HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem IVSteps Toward Sustainability
in Oshkosh, WI
Environmental Studies 490: Senior Seminar
May 3, 2016
Proposal for Native
Plantings in Stormwater
Basins
By: Shantel Brundidge, Gregory Gauthier Jr.,
Kelly Hamilton, and Lindsay McClintock
Current Situation
•Flooding
•Impervious Surfaces
•Water Quality
•Impaired Waters
Stormwater Basins located in Oshkosh, WI
Drainage Basin Powerpoint, E. Williams
Our Proposal
•Proposal:“All new developments and
redevelopments requiring stormwater
basins shall use native plants.”
•City of Oshkosh Sustainability Plan
•Environmental Conservation
Stormwater Basins with Native Vegetation
Benchmarking
•Farmington Hills, MI
•One of the few select cities
•Requires native planting
•Stormwater Management Ordinance
•Design guidelines provided
•Simulate water cycle and green the city
•Demographically similar to Oshkosh
Benchmarking
•Los Angeles, CA
•Passed ordinance, May 2012 use of Natural
Resources
•Ensures development and
redevelopment mitigate runoff
•To benefit watershed and city
•Water Quality Compliance Master Plan
•Designed and constructed by entire
community
Stormwater Basin in Los Angeles
Barriers
•Lack of understanding
•Benefits of native plants
•Aesthetics
•Not traditional landscape idea
•Costs
Business owners/developers unreceptive to added cost
Solutions
•Educational Campaign
•Wild Ones
•Grant Program
•Urban Nonpoint Source & Stormwater Management
•Community Partnerships
Fox Valley Technical College
Bettering Oshkosh’s Future
Economic
Increasing property value
Tourism
Environment
Clean water
Increased Biodiversity
Social
Reducing damage from flooding to
homes
Natural beauty & recreation
Works Cited
“Green Cities: Good Health.” 2015. University of Washington, College of the Environment. Web. 27 April
2016.
“Oshkosh, Wisconsin.” 2013. United States Census Bureau. Web. 27 April 2016.
“Upper Fox River Basins.” Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Web. 21 April
2016.
“Welcome to Wild Ones Fox Valley Area.”Fox Valley Area.Wild Ones, 2016. Web. 16 March
2016.
"Storm Water Detention Basins."Farmington Hills, MI -. Web. 18 Apr. 2016.
Urban Agriculture:
Beekeeping Ordinance
Heidi Hetzel, Erika Lechner, Kailey Wood
Urban Agriculture
●Health benefits
○Improves dietary habits
○Benefits mental health and personal wellness
○Provides social cohesion
●Ecological functions
○Biodiversity
○Habitat Improvement
Proposal
City beekeeping ordinance:
Ensure healthy honey bee populations
Benefitting our local economy
Provide nutritious produce locally
Sustainable practices
Addresses:Local food section of the Oshkosh Sustainability Plan under
Municipal Code Revisions
Why Bees?
Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD)
Wisconsin crop pollination
Why the city?
●Agricultural pesticides
●Diverse diet
●Longer foraging season
●Educational opportunity
Vital Services
Food Security
Pollinate 75% of food crops
⅓ of our daily diet
Pollinate 90 commercially grown crops
U.S. crops;alfalfa, almonds, blueberries, avocados cucumbers,
onions, grapefruits, oranges, pumpkins, etc.
Wisconsin Crops;Cherries, apples, cranberries
Large industries and revenues
Local Economic Products
●Beeswax -Lip balm, moisturizer, candles,
etc.
●Bee Pollen -Supplement for asthma,
increasing immune function, skin irritation
relief, weight management,etc.
●Royal Jelly -Supplement for poor digestion, stomach ulcers,
insomnia, high cholesterol, etc.
●Propolis -Antimicrobial properties, used in minor wounds, and being
researched on beneficial effects on cancerous cells.
●Honey -Medicinal purposes, cosmetics, consumption, etc.
Economic Consequences
•$15 billion annually
•Increase in produce costs locally
•Nuts, fruits, vegetables
•Increase in imported goods
•Increase the U.S. trade deficit
•Loss of industry
Economic Impact on Wisconsin
Negatively impacts the beef and dairy industries
2nd in the nation for milk production
Losses
Clover and alfalfa
138 Cheese factories
14 Butter factories
14 Yogurt factories
(Brancel)
Benchmarking
•Fond du Lac, WI
•Appleton, WI
•Madison, WI
Stakeholders
•Beekeepers
•City Council members
•People with allergies
•Concerned parents
Barriers
•Fear
•Lack of education
Momentum
Education action
Future planning:
•Beekeeping courses
•Incorporation into curriculum
•Community learning opportunities:
•Community gardens
Field trips
Where Does Oshkosh Stand?
●Proposed in March 2014
○Failed
●Recommended in February 2016
●Draft Ordinance -Sustainable Advisory Board
○Acceptance not permission
○Animal Husbandry -rules and regulations
Growing Oshkosh -2015
Significance for Sustainability
Grassroots contribution to three pillars of
sustainability...
AND
Serves as a gateway to the formation of a
community integrated with urban agriculture.
Works Cited
Bellows, Anne C., Katherine Brown, and Jac Smith. (2003). Health Benefits of Urban Agriculture.Community Food
Security Coalition.
Brancel, Ben. (2013). The Buzz About Bees: Let's Protect Our Pollinator.Wisconsin Department of Agriculture,
Trade and Consumer Protection.
Spector, D. (2013, June 22). What Our World Would Look Like Without Honeybee.
Rental Housing in Oshkosh:
Improving Energy Efficiency
Matt Gasper, Brian Gerl, Nate Kleist
Barriers:
1)Communication
2)Education
3)Split Incentives
4)Financial/Economic
5)Short Term Leases
6)Market Fragmentation
Stakeholders:
1)Lack of communication
2)Need for an education program
3)Concern whether there is a market for upgrades
4)Tenants unsure of willingness to pay
What we learned...
Benchmarking: SmartRegs
Boulder, Colorado
1)Mandatory program for rental
properties
2)Standardized grading system
3)Point system
4)Dedicated representative to help
through the process
Benchmarking: Me2
Milwaukee, WI
1)Voluntary program primarily
for homeowners
2)Combines existing Focus on
Energy℠rebates with low
interest loans
3)Loans ~5%
Benchmarking: Cambridge Energy Alliance
Cambridge, MA
1)Voluntary program
2)Green lease concept
a)Landlords and Tenants
b)Upfront payment of utilities
c)Helps finance green
improvements
3)Available 0% financing
4)Free assessments
Recommendations:
1)Green leases
2)Education programs for
landlords and tenants
3)Improve communication
avenues between all
stakeholders
4)Tax incentives
Summary
1)Barriers
2)Stakeholders
3)Benchmarking
4)Recommendations
References
Cambridge Energy Alliance. The Cambridge Energy Alliance. n.p. n.d. Web. 23 April 2016. <http://cambridgeenergyalliance.org/>
EnergySmart.Energy Smart, n.d. Web. 30 March 2016. <http://www.energysmartyes.com/>
Homeowners. Environmental Collaboration Office. (City of Milwaukee). Web. 25 March 2016. <
http://city.milwaukee.gov/Me2/Homeowners#.VyF---SGPHA>
Karnitz, Bruce. Personal interview. 16 March 2016.
Krueger, Jason. Personal interview. 14 March 2016.
Lord, Donn. Personal interview. 7 March 2016.
Oshkosh, WI. Planning Services. City of Oshkosh.Comprehensive Plan, 2005-2025.Ordinance 5-82. 22 March 2005. Web. 6 April
2016.
Oshkosh, WI. Sustainability Board. Sustainability.ICLEI Milestone 1 Oshkosh, Wisconsin Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis. Print.
2007.
Proposal for Reclaiming
Vacant Lots for Community
Use
Dani Hatch, Sophie Brandstetter, Ryan Kisow & Ty Voissem
Vacant Land in Oshkosh
Current Situation:Currently 28 city-owned
vacant lots
•Demolished homes and side lots
•Maintained by the city
•Up for sale by the city
•Can be utilized with a conditional use permit
Our Goal:The creation of community green
spaces
Decreases the city’s maintenance costs
Increases quality of life
Neighborhood aesthetics
Proposal
•8 Garden beds
•Archway
•Picnic table
•Little Library
•Storage shed
•2 Benches
Costs
Start Up budget: $1,345
Funding
Oshkosh Community Foundation Grant
Community Impact
Fund Donations
Local Businesses
Local Churches
Neighbors
Equipment Donations
Local Businesses
Benchmarking
Existing green spaces in Oshkosh:
Franklin & Ida
Central & Parkway
Milwaukee, WI
Social interaction, recreation, and
education
Youngstown, OH
Lots of Green Program
Stakeholders
City of Oshkosh
Growing Oshkosh
Local residents
Barriers
Neighborhood community participation
Some negative feedback from neighbors
Concerns over noise and traffic
Benefits of Green Space
•Decreases City Costs
•Beautify Unattractive Spaces
•Increase Neighborhood Values
•Increase Community Engagement
•Provide Sense of Place and Ownership
•Meeting Oshkosh’s Sustainability Goals
•Promote Local Food Education and Production
Overview/conclusion
•We laid the groundwork for this action plan to
be carried out anywhere where motivation for
such an idea exists.
•The measurements for the beds along with all
supplies have been adequately constructed
Expanding Plastic Film
Recycling in Oshkosh
Carly Persson & Cassandra Fowler
1
Slide 45
1 Cash introduce
194 tons annually
Define plastic film
Cassandra Fowler,
Recommendation
Include Plastic Film in City Recycling Ordinance
•Curbside Pickup
•W.R.A.P.
•Tri-County Recycling Center
•Operational change: slowing of
conveyor belt
Environmental Impacts
Over 33,000,000 million bags landfilled
Impact on Waterways
Microplastics
Persistent Organic Pollutants (POP)
PCBs
Effects on wildlife
Dangers to human health
Economic Impacts
•Redevelopment/Improvement
•Parks and waterfront
properties
•Lake Winnebago
•Economic
•$234 million fishing industry
•Fox River
•Food Source
Societal Change
Behavioral change
•Convenience
•Education
•Mandatory
Stakeholders
Tri-County Recycling Center
Winnebago County Recycling Coordinator
Economic
Street Sanitation
Public Works Sanitation Director
Risk of contamination
Oshkosh Residents
Benchmarking
Madison, Dane County,
Pellitteri Waste Systems
Population: 509,939
Households: 216,022
Since 2012
Slow conveyor belt
Bag of bags
Promotion
Youtube Tutorial
Online Guidelines
Oshkosh, Winnebago County, Tri-
County Recycling Center
Population: 604,472
Households: 250,849
Costs
•Additional Labor
•Keep up production
•Potential $27,160 offset per year
Barriers
•Education of Residents
•Tutorial
•“Bag of Bags”
•Framing for each age
bracket
•Simplicity emphasized
•Clarity of Bags
•Risk of Contamination
Conclusion
Initiate mandatory plastic film recycling and begin
curbside recycling of plastic film for processing in the
Tri-County Recycling Facility
•Changes to Tri-County Recycling Center
•Slow Conveyor Belt
•Educational Campaign
Works Cited
Andrady, Anthony L. "Microplastics in the Marine Environment."Marine Pollution Bulletin 62 (2011): 1596-605. Print.
Barr, Stewart, Andrew W. Gilg, and Nicholas J. Ford. “Differences between Household Waste Reduction, Reuse, and Recycling
Behavior: a Study of Reported Behaviors, Intentions, and Explanatory Variables.”Environmental and Waste Management 4.2
(2001): 69-82. Web. 29 March 2016.
Cherrier, Helene. “Consumer Identity and Moral Obligations in Non-Plastic Bag Consumption: a Dialectical Perspective.”
International Journal of Consumer Studies 30 (2006): 515-523. Web. 29 March 2016.
Ferrara, Ida and Paul Missios. “Recycling and Waste Diversion Effectiveness: Evidence from Canada.”Environmental and
Resource Economics 30 (2005): 221-238. Web. 29 March 2016.
“Milwaukee and Wisconsin WRAP (Wrap Recycling Action Program).”PlasticFilmRecycling.org.American Chemistry Council.
Web. 04 April 2016.
Ryan, Peter G., Charles J. Moore, Jan A. van Franeker, and Coleen L. Moloney. "Monitoring the abundance of Plastic Debris in
the Marine Environment."Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 364 (2009): 1999-2012. Print.
Thompson, Richard C., Charles J. Moore, Frederick S. vom Saal, and Shanna H. Swan. "Plastics, the environment and human
health: current consensus and future trends."Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 364 (2009): 2153-66. Print.