HomeMy WebLinkAboutSpring2018LandscapingImproving Stormwater Management in
Oshkosh Through Green Infrastructure
Environmental Studies Senior Seminar
University of Oshkosh Wisconsin
Landscaping Group
Lexie Uffenbeck, Caitlyn Uhlenbrauck, Grant Zweig, Hannah Holzschuh, Ben Slusser
May 2018
Table of contents:
●Execu ve Summary……………………………………...………………………………………………..…………..…2
●Introduc on……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…...3
●Iden fica on of problem……………………………………………………………………………………………....3
●Background………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..….4
●Proposed ac on…………………………………………………………………………………………………….……...8
●Stakeholders…………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………...10
●Case Studies…………………………………………………………………………………………………...……………20
●Cost……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………....23
●Barriers……………………………………………………………………………………………………...………………..24
●Significance of sustainability……………………………………..……………………….……………………..…26
●Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………..………....………………..27
●References…………………………………………………………………………………………………………...……..31
1
Execu ve summary:
The landscaping techniques we propose involve different levels of difficulty, costs, and
their own individual barriers. The techniques we want to implement are rain gardens,
bioswales, green roofs, and ver cal plan ngs. Behind all of these techniques is a dependence on
soil series which determine the different beneficial quali es for the area. Each soil series
contains a different amount of silt, sand, and clay which affects the type of landscaping and
materials that can placed in the area. The basis of these ideas comes from the city of Oshkosh
Sustainability Plan, the Green Tier Community document, and extensive research on the use of
green infrastructure. Oshkosh is a cer fied Green er Community, a part of Tree City USA, and
has high flyer status through Bird City. This shows how Oshkosh is dedicated to being
sustainable and how implemen ng the landscaping methods we are recommending are a
feasible change for the city. We talked to several stakeholders to gauge their opinion on the
ideas we are proposing and to see how viable these ideas are. A large por on of the following
report is spent explaining each landscaping technique and where these methods will be best
u lized. Before moving forward, it is also important to address what barriers and costs we may
encounter and how to overcome them. Through our research and audit of the city of Oshkosh,
we would like to propose numerous landscaping techniques to implement, especially in parking
lot design, to improve stormwater management, reduce runoff, and improve water quality.
2
Introduc on:
Within the city of Oshkosh there is a need for more green infrastructure. As a
community that is a Tree and Bird City, and a Green Tier Community, we must uphold this
pres ge by maintaining and improving our green infrastructure. We find the issue of green
infrastructure relevant to the issue of stormwater management and relevant to parking.
Through our research, we find that different techniques of landscaping can aid in trapping and
filtering stormwater before entering the sewer systems and groundwater. These landscaping
techniques include bioswales, rain gardens, na ve plants, and ver cal plan ngs. By
implemen ng our recommenda on of how to manage stormwater, we will see improved water
quality, reduced runoff, less flooding, and lower stress on sewer systems.
Iden fica on of the Problem:
Stormwater drainage issues are seen mostly in parking lots with imper vious surfaces.
Stormwater runs off of impervious surfaces and into water bodies. There are very high rates of
eutrophica on in Lake Winnebago and the Fox River. These water bodies around Oshkosh have
increasingly high levels of limi ng nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus; causing algal blooms
and accelera ng the life me of the lakes. Addi onally, the water running off of impervious
surfaces and the low absorbance of water in turf grass around the city causes flooding in yards,
streets, and basements.
Local pollu on from brownfield sites pollutes the soil and groundwater. Brownfields are
areas that are contaminated with various pollutants that impact public health and prevent or
3
slow development (Mikkelsen et. al 1994). It is important to prevent contamina on of water
that originates from runoff of these sites because many of these contaminants will persist in the
water and soil for very long periods of me and cause a variety of nega ve health impacts to
humans and the ecosystem.
Background:
Soil varies greatly depending on different factors such as climate, moisture regime, and
geological history. Each soil series and type of soil varies in composi on of sand, silt, and clay.
These three components and the composi on percentages create the different types of soil.
Figure 1.1: City map of Oshkosh map with NRCS data overlay
Figure 1 shows a map of the city of Oshkosh with an overlay of NRCS soil data. The
yellow lines depict the borders for different soil series in the area. For the city of Oshkosh there
are many different soil series each with a different soil profile and descrip on with quali es that
4
determine the types of plants that can grow in that area or the amount of infiltra on. It
determines the depth to the water table and within the different soil types are varia ons
amongst the availability of water intake and the amount of water that stays within the top soil
layers. Depending on soil composi on and the amount of air space between each aggregate,
the water will trickle and slowly filter toxins out before entering the water table. At the base of
any landscaping technique implementa on, there needs to a a qualita ve analysis of the soil
underneath the area along with an accurate site label, such as brown, etc. At the corner of
Butler and Snell there is a designated brown site, which means that this area is polluted and
therefore compromised and in need of restora on (Soil management plan, 2012). This area is
contaminated by petroleum. The basis of soil health and contamina on is something that is
required to know before trying to remediate the area. For example, certain na ve plants will be
able to hold up to pollu on be er than others and eventually filter those toxins out of the soil
through uptake from the soil. The importance of soil and knowing the condi on of the soil can
make a restora on process go much smoother and therefore lead to the success of landscaping
techniques in the system.
Na ve plants with deep roots hold the soil together, prevent erosion and runoff, do not
require the use of pes cides and fer lizers, and overall do not require much maintenance
(Hefland et. al 2006). Addi onally, they increase biodiversity which benefits the environment in
a number of ways as well as provides beauty and brings a natural sense of place and belonging
to this area. The ecotone in Oshkosh is tradi onally oak savanna which contains many deep
rooted grasses. These grasses grow a complex root systems that hold the soil together and soak
up water from the surface. Along shorelines, a buffer of deep rooted na ve plants will prevent
5
soil erosion which causes turbidity and poor water quality. Using na ve grasses in all parts of
city, in addi on to along water bodies, is beneficial and helps to conserve the quality of an
important natural resource ‑ water. Na ve plants have evolved with other species in the
ecosystem which means they are be er suited to handle the different climate events in this
area. Hasselkus, E. R. (2012) is a good reference for what types of plants are na ve to Oshkosh,
what their different benefits entail, and where to place them based on the habitat and soil type.
This will not only guide the city on how to be er understand the ecosystem and types of plants,
but also residents who want to implement na ve plants on their own property. The benefits of
na ve plants outweigh non‑na ve plants. They provide structure for the soil and they are
adapted to this ecosystem so they are be er suited for the climate and therefore require less
maintenance and resources.
Rain gardens are a sufficient solu on for stormwater best management prac ces
(BMPS). A rain garden is a depressed area that collects water from runoff (Asleson, 2009). They
are planted with grasses and flowering plants. Some of the major benefits include being cost
effec ve, aesthe cally pleasing, reducing runoff, filtering pollutants, and crea ng habitat for
wildlife (Asleson, 2009). Bioswales achieve the same goals as rain gardens but are designed to
manage a specified amount of runoff from a large impervious area, such as a parking lot or
highway. Bioswales o en deeper than rain gardens but use the same na ve plants to withstand
both heavy rains and drought (Soil Science Society of America, 2018). The use of rain gardens
and bioswales will provide useful bioreten on for posi ve drainage. Rain gardens and bioswales
are a great step toward introducing green infrastructure. We need to first implement
sustainable stormwater infrastructure. Then, begin planning and policy to connect ecological
6
aspects. These bioreten on methods will also feature na ve plan ngs that will create habitat
and be aesthe cally pleasing to the ci zens of Oshkosh. We can also work with large
corpora ons to implement rain gardens and bioswales on commercial property. For example,
Oshkosh truck is building their new headquarters in Oshkosh and by using green infrastructure
on their property, they can be a leading example in the city for other businesses. Oshkosh Truck
is especially significant because their new headquarters will be posi oned on two bodies of
water. Rain gardens and bioswales are effec ve at capturing water that typically runs off of the
land and into the water. Working with businesses around the city to implement rain gardens and
bioswales on their proper es is an effec ve stormwater management prac ce.
Preserving what we already have, the City of Oshkosh Sustainability Plan outlines that
the reten on of exis ng trees and other vegeta on is a goal for the city now and in the future.
We would like to reiterate the importance of maintaining that vegeta on within Oshkosh and
ensuring that any new developments that take place in the city are mindful of Oshkosh’s
commitment to retaining na ve vegeta on. Ensuring that new developments are following
recommenda ons and guidelines will help Oshkosh maintain its Tree City USA status along with
making it a healthier and more sustainable city. The benefit of retaining our Tree City USA status
requires us to maintain the trees we already have, but we recommend these trees are na ve
and have the deep rooted systems made for this environment and climate so they will benefit
the other species in the ecosystem and maintain a clean environment ( Berland et. al 2017).
Na ve trees placed along our street frontages will help increase infiltra on. Placing na ve trees
along street frontages will reduce soil compac on from the impervious surfaces and increase
infiltra on during rain events. (Bartens et. al 2008). Combining all of the landscaping methods
7
men oned will create the best stormwater management prac ce and greatest benefit for the
environment.
Proposed Ac on:
In order to protect our water resources, reduce runoff, and prevent flooding within the
city, we recommend three changes to the landscaping ordinance. In Ar cle IX, Chapter 30 of the
city of Oshkosh ordinances describes a point system that requires public and commercial land to
meet a certain number of points which are assigned to different landscaping features. Currently,
the point system is not used directly to manage stormwater and residen al areas are excluded.
We have also found that there are more parking lots than are being u lized in Oshkosh which
contributes to more runoff into the waterways. When rain gardens, bioswales, and other
landscaping features are added to parking lots, streetscapes, and other areas of the city, the
amount of runoff is reduced. The amount varies depending on how much landscaping is added
to an area, considering flow rate, slope of incline, soil type, and the severity of the rain event,
but green infrastructure and sustainable landscaping will have a posi ve impact on stormwater
management within the city. Overall, Oshkosh needs to implement a more developed point
system which favors green infrastructure in order to strengthen stormwater management to be
the best management strategies.
As the landscaping team for the University of Wisconsin‑Oshkosh Environmental Studies
Senior Seminar capstone we suggest the city implement an extension of the point system found
8
in Ar cle IX, Chapter 30 of the Oshkosh Municipal Code. The city of Oshkosh Municipal Code
states that the purpose of the Landscaping Requirements chapter is to “establish landscaping
requirements and other regula ons intended to preserve and maintain vegeta on within in a
manner that promotes the natural resource protec on, aesthe c, and public health goals of the
City.” The point system is used as a way to enforce specific landscaping techniques on
commercial and public lands in Oshkosh. Reaching a certain amount of points per area (which
differs depending on the land use) is required under the Landscaping Requirements ordinance.
The ordinance lays out how to reach the minimum amount of points required by assigning
points to different types of plants, shrubs, trees, fencing, and more. To further align with the
mission of Oshkosh and promote ecosystem health, these are the poten al changes we propose
be made to the Landscaping Requirements:
We request that the city implement within ar cle IX sec on 30‑253, item (2) paved
areas. For paved areas we want to alter the current plan from 40% of shrubbery requirements
to 40% na ve shrubs only. Second to that, we want ar cle IX sec on 30‑255 item (3) street
frontages. Within street frontages the minimum of 50% of all points are devoted to decora ve
and medium trees and we want to change this to be 30% na ve trees and a minimum of 30%
must be deep rooted na ve grasses. We believe that na ve plants are be er to manage
stormwater than trees. Ar cle IX sec on 30‑255 item (2) requirements part (A): currently
bioswales and rain gardens get 20 points per 20 square . area and cannot exceed 100 points.
We are requiring this be changed to 30 points per 20 square . area with no point limit.
We would also like to see changes to Sec on 30‑251: Applicability (B). This sec on
asserts that any expansion of exis ng buildings exceeding 50% of the current building ’s floor
9
area are required to follow the landscaping requirements listed in Chapter 30 ‑ Ar cle IX. We
recommend that this figure be reduced to 25% of the current building ’s floor area. This means
that if the expansion of the exis ng building exceeds one quarter of the the building ’s current
floor area, the owner(s) will be required to adhere to the requirements listed in Chapter 30 ‑
Ar cle IX.
Finally, we recommend an amendment to Sec on 30‑251: Applicability (E) Exemp ons.
This sec on has exempted single family and two family dwellings from mee ng landscaping
requirements. We propose that newly developed single and two family dwellings be included in
the landscaping requirements upon construc on.
Stakeholders:
We met with a variety of people in Oshkosh and the surrounding communi es to gain
insight into their perspec ves on various parts of the community in order to be er understand
how they perceive the landscaping ideas we are proposing. In addi on, we desired to discover
how viable these op ons are by gauging community acceptance.
I. Steven Wiley, Assistant Planner of the City of Oshkosh
One of the primary stakeholders we interviewed was Steven Wiley, who is the assistant
planner for the City of Oshkosh. Mr. Wiley is an important stakeholder for the Landscaping
group because he is knowledgeable about how different parts of Oshkosh are implemen ng
green infrastructure, where improvement needs to happen, and how feasible some of our ideas
are in regards to current regula ons. He had a lot of really great things to say that were very
helpful in crea ng our recommenda on for the city. The topics we focused on from his
10
interview are community planning, natural assets in Oshkosh, hazards, stormwater regula on,
current green infrastructure usage, how willing the community is to accept those features in the
City, and how everything es into community iden ty and character.
Mr. Wiley discussed that there was a comprehensive plan in place that is currently being
updated. It addresses Oshkosh’s natural resources as important for agriculture, nature, and
culture. The plan outlines a need for green infrastructure through conserva on of resources,
with special a en on to our water supply (i.e. watersheds, runoff issues, navigable waters and
erosion from wake, groundwater, drinking water, and floodplain and wetland zoning districts).
Although there have not been any formal wetland restora on projects that have taken place in
Oshkosh (to the best of Mr. Wiley ’s knowledge), the comprehensive plan does give sugges ons
on how to do so were one to be undertaken.
Oshkosh has many resources including rivers, streams, lakes, property on the water, and
other natural areas such as Sawyer Creek and Miller's Bay. As Mr. Wiley men oned previously,
Oshkosh’s resources bring a sense of culture to the city. Volunteers from all over Oshkosh came
together to help restore the Miller ’s Bay Mainly through na ve plan ngs with the goal to
maintain a healthy environment and an a rac ve appearance. Steven also suggested that the
Pioneer site in Oshkosh would be a suitable site for restora on and implementa on of green
infrastructure. Another ini a ve that has brought together the community is implementa on of
a stormwater medallion near stormwater drains that educates the community on what should
not be dumped into those stormwater drains that run directly into local bodies of water.
An unfortunate topic that has to be brought up when discussing stormwater drainage, is
hazards. Oshkosh has had many flooding issues including basements backups, wet basements in
11
homes, street flooding, and flooding in yards and other green spaces. Steven was not sure that
there have ever been beach closures because of high levels of bacteria, but it is not necessarily
always safe to swim in the water. In Lake Winnebago, there are high levels of phosphorus, PCBs,
and suspended sediment. The Fox River is in slightly be er shape with low levels of PCBs and
aqua c toxicity.
Perhaps the most important part of the interview with Mr. Wiley in rela on to this
project, was of discussion of stormwater regula ons. The stormwater ordinance is up to date
and does offer some incen ves for green infrastructure. Examples of these incen ves include
credit given to property owners who have city‑approved rain barrels and rain gardens (and an
extra credit given for property on the water), a best management prac ce credit, and a credit
given to those who improve the quality of the runoff from their land. Na ve plants and rain
gardens are noted in the stormwater ordinance, but there is li le to no men on of green roofs
and permeable pavers ‑ both of which are important to groups in this class. Overall, Steven said
that using green infrastructure to reduce infrastructure is not discouraged, but it is definitely
not as encouraged as it perhaps should be. In all of these categories, Oshkosh is doing a fair job
at focusing on environmental impact, but there remains room for improvement.
It is important to consider what has already been implemented in and around the City of
Oshkosh when planning what we would like to propose to the City for our por on of the final
project. Two of the most noteworthy green infrastructure features that were discussed in our
interview with Mr. Wiley were rain barrels and rain gardens. Perhaps due to the simplicity of
installa on and their low maintenance requirements, rain barrels seem to be the more
prevalent feature implemented by residents. Such features do not require a permit to be
12
installed, but in order to obtain the stormwater u lity credit that the City offers, a permit must
be submi ed by those seeking the credit. Along with rain gardens and rain barrels, Mr. Wiley
noted some of the other green infrastructure features that can be found in the City of Oshkosh
including, bioreten on areas, green roofs, permeable surfaces, bioswales, and na ve plan ngs.
Overall, residents have been fairly accep ng of green infrastructure features in the City
of Oshkosh. However, it was discussed that concerns related to such projects usually arise
around their cost. For the most part, residents are open to green infrastructure projects so long
as they are not overly expensive. Addi onally, there has been some controversy surrounding the
Friends of Menominee Park Shoreland restora on project. The dominant issue with this project
has not been the cost, rather it has been that the na ve plants that have been planted are
supposedly blocking some residents’ view of Lake Winnebago and therefore some want to see
those plants either removed, trimmed, or replaced with shorter vegeta on.
Although there is acceptance of some of the most common green infrastructure features
in the City of Oshkosh, it was discussed that the community ’s iden ty and character do not
necessarily reflect green infrastructure and landscaping. There is a small por on of the
popula on of Oshkosh that is interested in taking on such projects; however, there appears to
be a much larger por on that simply is unaware of such issues and projects. Steven also noted
that developers may be aware of such features but typically s ck to what they are used to,
which does not usually involve green infrastructure. Even though there may not be widespread
interest, Oshkosh seems to be changing for the be er. Part of this change comes in the form of
Oshkosh being designated a Tree City USA, receiving High‑Flyer statues through Bird City, and
being a Green Tier Legacy Community. There are also various allies to green infrastructure and
13
environmental ini a ves including Silverstar Brands, the Southwest Rotary Club, Oshkosh Corp.,
the Oshkosh Public Library, Friends of the Menominee Park Shoreland, and others.
II. Margy Davey, Head of the Sustainability Board for the City of Oshkosh
Along with Steven Wiley, Margy Davey is a primary stakeholder. Margy is a primary
stakeholder to the landscaping group because she works directly with the city of Oshkosh on
the Sustainability Advisory Board. Margy showed concern that although the community ’s
natural resources are addressed in the comprehensive plan, they are not given as much
a en on as they should be ge ng. She states that the city could be doing a lot be er with
specific a en on to the community ’s water resources in the comprehensive plan. In rela on to
stormwater, she men oned that although inflow and infiltra on has improved, many residents
of Oshkosh s ll struggle with flooding. She men oned that a major issue with the landscaping
point system, is how it is set up. Currently, trees gets more points than na ve plants even
though na ve plants would help mi gate stormwater runoff be er because of their deep root
systems and coevolu on with other species in the ecosystem.
Ms. Davis stated that the main problem is that other departments do not realize that
there is a Sustainability Advisory Board which will do research for them. The Sustainability
Advisory Board and Parks Department do not have a close rela onship, but Ms. Davis believes
that if they could work together, they would get a lot more accomplished. On a more posi ve
note, she acknowledged that the community is very involved with the Sustainability Advisory
Board by asking ques ons and demanding that more be done.
14
Since the community seems to be engaged with the board, we asked her if being “green”
is a rac ve to new people moving into the area. Ms. Davis said that, that was a good ques on,
and that she does not know. What she does know is that the board has spent months on green
events that provide informa on for people that want to be green. She once again voiced her
concern and frustra on that they do not get any recogni on from the city for holding such
events.
Specific environmental ini a ves that have been started in the community that relate to
the green events are rain gardens and rain barrel workshops. Fox‑Wolf River Shed Rain Barrel
workshops are more popular than the rain gardens. Ms. Davis is happy that there is a workshop
for people to a end but she wishes that they either they make it shorter and more concise or
make it long and go into greater detail. The workshop provides barrels, kits, and informa on on
how to set everything up. The issue she discussed is that there is confusion with the stormwater
credit that is in place. She is pre y certain that par cipants have to fill out paperwork to have
the rain barrels on their property to get the stormwater credit but no one keeps track of
whether they actually set up and are using it. In addi on to the rain gardens and rain barrel
workshops in the community, there may be some community gardens but she is unsure of
where the water comes from to maintain the gardens.
Ms. Davis brought up that she has contacted hotels in the area to see which hotels claim
to be “green” and what makes them green. What makes the hotels green include, asking guest
their if they want their sheets washed everyday during their stay. Another way they are being
green is by the landscaping techniques they are implemen ng. She wanted to put hotels and
restaurants that are “green” in a brochure for tourists. Her logic was that by promo ng “green”
15
companies, they would be rewarded with an increase of tourists going there.
Another issue she discussed in the city is shoreline preserva on. Ms. Davis would like to
see more na ve vegeta on buffers planted in Menomonee Park. There is terrible algae in
Miller ’s Bay and as a way to combat this, a restora on project was completed to implement
na ve vegeta on.
We asked if residents of the City of Oshkosh like a homogeneous appearance to their
neighborhoods or if individual residents’ preferences are tolerated or are celebrated. Ms. Davis
noted that a majority of Oshkosh looks similar and most have short turf grass which have very
short root systems. However, there are some residents that have na ve plants and keep up with
them. She wishes that there was more educa on for ci zens so they could realize the
importance of na ve plants ‑ especially those that have property on the water. She believes that
they should take more ini a ve and learn about such plants. Even if they used a “so ” buffer
zone, it would be be er than nothing.
Overall, issues that she voiced revolve around people not understanding the advantages
of green infrastructure and other environmental ini a ves, along with the fact that poli cs
complicates things and slow down the process. In future, she hopes the community will become
more informed about such issues. In order to educate ci zens, she offered a few methods. First,
she men oned a cellphone app called POLCO which can be used to ask ques ons about
anything environmental. Another way she noted on how to reach and educate people is through
the mail and social media sites, like Facebook. She wanted to voice special concern that it is
important to take into considera on the fact that there are 78 different languages spoken in the
Oshkosh area and it is a necessity to make all of this informa on accessible to all of the
16
residents in Oshkosh. Interviewing Ms. Davis was valuable for this project because she gave us
insight into how the community reacts to na ve landscaping, if residents are implemen ng
these prac ces already, and noted how educa on, communica on, and accessibility is key to
being successful.
III. Bruce Bartel, District Director at Northeast Wisconsin Water
Bruce Bartel is the District Director/ Treatment Manager for Northeast Wisconsin Water
(N.E.W Water). Interviewing him gave us insight into what ac vi es are occurring downstream
of the Fox River to be er the watershed. N.E.W Water is a Metropolitan Sewerage District but
they also clean water from the bay of Green Bay that they use for their drinking water. Because
the Fox River flows north, Green Bay receives the effluent from Oshkosh and other ci es
downstream so it is important that we work to be er our water quality in the watershed as a
whole.
Mr. Bartel talked about how Oshkosh wastewater had been hit with a high demand for
phosphorus reduc on from their effluent flow. The consequences of not reducing meant they
will not be permi ed by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) anymore. In
order to combat this, N.E.W Water has been undergoing several large scale renova ons on their
campus that Mr. Bartel was excited to tell us about. When the plans were being drawn up, there
were some intense nego a ons going on about which route to take. The two choices were to
focus more on the campus, expand and buy new technology, or to place money into the
community and work on adap ve management through the introduc ons of new green
infrastructure to their campus and new technology. The adap ve management route was
17
chosen. They are currently working on restoring Silver Creek and implemen ng rain gardens all
throughout the city of Green Bay. Addi onally, they are pushing for larger buffer zones along
shorelines and want to lay down permeable pavements. This will help filter water that runs off
of their campus which tends to be especially polluted due to wastes that are dropped off and
they do not want to risk contamina on of the groundwater supply. Overall, N.E.W Water is
se ng a great example and have high standards for the rest of the watershed. Mr. Bartel said
they are seeing significant benefits from the adap ve management approach and hope to see
Oshkosh start implemen ng some of these techniques to be er the watershed as a whole.
Although N.E.W. water is a secondary stakeholder, we can learn a lot from their own
decision to implement adap ve management and community involvement with green
infrastructure as a method to be er manage their stormwater runoff problem. Overall, this
interview provided us with a local example of a city and company that is affluent enough to
implement change in their city to be er handle stormwater runoff. They have taken on huge
projects and said they are s ll working to be er green infrastructure and stormwater
management in the city.
IV. Brian M. Helminger, Heart of the Valley ‑ District Director (Kaukauna)
The next stakeholder we met with was the district director at Heart of the Valley, Brian
M. Helminger. The main goal of this interview was to get a be er understanding of how
different areas of the same watershed are influenced by the ac ons of others. We asked about
the current methods that Heart of the Valley is using to reduce stormwater runoff, examined
landscaping alterna ves, and discussed poten al barriers.
18
We first discussed how pollu on mul plies as water heads downstream. Whatever
happens upstream will impact what goes on downstream. Oshkosh is upstream of Kaukauna
and Kaukauna is upstream of N.E.W Water in Green Bay so we met Mr. Helminger to further
explore this trend and how it affects Oshkosh. Mr. Helminger explained that total suspended
solids or (TSS) is the biggest issue that the plant faces. The Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) sets various water quality standards such as TSS. We asked Mr. Helminger if his plant was
conduc ng any adap ve management methods to reduce stormwater runoff and he told us that
the only method they used was water reten on ponds. He admi ed that the community does
not favor having reten on ponds near their property and it actually brings down their property
value. This makes sense because a large concrete hole with dirty standing water is not exactly
aesthe cally pleasing. As an alterna ve, we asked about the use of rain gardens. He agreed that
rain gardens are a good idea that the community would be more willing to accept, but his main
concerns with rain gardens were the con nued maintenance and ini al cost associated with
them. This was a notable point that we revisited when forming our recommenda on for
Oshkosh and overcoming our barriers.
A main barrier for small towns like Kaukauna to invest in green infrastructure is the cost
of doing so. Mr. Helminger said that “Europe is more willing to roll the dice on green
infrastructure” because of their larger budget. This is true, however we came to the conclusion
that ci es would ul mately be paying less if they worked in tandem with natural processes. The
hardest part of implemen ng green infrastructure is the ini al cost, but a er doing so, it will
start to pay off both monetarily and environmentally. When ci es u lize natural processes and
ecosystem services, they do not have to pay as much for water treatment, fixing the damage
19
from erosion, and more. This is one of the main driving points that we want the city of Oshkosh
to receive and u lize.
Case Studies:
Examining the implementa on of green infrastructure and landscape techniques for
stormwater management in places around the world is important to understand how viable
these methods will be in Oshkosh. The four ci es we studied were Prairie Crossing, Illinois,
Sea le, Washington, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and New York, New York and the country of
Singapore. Each of these loca ons have used their resources to manage stormwater in a natural
way that improves water quality, reduces runoff, helps the ecosystem, and is aesthe cally
pleasing.
The first city we examined was Prairie Crossing, Illinois. We chose this city because it is
close to home ‑ meaning they have a similar ecosystem, weather pa erns, soil types, and plant
and animal species. Addi onally, the community size is roughly the same as Oshkosh and it has
similar landmarks and land usage (i.e. agriculture, a lake, and natural spaces). Prairie Crossing
introduced their “stormwater treatment train system” which has successfully reduced peak
runoff by more than 60 percent and has reduced annual runoff up to 75 percent by using
different types of green infrastructure within the city (Buranen 2014). They restored 165 acres
of prairie and 20 acres of wetland using na ve plants. They also planted deep‑rooted na ve
plant species throughout the city which holds the soil together, prevents erosion, absorbs water
that would normally run off, and maintains good water quality. Using na ve plants also
benefited the city because they did not require fer lizers, pes cides, and do not need to be
watered in comparison to non‑na ve species. Na ve plants evolved with the soil type, amount
20
of water, and amount of sunlight in its natural habitat, so maintenance a er ini al plan ng is
very minimal. Prairie Crossing also used bioswales filled with na ve plants along streets to
collect and infiltrate polluted runoff coming off the roads. To further protect the quality of the
lake, they created wetland buffer zones using na ve plants which acted as a biological water
treatment and deten on to the lake. The final aspect of the stormwater treatment train system
took into considera on the social aspect of sustainability in managing stormwater: educa on.
Educa onal events are put on about how to plant effec ve bioswales, what na ve plants should
be used and how to arrange them, and more. The city has adopted an atmosphere of
environmental care ‑ their lake which holds endangered fish is named “Aldo Leopold” and there
street signs reflect other environmentalists and plant species. New home owners and
prospec ve builders in the city are given a pamphlet about how build “green” houses and grow
a na ve yard. We know transforming Oshkosh to adopt this environmental culture and changing
the physical state of our yards may take many years, but it is possible. Prairie Crossing, Illinois is
a great example of how a city can significantly reduce stormwater runoff (among many benefits)
through natural landscaping and we know that Oshkosh can do the same.
The second loca on we examined was Singapore. This is an interna onal example that
can show how a new leader and collec ve effort can en rely revamp an urban environment.
Singapore’s Prime Minister urged the city to move forward with Green in mind and launched a
campaign in the early 2000’s. The purpose of the campaign was to become the world's leader in
knowledge and implica on of green infrastructure at the city‑state’s center. They successfully
implemented ver cal plan ng, rain gardens, and overall worked to improve soil health.
Singapore took the ini a ve to rebrand their city‑state to bring in tourism and to be er their
21
city‑state for their residents. Singapore can provide us with an example of how anywhere can
transform from a gray infrastructural “concrete jungle” to green infrastructure (Karlenzig, 2018).
The associated benefits we have discussed thus far in this report were seen as a result of
Singapore’s ac ons towards using sustainable green infrastructure.
Another city we examined is Sea le, Washington which has taken a slightly different
approach in the landscaping of its city. Sea le aims to accomplish many of the same things that
we do here in Oshkosh, such as improving stormwater management, maintaining the aesthe c
appeal of the city, and improving the health of its residents and the environment. However, one
thing that Sea le is doing different is that they are plan ng species of vegeta on within the city
that can be harvested and used by the residents. This ac vity, known as urban foraging, is
slowly becoming more popular in major metropolitan areas around the world. Essen ally, the
city plants or maintains vegeta on that can be harvested by residents and used for food,
medicine, cra s, recrea on, and cultural and spiritual prac ces. By suppor ng urban foraging in
the city, Sea le is not only being environmentally sustainable by plan ng vegeta on throughout
the city, but it is also be socially sustainable. Just as diverse as the uses of the foragable urban
landscape, are the people who engage in urban foraging. The range of urban foragers can go
from hobbyists who might forage to maintain a connec on to nature while in the city, to
lower‑income residents who rely on urban foraging to supplement a por on of their income.
Whatever the reason for par cipa ng in urban foraging, the prac ce is a unique way to assist a
city in being socially sustainable, crea ng and maintaining the social cohesiveness and inclusion
that is a part of being a truly sustainable city (Poe 2014).
22
Our last case study comes from New York, New York. In this case study we were able to
delve into bioswales and the mean reten on that they offer. Bioswales are able to fit into ght
spaces within city blocks and they are also able to be implemented into parking lots. When they
are implemented into parking lots, they serve as collec on for runoff and filter the small
par culates out before entering the ground water. Bioswales also allow for recharge of the
groundwater. They studied ten bioswales during 185 rain events from Spring 2011 through
Summer 2011 (McLaughlin,2012) . They found that the mean capture rate between ten
bioswales when below one inch of rain fell was 73%. When there was 1.00‑2.00 inches of
rainfall, the mean capture rate was 25%. Lastly, when over 2 inches of rain fell, the mean
capture rate was 14%. That makes more a total average of 59% capture rate.
Cost:
The costs associated with implemen ng green infrastructure will come from installa on,
opera on, and maintenance within the city of Oshkosh. In this sec on, we will also explain the
differences in the effec veness of best management prac ces (BMPs) versus conven onal
systems and the environmental and economic benefits that BMPs and low‑impact development
can provide for stormwater management. It is important to look at more than just the up front
installa on cost when prac cing low‑impact development due to the fact that many of these
investments into infrastructure will provide long‑term benefits for the city of Oshkosh. Overall,
cost considera ons vary greatly based on the user and the project for the per‑unit area in
square feet. The cost of building a rain garden will vary based on the size, complexity of the
23
design, surface area, soil quality, and slope of ground (Rain garden alliance, 2018). The
es mated cost for bioreten on (rain gardens/ bioswales) was es mated at $1‑$5 per square
foot average for “do‑it‑yourself ” prices and $10‑ $40 per square foot average for professional
prices (Rain garden alliance, 2018). For example, a parking lot with 250 and 125 square foot
planter islands is replaced u lizing professional average installa on pricing. Both maximums
and minimums for 250 square foot and 125 square foot planter islands are used. To replace the
planter islands with bioreten on areas, the 250 square foot area will cost from $2,500 to
$10,000 dollars. For the smaller 125 square foot planter island, it will cost from $1,250 to
$5,000 dollars. It is important to note that these prices are high and low averages. Surveys will
be needed to get an approximate price for areas within the city of Oshkosh.
Benefits:
The benefits of these best management prac ces o en go ignored as policy makers only
focus on up‑front cost. Best management prac ces are proven to manage stormwater quan ty
and quality more effec vely than conven onal approaches (Coffman et. al., 1999). Examples
include filtering more pollutants, reducing flooding, improving water quality, increasing ground
water recharge, reducing public expenditures on stormwater infrastructure, and enhancing
aesthe cs and property values (Asleson, 2009). The reduc on of public expenditures on
stormwater infrastructure has been reported by various sources that the use of permeable
surfaces, rain gardens, and bioswales can greatly reduce the demand for conven onal
stormwater controls. Some addi onal benefits of bioreten on include lower life me costs,
mul func onality, reduced infrastructure cost, lower maintenance, chemical pollu on
24
reduc on, protec on from flooding, increased wildlife habitat, and overall cost‑effec ve
stormwater management (Coffman et. al., 1999). It is important to look at ini al costs as well as
addi onal costs over a structures life me including maintenance and opera on. Bioreten on
structures, like rain gardens and bioswales, can be le as natural areas at the end of their
func onal life me whereas high costs may be required to take conven onal gray infrastructure
out of commission. During the life me of bioreten on areas, the maintenance costs are
minimal and just require ensuring that drainage areas are kept clear (Coffman et. al., 1999).
U lizing ecosystem services gained from natural landscaping will also reduce infrastructure cost
in the city of Oshkosh. Bioreten on prac ces can be incorporated in a wide variety of places,
like along streets, which will take less me and require less labor than tradi onal drainage
piping systems. Addi onally, bioreten on improves water quality by allowing filtra on of
pollutants from water when it seeps through the soil and root system of the plants. To maximize
the infiltra on of water, it is recommended to use plants with long root systems na ve to the
area. Chemicals are filtered in the roots and soil in bioreten on areas. The soil in rain gardens
interact with pollu on using two main processes: absorp on and vola liza on. Vola liza on
occurs when the pollutants evaporate and adsorp on occurs when the pollutants s ck to soil
par cles (Dietz & Clausen, 2006). Maximizing infiltra on will lead to less flooding in parking
lots, roads, and residen als areas which put less strain on sump pumps in residents homes and
underground pipe systems. In some cases, green infrastructure may have a higher ini al cost
but the costs over these structures life mes will be minimal. Taking that into considera on
along with the ecosystem services gained, it is clear that the benefits of green infrastructure
outweigh the costs of standard gray infrastructure. Since costs are so variable, we recommend
25
that Oshkosh look into the costs of implemen ng these landscaping techniques while keeping in
mind that these are investments that pay themselves off over me.
Barriers:
When a emp ng to implement these green infrastructure techniques, various barriers
present themselves. Some of the main barriers include lack of legisla ve mandates, lack of
funding, lack of effec ve market incen ves, and the overall resistance to change. Some
proposed solu ons include using grassroots efforts to garner support for ordinances and
regula ons, addressing hurdles in market approaches to provide funding mechanisms, and to
educate and engage the community through demonstra ons and events (Roy et. al., 2008). The
use of grassroot efforts to support for ordinances and regula ons will help new legal mandates
for stormwater runoff gain popularity. The city of Oshkosh would need widespread public
support to be successful. For example, to gain this support, watershed groups and other
stakeholders can encourage local government agencies to communicate and adopt uniform
watershed regula ons and engage the rest of the city to do so as well.
Since stormwater runoff isn’t just an issues that the city has to deal with, finding ways to
mo vate the public to implement na ve plants and bioreten on within their own property is
another barrier. An incen ve approach may be successful but the rebate amount must be high
enough to encourage green infrustruce prac ces (Roy et. al., 2008). Following up with one of
Margy ’s concerns, that incen ve program/ tax credit must be enforceable and less complicated
to avoid issues like the credit for rain barrels in Oshkosh.To avoid some of this confusion, the
26
credit should be connected explicitly with runoff volume from a property to maximize effect. To
relate this to our recommenda on, the point system in the city of Oshkosh’s landscaping
ordinance can be u lized to increase market incen ves to build rain gardens within their
property.
Lastly, to the city of Oshkosh needs to educate the community. To reduce skep cism of
these new best management prac ces, demonstra ons, events, and talks should be conducted
on a regular bases to help the public understand the benefits of bioreten on prac ces and
na ve plan ngs as well as give them the knowledge on how to implement them themselves on
their own property. The tools to educate people is already available and on the city of
Oshkosh’s stormwater u lity sec on. Already created is a how‑to manual for homeowners to
install and maintain rain gardens ‑ it just needs to be u lized to engage ci zens. This guide is a
great tool to use to educate residents and should be handed out to homeowners like in our first
case study, Prairie Crossing, Illinois.
There will always be barriers when moving away from the status quo but working to
overcome these barriers is essen al to see real change within the quan ty and quality of
stormwater runoff. Educa ng the ci zens of Oshkosh is necessary to create public support and
awareness of runoff issues so solu ons will be implemented. If all these barriers are properly
addressed, the use of bioreten on and na ve landscaping throughout Oshkosh will greatly
mi gate the stormwater runoff issues we are currently facing.
Significance of Sustainability:
27
Sustainability can be defined as mee ng the needs of the present without hindering
future genera ons ability to meet their needs. Sustainability is made up of three different
pillars: the environmental pillar, the economic pillar, and the social pillar. All of these are
important to consider when proposing ac ons and they are all things that Oshkosh needs to
analyze before implemen ng any of the landscaping techniques that we are proposing.
Being environmentally sustainable means conserving the natural environment and the
resources it supplies, while also reducing the nega ve impacts on ecosystems. When a city is
concerned with being environmentally sustainable, it is conscience of ensuring clean water and
air, reducing pollutants, protec ng natural habitats, and using and developing eco‑friendly
products for its residents and and society at large. Na ve plants are an important aspect within
the landscaping features that we recommend the city of Oshkosh implement. The use of na ve
plants within these features will improve the environmental sustainability in Oshkosh by
increasing the level of biodiversity in the city. Biodiversity is crucial for environmental
sustainability because it creates an ecosystem that is resilient to disease, invasive species, and
other factors that may bring harm to the ecosystem. In addi on to the use of na ve plants,
plants that have deep root systems will also ensure environmental sustainability. Plants with a
deep root system that extends further into the soil than the tradi onally used turf grass, provide
more support for the soil. This addi onal support provided by deep root systems, holds the soil
in place and reduces the amount of erosion that occurs during rain events and from wind and
stormwater runoff. Finally, by implemen ng these landscaping features throughout the city,
Oshkosh will be increasing the volume of vegeta on within the city. This goes a long way in
28
ensuring environmental sustainability because this vegeta on will naturally clean the natural
and urban environment of Oshkosh by filtering pollutants out of the air, soil, and water.
In order to be truly sustainable, a city must ensure the health and well‑being of its
residents while also ensuring the health of the natural environment . The measures that
Oshkosh would take to improve the health of the natural environment would also go a long way
in improving the human well‑being as well. Aside from the poten al for pollen allergies amongst
some residents of the city, the implementa on of landscaping features will clean the urban
environment and therefore make it healthier for its human inhabitants by reducing the risk of
exposure to contaminants in the air, water, and soil (Hasse et al. 2017). It is also generally
accepted that landscaping features and green infrastructure improve the appearance of ci es.
The improvement of human health and the appearance of the city creates an environment that
enables and encourages ci zens to be ac ve within their community.
Perhaps the most difficult pillar of sustainability to sa sfy is that of the economy. The
economic pillar focuses on the likelihood that prac ces that are environmentally and socially
sustainable are also going to to be financially feasible now and in the future. This is especially
important when dealing with a limited budget whose alloca on is o en heavily contested by
compe ng interests. Although it is presumed that many green infrastructure and landscape
features may be too expensive to implement, it has been shown that the installa on of such
features does, in fact, save and make money for those that decide to adopt the prac ces. An
examina on of the gray infrastructure in New York City revealed that the city was likely to save
approximately $1.5 billion from conver ng cost‑ineffec ve gray infrastructure to green
infrastructure. Complemen ng cost‑effec ve gray infrastructure (the paved over and cement
29
stormwater management features) with green infrastructure features reduces maintenance
costs and the costs associated with filtering and trea ng stormwater runoff. Green
infrastructure and landscaping features also encourage new residents to move into an area.
Rela ng to the social sustainability aspect of improving the appearance of a city, green
infrastructure makes a city more aesthe cally pleasing and will draw in more people and
therefore more money for the city (Berkooz 2011). Implemen ng these ideas will address all
three pillars of sustainability by benefi ng the environment, the people, and the economy.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, our recommenda on to the City of Oshkosh is to require public and
commercial land to implement green infrastructure and encourage private landowners and
exis ng structures to do so as well. We want to require all new construc on (especially in
parking lots and on main streets) to use rain gardens and bioswales with na ve plants. Within
Ar cle IX, Sec on 30‑253, item (2) paved areas, we recommend altering the current plan of
requiring 40% shrubbery to specifically requiring 40% na ve shrubs only. The current plan in
Ar cle IX, Sec on 30‑255, item (3) street frontages, states that the minimum of 50% of all points
are devoted to decora ve and medium trees and we recommend changing that to requiring
30% be na ve trees and a minimum of 30% must be deep rooted na ve grasses. Na ve grasses
will filter out pollutants and slow down soil erosion more than trees will. Within Ar cle IX,
Sec on 30‑255, item (2) requirements part (A), our recommenda on is to change the current
plan where bioswales and rain gardens get 20 points per 20 square foot area and cannot exceed
30
100 points to assigning bioswales and rain gardens 30 points each without a point limit. We
believe that by not having a point limit and increasing the points bioreten on receives, it will
help mo vate people to implement rain gardens and bioswales in their own yards as well as in
parking lots and on main streets. We also recommend changes to Sec on 30‑251: Applicability
(B), which would reduce the percentage of expansion of exis ng buildings that must follow
landscaping requirements. Finally, our recommended changes to Sec on 30‑251: Applicability
(E)‑Exemp ons, include no longer exemp ng single family and two family dwellings from
landscaping requirements upon construc on of the units.
References:
Aecom. 2012., Soil Mangement plan
Asleson, B. C., Nes ngen, R. S., Gulliver, J. S., Hozalski, R. M., & Nieber, J. L. (2009).
Performance assessment of rain gardens. JAWRA Journal of the American Water
Resources Associa on , 45 (4), 1019‑1031.
Bartens, J., Day, S. D., Harris, J. R., Dove, J. E., & Wynn, T. M. (2008). Can Urban Tree Roots
Improve Infiltra on through Compacted Subsoils for Stormwater Management? Journal
of Environmental Quality , 37 (6), 2048‑2057.
Berland, A., Shifle , S., Schuster, W., Garmestani, A., Goddard, H., Hermann, D., & Hopton, M.
(2017) The role of trees in urban stormwater management. (2017). Landscape and
31
Urban Planning., 162 , 167.
Berkooz, C. B. (2011). Green Infrastructure Storms Ahead. Planning , 77 (3), 19‑24.
Buranen, M. (2014, March/April). Developers Go Green for Suburban Stormwater Management.
StormH2O , 24‑35.
Coffman, L. S., Goo, R., & Frederick, R. (1999). LowImpact Development: An Innovative
Alternative Approach to Stormwater Management. Wrpmd99 .
doi:10.1061/40430(1999)118
(n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.soils.org/discoversoils/soilsinthecity/greeninfrastructure/importantterms/r
aingardensbioswales
Dietz, M. E., & Clausen, J. C. (2006). Satura on to improve pollutant reten on in a rain garden.
Environmental science & technology , 40 (4), 1335‑1340.
Haase, D., Kabisch, S., Haase, A., Andersson, E., Banzhaf, E., Baró, F., Brenck, M., Fischer, L.
K., Frantzeskaki, N., Kabisch, N., Krellenber, K., Kremer, P., Kronenberg, J., Larondelle,
N., Mathey, J., Pauleit, S., Ring, I., Rink, D., Schaarz, N., & Wolff, M. (2017). Greening
ci es – To be socially inclusive? About the alleged paradox of society and ecology in
ci es. Habitat Interna onal , 64 41‑48.
Hasselkus, E. R. (2012). Guide to Selec ng Landscape Plants for Wisconsin. In Master
Gardener (pp. 1‑18). Madison, WI: Corporate Extension Publica ons.
32
Helfand, G., Joon Sik Park, J., & Nassauer, S. The economics of na ve plants in residen al
landscape designs. (2006). Landscape and Urban Planning., 78 (3), 229.
Karlenzig, W. (n.d.). What Singapore Can Teach All Ci es About Using Urban Green
Infrastructure To Mi gate Megadroughts. Retrieved from
h ps://www.smartci esdive.com/ex/sustainableci escollec ve/will‑urban‑green‑infrastructure
‑help‑mi gate‑megadroughts/1047571/
McLaughlin, J. (2012). NYC bioswales pilot project improves stormwater management. Clear
Waters Volume. 20‑23.
Mikkelsen, P. S., Weyer, G., Berry, C., Waldent, Y., Colandini, V., Poulsen, S., D,
Grotehusmann., R. Rohlfing,. (1994). Pollu on from urban stormwater infiltra on. Water
Science and Technology , 29 (1‑2), 293‑302.
Poe, M. R., LeCompte, J., McLain, R., & Hurley, P. (2014). Urban foraging and the rela onal
ecologies of belonging. Social & Cultural Geography , 15 (8), 901‑919.
Roy, A.H., Wenger, S.J., Fletcher, T.D. et al. Environmental Management (2008) 42: 344.
h ps://doi.org /10.1007/s00267‑008‑9119‑1
Selbig, W. R., & Balster, N. (2010). Evalua on of turf‑grass and prairie‑vegetated rain gardens
in a clay and sand soil, Madison, Wisconsin, Water years 2004‑08 (p. 75). US Department
of the Interior, US Geological Survey.
Yang, H., McCoy, E. L., Grewal, P. S., & Dick, W. A. (2010). Dissolved nutrients and atrazine
removal by column‑scale monophasic and biphasic rain garden model systems.
33
Chemosphere , 80 (8), 929‑934.
What size garden do I need? (n.d.). Retrieved from
h p://raingardenalliance.org /right/calculator
34