmwater Visual Preference Survey (Source: M. Requesens) Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 131

130 Quantitative Analysis In total, 78 participants completed visual preference surveys. Using Qualtrics, an online survey software, I recreated the survey that was distributed t o participants during the Alachua Harvest Festival on November 11, 2012. Then, I entered the answers from each of the 78 surveys. A combination of analysis techniques from Qualtrics Survey Statistics, and Excel Graphs express the results in a series of s ections (See Appendix D ) The first section of the results shows a brief breakdown of the answers for Part # 1 of the Survey. Numbers 1, 2, and 3 in the pie charts refer to Answers A, B, and C for each question. For example, 69% of the total responses c most ecologically friendly as well. The second section of the results further breaks down each image. There are a series of statistics for A, B, and C for each group. Please take note of the number of responses for each of the bar graphs for this section; otherwise the results may seem misleading. The third section analyzes the results from when participants were asked to read information about the various stormwater management techniques and then answer which they preferred based on this new information. For the purpose of recreating this survey through Qualtrics, these questions were simplified in order to efficiently acquire the data. Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 132

131 The last section consists of the statistical results for the demographic questions and knowledge based questions of the visual prefe rence survey. The following section illustrations a simplified version of these results. QUANTITATIVE RESULTS (GROUPS #1 8) In this section, a br ief summary the quantitative results of Parts 1 and 2 of stormwater visual preference survey will be assessed. As previously mentioned, a more detailed version of this se ction can be found in Appendix D In each scenario of this section the top image d emonstrates the image found in Part 1 of the Survey, with corresponding pie charts indicating the overall visual and ecological preferences. The purple arrow points to the image that received the highest preference for both. If two purple arrows are pres ent, this indicates that there were two different preferences, one with the highest visual preference and one with the highest ecological preference. The bottom image demonstrates the image found in Part 2 of the Survey, with the corresponding information that each participant was instructed to read, and a bar chart showing the overall preference basic on aesthetics, ecology, and maintenance. The blue arrow points to the image that received the highest preference for this part. Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 133

132 GROUP # 1 RESULTS In this scenario, respondents had an overwhelming visual preference for Choice C, with Choice A and B being fairly even second choices However, Choices A and C were found to be more ecologically friendly, while Choice B was drastically lessened to 1%. The r e was a greater preference for plant diversity and water management. After reading about each stormwater alternative, this particular scenario showed an overall preference for Choice A, when Choice C had originally had the highest visual and ecological pre ference. Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 134

133 GROUP # 2 RESULTS In this scenario, respondents had a fairly equal visual preference for Choice B and C, with very little preference for Choice A However, Choice C w as found to be significantly more ecologically friendly while C hoice B was lessened Choice A remained the same in both visual and ecological preference. After reading about each stormwater alternative, this particular scenario showed an overall preference for Choice C, when Choice B and C were similar in visual preference and C hoice C was the most ecologically preferred. Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 135

134 GROUP # 3 RESULTS In this scenario, respondents had a high visual preference for Choice C, with a close secondary preference for Choice B However, Choice B increased to have a relatively equal ecological pre ference to Choice C. Choice A significantly decreased from a visual preference of 11% to an ecological preference of 1%. After reading about each stormwater alternative, his particular scenario showed an overall preference for Choice C, when there was a h igh visual preference for Choice C and a relatively equal ecological preference between B and C. Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 136

135 GROUP #4 RESULTS In this scenario, respondents had a high visual preference for Choice C, with a secondary preference for Choice A There was not a drast ic change in responses to ecological friendliness, but Choice C increased by 12% while Choice A decreased by 13%. Choice B stayed at relatively the same low percentage. After reading about each stormwater alternative, t his particular scenario showed an ov erwhelming preference for Choice C, when Choice C had both a high visual and ecological preference as well. Chapter Th ree: Methods and Approach

PAGE 137

136 GROUP # 5 RESULTS In this scenario, respondents had a high visual preference for Choice B with a secondary preference for Choice A However, t he ecological preference for Choice B increased by 19%, while Choice A de creased by 16%. Choice C stayed relatively low in both visual and ecological preference. After reading about each stormwater alternative, t his particular scenario showed an overwhel ming preference for Choice B, when Choice B had both a high visual and ecological preference as well. Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 138

137 GROUP # 6 RESULTS In this scenario, respondents had both a very high visual and ecological preference for Choice B. Choice C had a slightly higher vi sual preference as a second choice, which Choice A had a slightly higher ecologica l preference as a second choice. After reading about each stormwater alternative, t his particular scenario showed an overall preference for Choice B, when Choice B had both a high visual and ecological preference as well. Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 139

138 GROUP # 7 RESULTS In this scenario, respondents had a high visual preference for Choice C, with a secondary preference for Choice B. However, Choice B had a significantly high ecological preference, incr easing by 30%. The ecological preference of Choice C decreased by 33% from its high visual preference. Choice A remained about the same for both preferences. After reading about each stormwater alternative, t his particular scenario showed an overwhelming preference for Choice B, when Choice C had a high visual preference and Choice B had a high ecological preference. Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 140

139 GROUP # 8 RESULTS In this scenario, respondents had a high visual preference for Choice C, with a s econdary preference for Choice A However Choice A and Choice C had almost identical ecological preference. Choice B remained about the same for both preferences. After reading about each stormwater alternative, t his particular scenario showed an overall preference for Choice C, when the re was a high visual preference for Choice C and an almost identical ecological preference for both Choice A and Choice C. Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 141

140 DEMOGRAPHICS & KNOWLEDGE BASED QUESTIONS Part 1 and 2 of the survey indicated higher preferences for stormwater alternatives that c ontained more plant diversity, more on site water management, and more visible technology. In this section, Part 3 of the visual preference survey is graphically represented with bar charts created from Qualtrics These answers make up the demographic an d knowledge based questions of the survey. What is your gender? # Answer Response % 1 Male 33 46% 2 Female 38 54% Total 71 100% What is your age? Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 142

141 Do you live in the CITY of Alachua? # Answer Response % 1 Yes 23 33% 2 No 46 67% Total 69 100% What is your ethnicity? # Answer Response % 1 White, non Hispanic 59 86% 2 African American 1 1% 3 Hispanic 4 6% 4 Asian Pacific Islander 2 3% 5 Native American 1 1% 6 Other 2 3% Total 69 1 00% How much do you know about stormwater management? # Answer Response % 1 I have never heard of stormwater management 3 4% 2 I have heard of it, but don't know very much about it 23 32% 3 I know some information about it 34 48% 4 I know a lot about it 11 15% Total 71 100% Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 143

142 How often do you consciously try to conserve water in your home? # Answer Response % 1 Not often 6 8% 2 Sometimes 20 28% 3 Often 45 63% Total 71 100% How concerned are you about water quality in your COMMUNITY? # Answer Response % 1 Not concerned 4 6% 2 Somewhat concerned 21 30% 3 Very concerned 44 62% 4 I don't know if there are any water quality issues in my community 2 3% Total 71 100% How much do y ou know about the Floridan Aquifer? # Answer Response % 1 I have never heard of the Floridan Aquifer 7 10% 2 I have heard of it, but don't know very much about it 15 21% 3 I know some information about it 35 49% 4 I know a lot about it 14 20% Total 71 100% Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 144

143 How important is it for community members to play active roles in protecting local watersheds from pollution? # Answer Response % 1 Not important 0 0% 2 Sometimes important, depending on what's causing the pollution 7 10% 3 Very important 63 90% 4 It is not the community member's role 0 0% Total 70 100% Would you like to be added to the email list to receive updates on the progress of this research and an invitation to the public presentation? # Answer Response % 1 Yes 33 46% 2 No 38 54% Total 71 100% Observations and Participant Reactions Introduction Assessing the visual preferences of various stormwater solutions in a festival setting proved to be a valuable experience, bo th written and verbally. The following sections will describe a series of anecdotes, observations, and opinions regarding the interactions that occurred during the festival. Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 145

144 The Booth Design The design of the two booths were planned in order to give par ticipants the ability to freely move throughout the space; to view the posters in order from left to right but also giving everyone enough room to walk back through them in any order. A table for greeting participants with surveys was placed on the left, and a table for drawing was placed on the right. The middle was open to invite people in, and to efficiently monitor who was ready to take surveys and then hand them back in. All trained volunteers were instructed to keep their introduction of the projec t friendly, engaging, and to the point. This approach attracted immediate interest and opened up discussion for more questions. Residents were immediately interested in where stormwater concerns were happening in Alachua and what the posters had to do w ith my research. Having the posters as a backdrop was incredibly useful. They caught the attention of several people at once, even when volunteers were preoccupied giving instructions to others With so many people stopping by the booth at once, I noti ced on several occasions that overhearing the introductory talks, signed a release form, and walked themselves through the survey. The Survey and Posters One of the best parts of this festival event was being able to talk with people about what they were thinking as they were Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 146

145 taking the survey. It seemed as though the quantitative research that supported the survey sparked a much greater qualitative discussion. I found that these discussions were one of the most benefici al aspects and thought processes was very exciting, and created a lot of great discussion. I believe these discussions are key to truly understanding what people want to see in their communities. The Walmart O nce community members realized that the research booths were interactive and involved their opinion, people were very interested and engaged. After the first hour of having the booths, I quickly realized that the construction of the local Walmart was a ve ry hot topic of interest for community members. From this observation, I started using the Walmart as part of my opening dialogue, which increased my participation rate exponentially. Water Some people were interested about water quality and the cook ie cutter retention ponds that come with big box stores. Most of their concerns involved where these were going to be placed, and how they were going to look. Many were already aware of the purpose and function of retention ponds and assumed most of thes e ponds are designed the same way. This was interesting because the retention pond scenarios from Poster #3 were from a pho tographed pond in Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 147

146 Gainesville. H owever; I had several comments from refer ring to the retention pond in front of the choose this image to look like the one in Alachua, but it interesting seeing how remarkable the similarities were Immediate Reactions There was almost an even amount of negative and positive opinions on the Walmart being beneficial to the community. Those who Their reasoning was that it would not only provide jobs, but allow them to shop for more of the necessities they need locally rather than driving to Gainesville. Those who had negative comments were content with the new Walmart that is being built further South on 13 th Street, and were willing to travel that extra distance to keep Walmart out of their community. There were another handful of community members that had no idea that a Walmart was being proposed for Alachua, and thought I was talking about a different one. Showing them the map and the proposed locat ion was shocking to most peop le and led them to have an overwhelming support Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 148

147 Pollution People seemed genuinely concerned about the pollution from car s in parking lots and the impact that has on surrounding water systems. I had several comments about the scale of the Walmart parking lot and what happens to the runoff. Permeable pavers came up a lot in these discussions with concerns of whether or not pollutants soak directly into the ground. Look and Feel of a Big Box Store Those who had negative comments about the Walmart mentioned how Walmart would not be characteristic of Alachua and how they worried it would take away from the historic nature an Traffic worried that Walmart would significantly cause more traffic and pollution. Local Business/ Economy There were positive comments on jobs; however, there were some concerns that Walmart would be the smaller, local businesses. Parking Lots Locals know the proposed site for the Walmart as agricultural land. It is one of the few areas Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 149

148 in Alachua that has a relatively good amount of topography as well. So naturally, there were many comments on the unsightly design of Walmart parking lots and how that would destroy the natural feel of the area. People described the Walmart parking lots as Location People were concerned about the loc ation as far as the proposed entrance, and especially the view of the existing single family and multi family residential housing nearby. This was particularly important to those who were living there currently. I had one family mentioned that they lived in the multi family residential open and natural land around them and often take walks down to these natural areas. They were very concerned about how this natural area would look if a Walmart was plac ed there. Discussions from Poster 1 : Parking Lot Median Permeable Pavers what are they and are they good for parking lots when pollutants of cars can soak through them? Drains where do they go, and are they necessary? Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 150

149 Plants there are a lot of dif ferences in plant selection, is this important? Are they native? (It was encouraging to hear people recognize that native plants are a good thing) Plant Health Image C typically received more more fu ll compared to Image A Flooding more people preferred to see some drainage in case of flooding Visibility parking lot & streetscape concerns Discussions from Poster 2 : Public Sidewalk Color Many people found Image B to be very appealing in color. I n many instances, people to see a combination of B and C, which had a combination of the red permeable pavers with the sidewalk planters. I was surprised by the larger number of people that commented on this same detail. One wo man even began combining design elements from different posters. She mentioned that it would be perfect if had the red pavers, with the plant selection of Board 1 (option C) and Board 4 (option C). Open Space Fluidity for people to move about was impor tant, which allows for better walkability and bike ability, as well as safety. Chap ter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 151

150 Character Many noted that C seemed to be more ecologically friendly, but still chose B due to the combination of color and permeability. Slipping a concern, especially for images with no on site drains and for permeable pavers. Those who did not choose Image B in many instances thought that the cracks might be hard to walk on and maintain / algae and water in cracks. Combinations as mentioned above, people made many comme nts on their wanting to combine two or more different choices to get the perfect combination of what they like to see. After viewing all the boards, I received several questions on whether or not certain elements could apply to all or most cases, such as permeable pavers, green roofs, and weirs in a single site. Discussions from Poster 3 : Waterfront Edge Plants People seemed to like the more natural look for both visually appeal and ecological friendliness, but wondered how much grass is too much grass. Water flow Common questions of how long does the water sit, and where does it go? Maintenance difficult to maintain, but they often liked that option if there was a way to keep it looking nice. A couple Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 152

151 people com mented on algae growing with standing water and how to keep the water clean. Discussions from Poster 4 : Roadside Swale Visibility This was a significant point of consideration for people. It seemed as though those who were having difficulty choosing bet ween A and C were addressing the visibility concerns. Flooding/Drainage As with most posters, people liked to see more natural landscapes with some drainage. Concerns with flooding and mosquitoes were also a concern. Plants which plants would do well with little maintenance and which look the healthiest. Again, people seemed to like a combination of options. Discussions from Poster 5 : Roof Water Collection One of the largest amount of discussion was prompted on this poster. Green roofs many people w ere unfamiliar with the functionality of green roofs and weirs o maintenance and labor (lots of questions) o life span and durability (some questions) o plant selection, specific to Florida and this region (lots of questions) Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 153

152 o c ost ( minimal questions ) o water leaking problems into building? Basic design of a green roof? o insects ( minimal questions) o for those who asked about th e other benefits of green roofs, they really like the cooling, comparative cost of a conventional roof, etc. Cisterns lots of inte rest o p eople loved the practicality of being able to reuse the water in the building o loved the water storage aspect of them o people overall didn think they were unappealing. o o nce they learned more about them, they seemed very interested in seeing more of them o people were curious about different ways cisterns could be placed in the landscape, such as the use of different materials o Seemed to like cisterns over the g reen roof Can SEE the cistern and the reuse happening Can NOT see the green roof as easily Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 154

153 Di scussions from Poster 6 : Rainwater at Home Rain barrel o visual appeal of barrel positive o mosquitoes possible breeding problem o maintenance algae and upkeep o hose vs. drip irrigation options in Image B. o drainage are drains necessary ? o plant selection water tolerant plants vs. others Discussions from Poster 7 : Public Green Space One of the largest amounts of discussion was prompted on this poster. Weirs people were VERY fascinated by the mechanism of a weir system. I was surprised how much people liked the science behind them and even more surprised with how much they liked them visually. Curiosi ty people had many questions on where they can go to see something like this, if this is being done in other places, how this would work here, etc. Wate r flow is there enough water to keep this system going? How would it look if there is a drought? Maintenance how difficult would it be to keep it looking nice? Plants how many different plant species could be planted in this system? Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 155

154 Types are ther e different types and styles of weir systems? Art form people seemed intrigued by the stru ctural components of them. Discussions from Poster 8 : Residential Lawn Standing Water there were several comments regarding standing water near residential areas and how this would be addressed in each of these scenarios; especially an issue in Image C? The concern about mosquitoes came up the most during this poster. Maintenance Image A is hard to maintain, how would residents care for it ? Snakes and other an imals People had some other concerns about hard to landscapes CHAPTER SUMMARY The City of Alachua is the reason why I was inspired to base my research on stormwater management. This community watersheds and ecological networks within the area. Stormwater management is going to play a bigger and bigger role in developing communities, such as Alachua, as development continuously increases. Therefore, communities need to be very Chapter Three: Methods and Approach

PAGE 156

155 conscious of the needs of the local residents, in terms of stormwater design. The process of c ommunity engagement prompted thought provoking results and discussions during the City of The visual preference s cenarios that participants most preferred tended to have better on site management techniques over the least preferred scenarios of tradi tional techniques (See Fig. 3.8 ). However, the discussions that arose from the survey was equally ben eficial in that it allowed several concerns and questions to be discussed openly. Further findings will be discussed in the following chapter. Chapter Three: Methods and Approach F IGURE 3.9 Most and Least Preferred Stormwater Management Scenarios (Source: M. Requesens)

PAGE 157

156 CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS

PAGE 158

157 "When you take the time to actually listen, w ith humility, to what people have to say, it's amazing what you can learn. Especially if the people who are doing the talking also happen to be children." Greg Mortenson, Stones Into Schools: Promoting Peace With Books, Not Bombs, in Afghanistan and Pak istan 2009

PAGE 159

158 FINDINGS AND CONCERNS Robert Thayer described a surface and core approach of how people view the landscape. By conducting a visual engagement strategies and vi sual design alternatives, the community preferences and opinions on stormwater management began displaying a core approach to viewing stormwater. Qualitatively, participants spoke openly about what they would like to see in their community and were eage r for more information regarding various stormwater management techniques. T he data that was produced from the written portion of the visual preference survey supported the qualitative discussions. The following findings summarized some of the key conclu sions from both the community engagement and the visual preference survey: Positive Findings 1. Local residents are interested in seeing more creative, stormwater design solutions in their community vs. the undesirable 2. Landscapes wh ere they can visibly se e the water were most desired 3. With education, people preferred the landscapes that were the most ecologically friendly Traditional stormwater management alternatives (top) vs. preferred stormwater management design solutions Chapter Four: Findings

PAGE 160

159 4. Diversity of vegetation was both a visually and ecologically desired design element in every stormwater scenari o 5. W ater management at eye level was preferred to better allow people to interact with and appreciate the landscape 6. People are not afraid of technology. The more interesting the design, the more curious people became about its function. 7. People often consci ously conserve water in their homes and are genuinely concerned about water use, water quality, and water conservation. Concerns 1. Maintenance was a concern in many cases, especially with upkeep of public stormwater designs and residential designs 2. Safety was a concern in terms of public access, visibility, and pests (mosquitoes, snakes, etc.) 3. Sustainability and durability of designs was a concern for many of the public spaces 4. Flooding was one of the biggest concerns with designs that had minimal drains Chapter Four: Findings FIGURE 4.1 4 Sets of Images: Least preferred (top) vs. Most preferred (bottom). (Source: M. Requesens)

PAGE 161

160 5. Color was a preference concern in terms of how stormwater structures fit into the overall design aesthetic of small communities 6. Residents of growing communities were concerned about the impacts more development would have on local watersheds. In the case of the City of Alachua, people were most concerned about increasing commercial developments, a Walmart and residential developments The discussions that stemmed from the visual preference survey revealed that residents were most interested in seeing crea tive solutions f or water storage, colorful yet functional public spaces where water is visible and unique technologies that imp rove upon local water quality. While taking the survey, participants were able to also discuss their thoughts on water in their community. This dialogue proved to be one of the most beneficial methods of communi ty interaction However, due to this open dialogue, several surveys were not completed. In other instances, participants tended to merge Part 1 and Part 2 of the survey with an over anticipation for learning about each alternative. As a result, t he visual preference survey became more of a tool for discussion and gave a broad perspective into the visual, ecological, and educated preferences for various stormwater scenari os. Chapter Four: Findings

PAGE 162

161 The combination of literatu re and survey results can effectively begin a handbook of guidelines that assists planners, designers, and residents of rural communities in creating functional and aesthetic spaces for stormwater management. COMMUNITY E NGAGEMENT METHODOLOGY My research is intended to provoke stormwater awareness at the community scale. In doing so, a strong methodology of community engagement became one of the most beneficial tools for answering the research question, "In what way can landscape architects and city planners turn stormwater management into a participatory community effort that utilizes local resources in an attempt to protect quality of local enhancements, new c onstruction, or public spaces, community engagement can initiate a solid dialogue between city represen tatives and the general public. With stormwater management as the focal topic of discussion, I proved that properly planned community engagement 1.) ex cites participants to engage in local issues, 2.) collects vital thoughts, preferences, and concerns that could otherwise be lost in a non engaging scenario, 3.) prompts a dialogues between professionals and locals as well as locals with other locals, and 4.) reveals patterns of community needs that city planners and landscape architects can then turn into guidelines that are specific to that community. Chapter Four: Findings

PAGE 163

162 In the creation of a community engagement methodology, I wanted to highlight three of the main parts t hat played key roles in the engagement process: planning, development, and the engagement itself (See Fig. 4.2 ). Both city planners and landscape architects have the resources to effectively execute this process and develop community guidelines from the r esults. Planning Stage The planning stage is what initially determines the success of the entire engagement process. It is one of the most important, if not the most important, step that outlines why you want to engage the community and what basis of kno wledge is needed to proceed. When planning, it is critical that you seek out as much knowledge as possible, from literature, professionals, and stakeholders that represent the audience you plan to engage. Researching the type of engagement that best suit s the purpose and goals is beneficial, in addition to researching case studies that have successfully used that type. As it pertained to stormwater management in the City of Alachua a distinctive approach was made based on conversations with UF landscape architect professionals, Mayor Gib Coerper of the City of Alachua, other city officials, and UF wetland specialist Dr. Mark Clark. These conversations highlighted some of the initial stormwater needs of the community as it faces concerns with community gr owth. Chapter Four: Findings

PAGE 164

163 Chapter Four: Findings FIGURE 4.2 Community Engagement Methodology Diagram (Sour ce: M. Requesens)

PAGE 165

164 The conversations also highlighted a need to creatively engage the pub lic during a festival setting. in hopes of educating participants and collecting opinions on stormwater management. The decision to lead the community engagement pr ocess with a visual preference survey occurred after researching the 1.) quantitative benefits of collecting large amounts of opinions with a survey, 2.) the visual component of an illustrative visual aid to the survey, and 3.) the approachability of this type of survey during a street festival scenario The type of community engagement should be based specifically on what works best for your community, and adapted to best obtain its goals and objectives. Development Stage The development stage is where you properly plan for the community engagement. After collecting all of the base knowledge about the type of community engagement you wish to proceed with, as well as plenty of background knowledge about the subject matter, you design your strategy. The design includes everything from planning out materials, the actual design of the site you will be confronting the public with, to training volunteers to assist you. You must never underestimate this stage, for it is what determines how smoothly the day o f the community engagement will run. Chapter Four: Findings

PAGE 166

165 As it pertained to development of a visual preference survey in the City of Alachua, lots of planning went into the design of survey as well as the design of the booth that local residents entered to participate in. H owever, to ensure that you are fully prepared for the day of the engagement, it is recommended that you assemble the main components of the event (assemble materials, volunteers, etc.) and either conduct a pilot test of the survey beforehand, or have a dry run through before the day of the engagement. Engagement Stage The day of the community engagement will tend to run smoothly if you are fully prepared from the planning and development stages. However when dealing with the public, there are several t hings to keep in mind: Introduction talking with participants is important when communicating to them why they should participate in the first place. Keep this dialogue clear too much information the m inute they walk up to you Visuals a visual preference survey is a nice way to attract the attention of participants, especially if there are large graphics for people to see from afar. However, if not conducting a survey, it is still important to provid e supporting visuals for people to reference to. Chapter Four: Findings

PAGE 167

166 Volunteers space volunteers in different locations to allow participants to freely ask questions when needed Interaction friendly and helpful, and also be know ledgeable of the subject matter. Be Flexible if people begin to deviate from the task at hand, allow them to do so. The engagement tool should remain a tool in that it begins a conversation rather than aiming to retrieve Keep Audience in Mind if ther e are families involved, be sure you accommodate the needs of all ages, whether or separate engagement strategy. Result The creation of community guidelines must first come from a clear methodology of community engagement. After completing the engagement process, it is useful to acquire even more outside opinions as to the directions the guidelines should take. It is essential that the guidelines mold to the needs of the community and issue at hand. As previously mentioned, ther e is no right or wrong way to create guidelines, but they should be a reflection of your r esearch findings and the engagement goals. Chapter Four: Findings

PAGE 168

167 STORMWATER DESIGN GUIDELINES My research attempted to understand the visual preferences for various stormwater solution s in the built environment, and how these preferences can influence future development plans for communities. Based off the created methodology for community engagement, t his section beings to create design guidelines specific only to the the City of Alac mwater management preferences. These guideline examples aim to follow the framework of Christopher Alexander in a manner that is meant to be further adapted. A Pattern Language of Sto rmwater A pattern language of stormwater began to emerge from this research city based pattern language in the landscape. Alexander encouraged people to take his guidelines as a singular example of a language, and imp rove upon it as the language evolves. The patterns that he saw for water included examples such as pools and streams, and green roofs. However, Alexander only scratched the surface of the amount of patterns that could pertain to community stormwater. Th e results from the City of Alachua stormwater visual preference survey and community discussions aimed to cover a variety of stormwater management techniques that in turn revealed some of these common patterns. Chapter Four: Findings

PAGE 169

168 To organize these patterns, I placed storm water management into four categories: 1.) Rooftop, 2.) Roof to Ground, 3.) Across the Ground, and 4.) Underground. The subcategories within these designations are as followed: 1. Rooftop: roof garden (extensive, shallow), eco roof (intensive, deep) 2. Roof to Ground: downspout disconnection, rain barrels, cisterns, rain chains, visual tiers, etc. 3. Across the Ground: vegetative swales, planters (flow through, infiltration, contained), pavers/pavement (pervious, permeable, turf blocks), wetlands, stormwater po nds, weir systems, check dams, rain gardens 4. Underground: water storage tanks, dry wells, trenches Chapter Four: Findings FIGURE 4.3 Stormwater Categories (Source: M. Requesens)

PAGE 170

169 Within these categories, a common language of community water emerged. In an effort to identify with s signify some of the ba sic guideline goals that apply to every category: DO 1. Integrate stormwater whenever possible into the ecology and language of the urban environment 2. Enhance the technology and visibility of stormwater management systems 3. Create functional sto rmwater systems that clean local water sources, stores water, and is easily maintained 4. Keep it simple DON T 1. Isolate or redirect stormwater away from its natural topography within the landscape 2. Hide technology 3. Design for the sake of design 4. Overdesign / Mak e it tacky Introductory Guidelines City of Alachua begin to design more effective stormwater management systems. In reference to the results of the visual preference survey and comments that were coll ected the City of Alachua found Chapter Four: Findings

PAGE 171

170 management techniques such as green roofs, stormwater collection devices, and weir systems to be the most interesting and desired design solutions. The following guidelines act merely as an example of possible community stormwater guidelines that could be created following community engagement. With additional efforts to collect community thoughts and preferences that aim at reaching a wider range of community demographics and ages, a more collective community preference could be developed by city planners and landscape architects in and around the City of Alachua. Guideline #1: INTEGRATE Placement: when designing for new developments, create on site runoff within the urban environment, ildings. At the street scale, avoid the use of static retention ponds. Mold the design to natural topography. Establish nodes for sediments to be collected. Integrating stormwater within cities is an important management effort to consider, especially with cities facing rapid urbanization. The results from the visual preference survey Chapter Four: Findings FIGURE 4.4 Integrated Stormwater Design (top) vs. Undesired Stormwater Design (bottom) (Source: M. Requesens)

PAGE 172

17 1 indicated that residents are open to seeing water at the forefront of design in their public spaces. Guideline #2 : ENHANCE When designing systems that highlight a un ique form of technology, make it accessible. Visibility is important People like to see technology. If people cannot physically access a design, create angles that showcase it. In the case of green roof design, residents of the City of Alachua were ex tremely interested by their technology and aesthetic appeal. However, on larger buildings with flat rooftops, people were concerned that they would never get to see it. Therefore, it was concluded that designing for accessibility to the green roof itself or angling the roof to see from the ground would be most preferred. Guideline #3: FUNCTION Intercept water before it reaches a major water body; bioswales, rain gardens, etc. People like to see colorful, lush vegetation: use a diverse selection of na tive plants to better suit local ecology. Use less lawns and hedges. People have an overwhelming affinity for natural ecosystems. Chapter Four: Findings FI GURE 4.6 Water Edge with Vegetated Depressions Before and After. (Source: M. Requesens) FIGURE 4.5 Green Roof Design Options for City of Alachua: Accessibility and Visibility (below) (Source: M. Requesens)

PAGE 173

172 Use a diverse selection of native plants to better suit local ecology. Whether it was a residential scenario, or a natura l water body in the public realm, people preferred better on site water management techniques that allowed for more catchment areas and more vegetation. The aesthetic, ecological, and maintenance of these designs were highly preferred. Guideline #4 : SIM PLICITY People like to see simple, clean designs with tasteful creativity Do not overuse the same design element Color: use color choices that match the character of the local community. Only use a highlight of color when drawing attention to a specific element Use various shapes and forms to add interest to the flow of water The design of rain barrels was a good example of personal preference and how stormwater management designs should remain simple, but still fit within the aesthetic of the communi ty. Function is important, but traditional styles can be enhanced with color and elements such as rain chains, for added interest. Chapter Four: Findings FIGURE 4.7 Residential Lawn with Rain Gardens and a Diverse Selection of Plants Before and After. (Source: M. Requesens) FIGURE 4.8 Resi dential Rain Barrel Style Option 1 with Rain Chains (above) (Source: M. Requesens) FIGURE 4.9 Residential Rain Barrel Style Option 2 (above), with Artistic Design Element (top left) and a Poor Barrel Design (bottom left). (Source: M. Requesens)

PAGE 174

173 Guideline #5 : Weirs O ne of the most highly discussed water management technique nt. They are designed and strategically placed within a stormwater facility to slow the flow of runoff. To integrate them into the urban environment, place them in areas where they can easily collect stormwater runoff If the weir is placed away from the building, water can either be diverted under the street into the weirs or diverted to rain gardens. The one of the most interesting design scenarios that attracted the most visual and ecological preferences were the concept s of integrating weir systems and check dams into public spaces. By definition, stormwater management. They are designed and strategically placed within a stormwater facility to slow the flow of runoff. Check dams can be defined as stru ctures in the landscape that retain stormwater. Weirs are a notch within a check dam with an adjustable height to allow for varied amounts of stormwater retention. Check dams should retain stormwater to relatively shallow depths, with a maximum ponding dep th of 6 to 8 inches of runoff during storm events. Check dams and weirs can be made out of any durable material, including rock, concrete, metal, or wood. A check dam or weir should generally be placed in a rain garden facility for every 4 to 6 inches of elevation change. Check dams may also be used in swales and planters that have little or no slope to promote infiltration. This should be done only where soil conditions are conducive to infiltration Cha pter Four: Findings FIGURE 4.10 Weir System Placement between building and street (Source: M. Requesens) FIGURE 4.11 Weir System Placement next to street, away from building (Source: M. Requesens)

PAGE 175

174 (Class A or B soils) or if there is an underdrain syste m instal led in the stormwater facility. Steep grade conditions (over 6 percent) may require hardscape check dams (i.e., concrete, stone, wood, metal) and weirs to terrace rain gardens down the steep slope. (EPA Smart Growth, 2013 The technologies of weir systems are an especially rare commodity in the urban environment. When used, they are often set aside from the public eye and convey a strictly functional purpose of regulating water flow. However, when integrated into the urban environment, these structures can function as both an ecological amenity and a sculptural aesthetic. The following guidelines begin to introduce the pattern language of weir systems in residential, commercial and industrial areas of growing communities: Plant site specific vegetation around the weir systems and add walkways that run parallel to the weirs. The fascination with stormwater management technologies such as weir systems, draws people closer to them. Allowing safe access to these systems in a way that is visual ly pleasing and ecologically beneficial is preferred. In an urban setting, weir systems can act as structural stormwater solutions as well as public amenities. Chapter Four: Findings FIGURE 4.12 Weir System Commercial Design: Pedestrian Friendly Access with sidewalks, shade, and vegetation (Source: M. Requesens)

PAGE 176

175 If the weir is placed between the building and the street, the runoff from each of these loc ations can be diverted into the weir system. Place weir systems in front of residential homes and apartments. People prefer to see this technology. In a residential scenario, stormwater management techniques that separate the public from the street is a n added amenity. The community engagement results discovered an affinity for on si te stormwater management that is visible and well maintained. Create crossing points across the weir systems Do not make the weirs too far out of the line of sight. Widt h and height of the weir system may depend on site specific stormwater flow rates. However, access to the system should be attainable. If there are walls containing the weir structure (more typical of commercial and industrial sites), they cannot extend too high for safety and maintenance reasons. On average, a comfortable weir system width is between Crossing points for all stormwater management techniques allows visibility of the technology to increase. By allowing systems such as weirs to collect runoff from nearby structures Chapter Four: Findings FIGURE 4.13 Weir System Residential Design: Pedestrian Friendly Access with sidewalks, shade, and vegetation (Source: M Requesens) FIGURE 4.14 Weir System Crossing Points: Benefits to Visual Appeal, Safety, Visibility and Maintenance (Source: M. Requesens)

PAGE 177

176 and roadways, the general public is able to watch the cleansing process of the water from a safe distance. When creating above ground weir systems (most desired in commercial areas), allow for easy public access. When possible, divert street runoff into these systems to allow pollutants to be filtered out in a controlled environment. Do not mask the function of the weir system. Weir systems are not restricted to the same design, size or shape. Stormwater management can be an artful design form, as long as the function of the design is not masked with elements that take away from t he aesthetic of the design itself, such as placing wood logs over weir surfaces. Safely managed systems can in fact be integrated into the public realm, adding interest and benefits to the surrounding environment. Chapter Four: Findings FIGURE 4.15 Above Ground Weir System Design: Accessibility and Function (Source: M. Requesens) FIGURE 4.16 Design Element that masks the function of the Weir System (Source: M. Requesens) FIGURE 4.17 Design Option for Above Ground Weir System (Source: M. Requesens)

PAGE 178

177 CHAPTER SUMMARY This chapter visual preference survey and community engagement. From these findings, a methodology was developed that helps guide city planners and landscape architects through the process of effectively engaging community resid ents. In an effort to demonstrate how this methodology could be used to develop guidelines, I also modeled an introductory set of guidelines after the stormwater visual preference survey conducted in the City of Alachua. When designing any stormwater man agement system, it is important to recognize the community preference of those systems and understand how it may affect the surrounding public spaces. It is equally important knowing how to collect opinions and concerns of the public in an effort to creat e local level advocacy for the preservation, conservation, enhancement, and management of w ater. From this research, communities can not only begin to benefit from a community engagement methodology locally, but the continual practice of reaching out to the general public for a continuous design discussion can benefit the management of water on regional and global scales as well. Chapter Four: Findings

PAGE 179

178 CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

PAGE 180

179 "A small group of t houghtful people could change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead American Cultural Anthropologist

PAGE 181

180 DISCUSSION ON STORMWATER DESIGN AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT This section discusses the overall r esearch conclusion as it relates to the development of guidelines from community engagements a series of conclusions as they pertain to various aspects of the community engagement that was conducted in the City of Alachua and a discussion on what this mea ns for growing communities. Research Conclusion By creating a community engagement methodology, I helped to generate a means by which landscape architects and community planners communicate with the general public on community related issues. Difficult i ssues to vocalize to local residents, such as stormwater management, can be easily turned into a fun, engaging activity that people of all ages can benefit from. The key benefit of this type of interaction is the dialogue that initiates from participants. In the case of the City of Alachua, a stormwater visual preference survey and festival interaction were the sources of this dialogue, providing visual, written, and human references to relate to. The second part of the survey also did more than just br iefly educate the public on each stormwater management alternative, it inspired people to ask questions. In fact, many survey before wanting to find out more. M any management Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclus ions

PAGE 182

181 techniques were d iscussed as participants were completing part one. Therefore, the visual preference survey did more than just collect visual preferences; it got the general public to ask questions, and left them with wanting to know more. This is precisely what the meth odology of community engagement is meant to achieve: curiosity and a continual dialogue outside of the festival setting. The community engagement was an extremely successful event due to the proper planning, development, and engagement stages of community engagement. Without these stages, the amount of information that was gathered could not have been achieved. The community engagement methodology itself was designed to be applied to any type of community engagement scenario, whether it uses a visual pref erence survey or not. It more acts a tool to lead community engagement to a successful outcome. From the community engagement methodology and findings, examples of possible community stormwater guidelines were developed to demonstrate how guidelines could be started. These were by no means a complete set of guidelines, but rather a visual representation of how communities could begin to create their own set of guidelines that cater to the needs of a particular subject matter. Overall, it is my hope that communities use the methodology to adhere to the design needs of their own individual community residents. Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusions

PAGE 183

182 Conclusion s from Community Engagement Some factors about the stormwater visual preference survey processes that are worth considering for future co mmunity engagements are as followed : Demographics : The main demographic of participants were mainly Caucasian women over the age of 40. Due to this demographic, there are still diverse groups of residents that were not reached. Attempting to reach all demographics through a public street festival, as well as attracting people to one booth in particular proved to be a challenge. Since this demographic did not have many young people, Question 2 in Part 3 should have had more choices over the age of 61. There were a few instances where older participants openly commented on the lack of options over the age of 60. To acquire a wider range of ages and ethnicities, I may suggest for future studies to have other locations for this activity, such as a lo cal grocery store, local business or high school. Providing an incentive for taking a survey other than stickers, may also increase participation rates. Length: The length of the survey was probably one of the biggest factors that restricted some p articipants from fully finishing. It was simply too long. Many people were interested and spent an extended amount of time on Part 1. As a result, these were the same people that seemed overwhelmed to find out there there were two additional parts to th e survey. Others Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusions

PAGE 184

183 walk through the festival. The length also seemed to be a negative factor to younger adults and children who liked looking On the other hand, the length enabled more thought provoked answers followed by discussions of local stormwater. In many instances, participants asked questions throughout the entire survey process. In fact, the eagerness of wanting to know more about This overarching curiosity allowed for people to not only ask lots of questions, but it sparked a lot of cross discussions with other participants. The mixture of dialogue was an unexpected result that turned out to not only educates people about stormwater, but allowed for a greater ease of stormwater discussions with the people around them. Nothing could be more valuable than initiating this kind of discussion. However, in most cases, Part 2 was not completed because many participants wanted more discussion on each posture during Part 1 therefore not needing to complete Part 2. Family: Engaging the public involved also engaging children. To allow a better ease of the survey taking p rocess, a was set up in order to 1.) allow all ages, especially kids to draw what they like to see in the landscape, and 2.) to entertain children if their parents decide to take the visual preference survey. This method was highly effective. Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusions

PAGE 185

184 Hydrolog y: R oughly half of the participants seemed aware of the unique hydrology in the area and stormwater discharge points (large sinkhole, streams, ponds, caves, etc), and disa ppointed they could not access many of them. The other half either did not know they existed or knew little to none about where they were or what implications they had for the surrounding environment. The future of stormwater and water awareness in general has great potential within the city. Photoshop Stormwater Scenarios : The meth od in which I created the digitally created Photoshop scenarios was by means of photo collaging a range of images into a cohesive alternative. However, due to restricting the alternatives to three, there was some difficulty in decided how different each s hould be. There needed to be enough variety between the choices, without having one dominate over the other. The similarities that were not the points of interests stayed the same, and the differences were aimed and stormwater aesthetics In future atte mpts of this nature, there needs to be more visible clarification in some instances, and less visible clarification in others. For instance, the waterfront edge scenarios were confusing to a lot of survey takers in that they could not distinguish a clear preference between Choices B and C. Also, I would probably choose a different pond image that would not make people think of a specific place in their community. However, it did bring up a point that each of these ponds is in fact designed for the main Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusions

PAGE 186

185 purpose of efficiently storing water. In another instance, there may have too much of difference in the public green space scenarios as it tried to incorporate weir systems, manicured lawns, and a wild form of native landscaping. Visual aesthetics were a lso sometimes swayed by color choices, specifically in the case of the red permeable pavers in conjunction with the street planters. Perhaps making all alternative images more similar in color will have the focus drawn to the stormwater management techniq ue in particular. Need for Answers: People almost expected there to be a right and a wrong answer to the alternatives It was important to try and answer according to what they though t was best according to my standards vs. what they thought was best to their standards. Concluding Discussion Public engagement is reviewed as a way of understanding how people relate to water quality issues. People regularly utilize water; whether it's through recreation or consumption, people want healthy water systems. Public open spaces for stormwater should not only be visually exciting, but should provoke an emotional connection to the land, and prompt citizens to actively protect th e quality of wa ter around them. In turn by engaging the public is a stormwater visual preference Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusions

PAGE 187

186 survey, designers and planners help redefine a water ethic for individuals within a community. Annie Pais, executive director of Florida's Eden and The Blue Path project published an article in the Gainesville Sun on June 21 st 2012, stating that there is a need for a new way of addressing water, treating it as a "treasure for a sustainable future" by direct means of how water is managed (Pais, 2012). However, through c ommunity engagement an educated approach to water resources and a willingness to have innovative design solutions is what drives stormwater management to adapt the water crisis of the present. The visual preference survey data as well as the qualitative data collected from engaging the public proved to give valuable insight into the preferences and perspectives of community members in the City of Alachua. Thus, suggesting a new way in how stormwater is designed and managed. FUTURE RESEARCH IMPLICATIO NS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The profession of landscape architecture is often driven by the effective planning and sustainable approaches to lan dscape design. In the coming years, stormwater management in going to be a highly discussed topic of debate, especi ally with the aging of stormwater infrastructure. According to a March 19 th 2013 article from the Huffington post, the Congressional Progressive Caucus released The Back to Work Budget, Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusions

PAGE 188

187 proposal that offers long term solutions to our challenges while capitalizing on opportunities to create good jobs and build strong, healthy communities ( Ellis Lamkins proposal highlights green solutions in infrastructure and community resilience... by modernizing our water a nd transportation systems using 21 st century green vulnerable communities more resilient in the face of superstorms and other climate change disasters Fixing our broken stormwater infrastructure alone would create 2 million new jobs and safer, healthier, more prosperous communities ( Ellis Lamkins 2013 With jobs as a driving force for many recent Congressional decisions, the recognition of failing infrastructure is a predominant concern for the co untry as a whole. There is no better time to look at innovative design solutions in communities than right now. Infrastructure may be failing, but the opportunity for change is also at the forefront o f community planning decisions. Future research imp lications include a closer look at the needs of communities, the visual preferences of green solutions for stormwater management, and the investments in 21 st century technology as opposed to simply re doing existing infrastructure. I would recommend that more stormwater visual preference surveys be conducted not only to encourage further stormwater communication, but to encourage communities to take action in the design of local stormwater systems. Water is a Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusions

PAGE 189

188 resource we cannot afford to take for grante d. The more residents prefer green stormwater designs, the more they will elect local government officials that support and invest in these designs. I n order to inspire both local residents and local government officials with effective design solution s, the creation of a stormwater handbook that contains design guidelines for each stormwater management technique would be highly useful. I encourage future research projects to pursue the pattern language of stormwater more in depth, and to effective tes t the useful of this tool as a means to jumpstart action at the community scale. Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusions

PAGE 190

189 Works Cited 7. Basin Commission, Canberra, Australia. 2004. Barlow, M. and Clarke, T. "Blue Gold: The Fight to Sto p the Corporate Theft of the World's Water." The New Press, New York, NY. 2002. Barnett, Cynthia. Beacon Press. 2011 y Flood Control District. 2010. < http://www.projectbrays.org/detention.html > Cech, V. Thomas. "Principles of Water Resources: History, Development, Management, and Policy." John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2010. Cellon Creek. Alachua County Florida Environmenta l Protection Division. Retrieved December 2012. < http://www.alachuacounty.us/Depts/EPD/WaterResources/PublishingImages/Cellon%20creek%20layou t.pdf > 2011. < http://www.portlandoregon.gov/bes/43110 > Chow, V., Maidment, D., and Mays, L Applied Hydrology. Tata McGraw Hill Education. 1988. Resources Allocation. The New Zealand Digital Library: Community Development Library. Retrieved January 2013. < http: //www.nzdl.org/gsdlmod?e=d 00000 00 --off 0cdl -00 0 ---0 10 0 --0 --0direct 10

PAGE 191

190 -4 ------0 1l -11 en 50 --20 help --00 0 1 00 0 0 11 1 0utfZz 8 00 0 0 11 10 0utfZz 8 00&cl=CL1.149&d=HASH01e4bbc77c5bd6c3e32ce47b.4.1>=1 > Coen, D., N assauer, J., and Tut Society of Landscape Architecture. Landscape Architecture Technical Information Series 10. 1987. lanning at Geography and Environmental Science. 2009. Davis, P. Allen and McCuen, H. Richard. "Stormwater Management for Smart Growth." Springer Science+B usiness Media, Inc. New York, NY. 2005. Dame, Johnny. "We are undoing the water work of 25 million years." The Gainesville Sun June 20, 2012. Ellis Huffington Post. March 4, 2013. < http://www.huffingtonpost.com/phaedra ellislamkins/clean air safe communitie_b_2807146.html > EPA Stormwater Management. U.S. En vironmental Protection Agency. Nov. 2012. < http://www.epa.gov/oaintrnt/stormwater/index.htm> EPA. Histo ry of the Clean Water Act U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Feb. 2013. < http://www.epa.gov/lawsregs/laws/cwahistory.html> EPA. Illinois: Des Plaines River. March 2012. < http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/success319/il_desplaines.cfm > EPA Smart Growt < http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/pdf/northern_kentucky_appendices.pdf >

PAGE 192

191 Ferguson, K. Bruce and Debo D. Thomas. "On Site Stormwater Management: Applications for Landscape and Engineering Second Edition." Van Nostrand Reinhold. New York. 1990. Giblett, Rod. Postmodern Wetlands: Culture, History, Ecology 1996. Edinburgh University Press. Harnik, Pe ter. "Urban Green: Innovative Parks for Resurgent Cities." Island Press. 2010. Press of Kentucky. 1974. People in Mind: Design and Management of Everyday Kemp, L. Roger. "Cities and Water: A Handbook for Planning." Mc Farland & Company, Inc. NC. 2009 Resources Engineering, Hill. 1964. < http://www.stadsbyggnad.lth.se/english/news/ > Mays, W. Larry. February 13, 2013. Telephone Interview. Mays, W. Larry. Private Collection of Images. 2013. Mays, W. Larry. "Stormwater Collection Systems Design Handbo ok." McGraw Hill, New York, NY. 2001. Mill Creek. Alachua County Florida Environmental Protection Division. Retrieved December 2012. < http://www.alachuacounty.us/Depts/EPD/WaterResources/PublishingImages/Mill%20creek%20layout.p df >

PAGE 193

192 Nassauer, Joan Iver D.C. 1997. http://www.fredericklawolmsted.com/riverside.html > Outwater, Alice. "Water: A Natural History." Basic Books, New York, NY. 1996. Orlando Sentinel July 6, 2012. Pais, Annie. "Come to Silver Springs to help us find a New Way." The Gainesville Sun June 21, 2012. 2007. (PPA) Department of Public Policy and Administration Research Methods Data Collection Strategies II: Qualitative Research. Retrieved December 2012. < http://www.csulb.edu/ ~msaintg/ppa696/696quali.htm > WaterCentre PTY LTD. May 2 008. < http://www.sfwater.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=2779 > San Fr Solomon, Steven. "Water: The Epic Struggle for Wealth, Power, and Civilization." HarperCollins Publishers. 2010. Somerville, Mass 2012.

PAGE 194

193 Stahre, Peter and Geldof, Govert. New Approach to Sustainable Stormwater Planning." International Green Roof Institute (IGRI). Publication 005. September, 200 3. Prevention and Sustainability Technical Library. Retrieved January 2013. < http://www.p2sustainabilitylibrary.mil/stormwaterbmp/HTML/BMP24.htm > Thayer, R obert. "Gray World, Green Heart: Technology, Nature, and the Sustainable Landscape." John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1994. Thayer, Robert. Life Place: Bioregional Thought and Practice. University of California Press. 2003. Urbonas, Ben. "Linking Stormwater BMP Designs and Performance to Receiving Water Impact Mitigation Proceedings of an Engineering Foundation Conference." ASCE and American Society of Civil Engineers. 2002. 2013. < http://www.npg.org/facts/world_pop_year.htm > Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States: Projected 2009. < http://nca2009.globalchange.gov/projected changes water cycle > < http://www.wbjour nal.com/article/20110523 /PRINTEDITION/305239965> < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseflow > WSUD Water Sensitive Urban Design Program. Retrieved February 2013.

PAGE 195

194 Appendix A: Stormwater Visual Preference Survey

PAGE 196

195 Appendix A: Stormwater Visual Preference Survey

PAGE 197

196 Appendix A: Stormwater Visual Preference Survey

PAGE 198

197 Appendix A: Stormwater Visual Preference Survey

PAGE 199

198 Appendix A: Stormwater Visual Preference Survey

PAGE 200

199 Appendix A: Stormwater Visual Preference Survey

PAGE 201

200 Appendix A: Stormwater Visual Preference Survey

PAGE 202

201 Appendix B : Informed Consent Documentation

PAGE 203

202 Appendix B : Informed Consent Documentat ion

PAGE 204

203 Appendix B : Informed Consent Documentation

PAGE 205

204 Appendix B : Informed Consent Documentation

PAGE 206

205 INTERVIEW QUESTIONS Author Larry W. Mays. Stormwater Collection Systems Design Handbook ." Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Arizona State University Tempe, Arizona My Introduction: Explain my research and intended purpose of creating stormwater guidelines for developing communities Describe my methodology and how I plan to transform the survey results into those guidelines Questions to Ask: 1. How did you begin your process of developing a Stormwater Design Handbook? 2. In your book, you stated how you reflect upon your own experiences in the field of water resources, and how you are continually reminded of how handbooks have always been part of your learning. Can you elabo rate on what made these handbooks so influential to your learning? 3. Are there any specific factors that you have found to be particularly critical for users to have in a handbook? Organization, tables/graphs, graphics, etc.? 4. In creating the handb ook, did you encounter any unexpected challenges? If so, what were they and how did you overcome them? 5. You designed this handbook to be a teaching tool mostly for undergraduate and graduate students learning stormwater design. How would you have des igned your handbook differently to interest the general public? 6. As a stormwater expert, do you think it is probable to design a handbook to accommodate the needs of landscape architects/city planners/designers AND the general public? 7. In your boo k, you mention three roles of the design of hydrologic systems: economics, optimization, and risk analysis. If you were to incorporate a fourth role of 'aesthetics' how would you go about including that? 8. If you were to create a pocket sized book of s tormwater ideas for growing communities, what sort of things would you include? What would you exclude? Appendix C : Interview Questions

PAGE 207

206 PART 1: GROUP # 1 In this scenario, respondents had an overwhelming visual preference for Choice C, with Choice A and B being fairly even second choices. However, Choices A and C were found to be more ecologically friendly, while Choice B was drastically lessened to 1%. The greater the plant diversity and water management quality, the greater the preference. 14% 17% 69% Visual 1 2 3 41% 1% 58% Ecological 1 2 3 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 208

207 PART 1: GROUP # 2 In this scenario, respondents had a fairly equal visual preference for Choice B and C, with very little preference for Choice A. However, Choice C was found to be significantly more ecologically friendly, while Choice B was lessened. Choice A remained the same in both visual and ecological preference. 3% 44% 53% Visual 1 2 3 3% 14% 83% Ecological 1 2 3 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 209

208 PART 1: GROUP # 3 In this scenario, respondents had a high visual preference for Choice C, with a close secondary preference for Choice B. However, Choice B increased to have a relatively equal ecological preference to Choice C. Choice A significantly decreased from a visual preference of 11% to an ecological preference of 1%. 11% 35% 54% Visual 1 2 3 1% 50% 49% Ecological 1 2 3 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 210

209 PART 1: GROUP #4 In this scenario, respondents had a high visual preference for Ch oice C, with a secondary preference for Choice A. There was not a drastic change in responses to ecological friendliness, but Choice C increased by 12% while Choice A decreased by 13%. Choice B stayed at relatively the same low percentage. 27% 4% 69% Visual 1 2 3 14% 5% 81% Ecological 1 2 3 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 211

210 PART 1: G ROUP # 5 In this scenario, respondents had a high visual preference for Choice B, with a secondary preference for Choice A. However, the ecological preference for Choice B increased by 19%, while Choice A decreased by 16%. Choice C stayed re latively low in both visual and ecological preference. 32% 56% 12% Visual 1 2 3 16% 75% 9% Ecological 1 2 3 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 212

211 PART 1: GROUP # 6 In this scenario, respondents had both a very high visual and ecological preference for Choice B. Choice C had a slightly higher visual preference as a second choice, which Choice A had a slightly higher ecological preference as a second choice. 10% 72% 18% Visual 1 2 3 14% 74% 12% Ecological 1 2 3 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 213

212 PART 1: GROUP # 7 In this scenario, respondents had a high visual preference for Choice C, with a secondary preference for Choice B. Howev er, Choice B had a significantly high ecological preference, increasing by 30%. The ecological preference of Choice C decreased by 33% from its high visual preference. Choice A remained about the same for both preferences. 14% 24% 62% Visual 1 2 3 17% 54% 29% Ecological 1 2 3 Appendix D : Visual Preference Su rvey Statistics & Results

PAGE 214

213 PART 1: GROUP # 8 In this scenario, respondents had a high visual preference for Choice C, with a secondary preference for Choice A. However, Choice A and Choice C had almost identical ecological preference. Choice B remained about the same for both preferences. 28% 8% 64% Visual 1 2 3 46% 9% 45% Ecological 1 2 3 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 215

214 PART 1 : GROUP # 1 STATISTICS 1 Group # 1: Choice A # Question A Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 11 11 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 32 32 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 11 32 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 216

215 PART 1 : GROUP # 1 STATISTICS 2. Group # 1: Choice B # Question B Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 13 13 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 1 1 1.00 St atistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 13 1 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 217

216 PART 1 : GROUP # 1 STATISTICS 3. Group # 1: Choice C # Question C Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 54 54 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 46 46 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 54 46 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Re sults

PAGE 218

217 PART 1 : GROUP # 2 STATISTICS 4. Group # 2 : Choice A # Question A Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 2 2 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 2 2 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 M ax Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 2 2 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 219

218 PART 1 : GROUP # 2 STATISTICS 5. Group # 2: Choice B # Question B Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 34 34 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 11 1 1 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 34 11 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 220

219 PART 1 : GROUP # 2 STATISTICS 6. Group # 2: Choice C # Q uestion C Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 41 41 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 63 63 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.0 0 Total Responses 41 63 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 221

220 PART 1 : GROUP # 3 STATISTICS 7. Group # 3 : Choice A # Question A Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 9 9 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 1 1 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Va lue 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 9 1 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 222

221 PART 1 : GROUP # 3 STATISTICS 8. Group # 3: Choice B # Question B Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 27 27 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Fr iendly? 39 39 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 27 39 Appendix D : V isual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 223

222 PART 1 : GROUP # 3 STATISTICS 9. Group # 3: Ch oice C # Question C Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 42 42 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 38 38 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Dev iation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 42 38 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 224

223 PART 1 : GROUP # 4 STATISTICS 10. Group # 4 : Choice A # Question A Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 21 21 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 11 11 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologic ally Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 21 11 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 225

224 PART 1 : GROUP # 4 STATISTICS 11. Group # 4: Choice B # Question B Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 3 3 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 4 4 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 3 4 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 226

225 PART 1 : GROUP # 4 STATISTIC S 12. Group # 4: Choice C # Question C Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 54 54 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 62 62 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.0 0 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 54 62 Appendix D : Visual Preference Sur vey Statistics & Results

PAGE 227

226 PART 1 : GROUP # 5 STATISTICS 13. Group # 5 : Choice A # Question A Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 25 25 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 12 12 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appe aling? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 25 12 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 228

227 PART 1 : GROUP # 5 STATISTICS 14. Group # 5: Choice B # Question B Mean 1 Most Visually Ap pealing? 44 44 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 57 57 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 44 57 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 229

228 PAR T 1 : GROUP # 5 STATISTICS 15. Group # 5: Choice C # Question C Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 9 9 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 7 7 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.0 0 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 9 7 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 230

229 PART 1 : GROUP # 6 STATISTICS 16. Group # 6 : Choice A # Question A Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 8 8 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 11 11 1.00 Statistic Mo st Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 8 11 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Res ults

PAGE 231

230 PART 1 : GROUP # 6 STATISTICS 17. Group # 6: Choice B # Question B Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 56 56 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 58 58 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Response s 56 58 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 232

231 PART 1 : GROUP # 6 STATISTICS 18. Group # 6: Choice C # Question C Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 14 14 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 9 9 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 14 9 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 233

232 PART 1 : GROUP # 7 STATISTICS 19. Group # 7 : Choice A # Question A Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 11 11 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 13 13 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 11 13 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 234

233 PART 1 : GROUP # 7 STATISTICS 20. Group # 7: Choice B # Question B Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 19 19 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 42 42 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 19 42 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 235

234 PART 1 : GROUP # 7 STATISTICS 21. Group # 7: Choice C # Question C Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 48 48 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 22 22 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friend ly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 48 22 Appendix D : Vi sual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 236

235 PART 1 : GROUP # 8 STATISTICS 22. Group # 8 : Choice A # Question A Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 22 22 1.00 2 Most Ecol ogically Friendly? 36 36 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 22 36 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 237

236 PART 1 : GROUP # 8 STATISTICS 23. Gr oup # 8: Choice B # Question B Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 6 6 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 7 7 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecologically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Stand ard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 6 7 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 238

237 PART 1 : GROUP # 8 STATISTICS 24. Group # 8: Choice C # Question C Mean 1 Most Visually Appealing? 51 51 1.00 2 Most Ecologically Friendly? 35 35 1.00 Statistic Most Visually Appealing? Most Ecol ogically Friendly? Min Value 1 1 Max Value 1 1 Mean 1.00 1.00 Variance 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 Total Responses 51 35 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 239

238 PART 2 : GROUP # 1 STATISTICS # Answer Response % 1 A 36 60% 2 B 2 3% 3 C 22 37% Total 60 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 3 Mean 1.77 Variance 0.93 Standard Deviation 0.96 Total Responses 60 After reading about each stormwater alternative, this particular scenario showed an overall preference for Choice A when Choice C had originally had the highest visual and ecological preference. Appendix D : Visual Preference Surv ey Statistics & Results

PAGE 240

239 PART 2 : GROUP # 2 STATISTICS # Answer Response % 1 A 1 2% 2 B 24 40% 3 C 35 58% Total 60 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 3 Mean 2.57 Variance 0.28 Standard Deviation 0.53 Total Responses 60 This particular scenario showed an overall preference for Choice C, when Choice B and C were similar in visual preference and Choice C was the most ecologically preferred. Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 241

240 PART 2 : GRO UP # 3 STATISTICS # Answer Response % 1 A 1 2% 2 B 27 44% 3 C 33 54% Total 61 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 3 Mean 2.52 Variance 0.29 Standard Deviation 0.54 Total Responses 61 This particular scen ario showed an overall preference for Choice C, when there was a high visual preference for Choice C and a relatively equal ecological preference between B and C. Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 242

241 PART 2 : GROUP # 4 STATISTICS # Answer Response % 1 A 11 18% 2 B 0 0% 3 C 49 82% Total 60 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 3 Mean 2.63 Variance 0.61 Standard Deviation 0.78 Total Responses 60 This particular scenario showed an overwhelming preference for Choice C, when Choice C had both a high visual and ecological preference as well. Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 243

242 PART 2 : GROUP # 5 STATISTICS # Answer Response % 1 A 5 8% 2 B 49 83% 3 C 5 8% Total 59 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 3 Mean 2.00 Variance 0.17 Sta ndard Deviation 0.42 Total Responses 59 This particular scenario showed an overwhelming preference for Choice B, when Choice B had both a high visual and ecological preference as well. Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Resu lts

PAGE 244

243 PART 2 : GROUP # 6 STATISTICS # Answer Respons e % 1 A 9 15% 2 B 45 74% 3 C 7 11% Total 61 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 3 Mean 1.97 Variance 0.27 Standard Deviation 0.52 Total Responses 61 This particular scenario showed an overall preference for Choice B, whe n Choice B had both a high visual and ecological preference as well. Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 245

244 PART 2 : GROUP # 7 STATISTICS # Answer Response % 1 A 13 21% 2 B 35 57% 3 C 13 21% Total 61 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 3 Mean 2 .00 Variance 0.43 Standard Deviation 0.66 Total Responses 61 This particular scenario showed an overwhelming preference for Choice B, when Choice C had a high visual preference and Choice B had a high ecological preference. Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 246

245 PART 2 : GROUP # 8 S TATISTICS # Answer Response % 1 A 19 32% 2 B 3 5% 3 C 37 63% Total 59 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 3 Mean 2.31 Variance 0.87 Standard Deviation 0.93 Total Responses 59 This particular scenario sho wed an overall preference for Choice C, when there was a high visual preference for Choice C and an almost identical ecological preference for both Choice A and Choice C. Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 247

246 PART 3 : DEMOGRAPHICS & KNOWLEDGE BASED QUESTIONS What is your gender? # Answer Response % 1 Male 33 46% 2 Female 38 54% Total 71 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 2 Mean 1.54 Variance 0.25 Standard Deviation 0.50 Total Responses 71 What is your age? Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 248

247 # Answer Response % 1 5 12 2 3% 2 13 1 7 0 0% 3 18 21 1 1% 4 22 25 9 13% 5 26 30 8 11% 6 31 40 8 11% 7 41 50 9 13% 8 51 60 16 23% 9 61 or over 18 25% Total 71 100% # Answer Response % 1 5 12 2 3% 2 13 17 0 0% 3 18 21 1 1% 4 22 25 9 13% 5 26 30 8 11% 6 31 40 8 11% 7 41 50 9 13% 8 51 60 16 23% 9 61 or over 18 25% Total 71 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 9 Mean 6.79 Variance 4.20 Standard Deviation 2.05 Total Responses 71 Appendix D : Vis ual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 249

248 Do you li ve in the CITY of Alachua? # Answer Response % 1 Yes 23 33% 2 No 46 67% Total 69 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 2 Mean 1.67 Variance 0.23 Standard Deviation 0.47 Total Responses 69 What is your ethnicity? # Answer Response % 1 White, non Hispanic 59 86% 2 African American 1 1% 3 Hispanic 4 6% 4 Asian Pacific Islander 2 3% 5 Native American 1 1% 6 Other 2 3% Total 69 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 6 Mean 1.42 Varian ce 1.31 Standard Deviation 1.14 Total Responses 69 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 250

249 How much do you know about stormwater management? # Answer Response % 1 I have never heard of stormwater management 3 4% 2 I have heard of it, but don't know very much about it 23 32% 3 I know some information about it 34 48% 4 I know a lot about it 11 15% Total 71 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 4 Mean 2.75 Variance 0.59 Standard Deviation 0.77 Total Responses 71 How often do you consciously try to conse rve water in your home? # Answer Response % 1 Not often 6 8% 2 Sometimes 20 28% 3 Often 45 63% Total 71 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 3 Mean 2.55 Variance 0.42 Standard Deviation 0.65 Total Responses 71 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 251

250 How con cerned are you about water quality in your COMMUNITY? # Answer Response % 1 Not concerned 4 6% 2 Somewhat concerned 21 30% 3 Very concerned 44 62% 4 I don't know if there are any water quality issues in my community 2 3% Total 71 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 4 Mean 2.62 Variance 0.41 Standard Deviation 0.64 Total Responses 71 How much do you know about the Floridan Aquifer? # Answer Response % 1 I have never heard of the Floridan Aquifer 7 10% 2 I have heard of it, but don't know very much about it 15 21% 3 I know some information about it 35 49% 4 I know a lot about it 14 20% Total 71 100% Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results

PAGE 252

251 Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 4 Mean 2.79 Variance 0.77 Standard Deviation 0 .88 Total Responses 71 How important is it for community members to play active roles in protecting local watersheds from pollution? # Answer Response % 1 Not important 0 0% 2 Sometimes important, depending on what's causing the pollution 7 10% 3 Very important 63 90% 4 It is not the community member's role 0 0% Total 70 100% Statistic Value Min Value 2 Max Value 3 Mean 2.90 Variance 0.09 Standard Deviation 0.30 Total Responses 70 Appendix D : Visual Preference Surve y Statistics & Results

PAGE 253

252 Would you like to be added to the email list to receive updates on the progress of this research and an invitation to the public presentation? # Answer Response % 1 Yes 33 46% 2 No 38 54% Total 71 100% Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 2 Mean 1.54 Variance 0.25 Standard Deviation 0.50 Total Responses 71 Appendix D : Visual Preference Survey Statistics & Results