Perceptions of Green Infrastructure in Austin: RESEARCH QUESTION:

What are perceptions of green infrastructure among public and private practitioners in Austin?
BARRIERS & IDEAL CONDITIONS
What are perceived barriers to the implementation of green infrastructure?
Research completed by Bianca Bidiuc | Masters of Community & Regional Planning, 2015
Alyssa Hassell | Masters of Landscape Architecture, 2015
Rebekah Palmer | Masters of Commmunity & Regional Planning, 2015 What are perceived ideal conditions for the implementation of green infrastructure?
Sarah Simpson | Masters of Architecture II Post Professional Urban Design Candidate, 2016

In fulfillment of Urban Ecological Infrastructure, UTSOA, Spring 2015
Instructed by Professor Sarah Dooling

BACKGROUND: ANALYSIS & FINDINGS: only 36% of interviewees Conclusion 1: Despite strong watershed policies
CONCLUSIONS
implementation
& RECOMMENDATIONS:
at the
in Austin, there is currently a lack of city guidance for GI
individual project level.

1
Austin Context & Development of Green Infrastructure Initiatives & Tools Interview Word Cloud had any previous education in GI Recommendation:
Conclusion Increased
1: Despite strong watershed policies incity leadership
Austin, there is currently&a lack
GI ofrequirements
city guidance for GI that provide
implementation at
Austin Context and Development of Green Infrastructure Initiatives and Tools aindividual
the visibleproject
framework
level. that individual projects and practitioners can plug into
• 2007 City Council passed the Green Infrastructure Resolution Recommendation: Increased city leadership & GI requirements that provide a visible framework that
• 2011 -Watershed Protection
2007 City Council Department
passed (WPD) formed
the Green Infrastructure the Green Infrastructure Team
Resolution individual projects aand
Need to develop practitioners
more can plug
muscular green into.
infrastructure strategy that provides resources for Austin projects
• 2012- Imagine
2011 Watershed Protection
Austin Green Department (WPD) formed
Infrastructure-related Green
policies Infrastructure Team
(51 total) and project teams, including:
- 2012 Imagine Austin Green Infrastructure-related policies (51 total) Need to develop a more muscular green infrastructure strategy that provides resources for Austin projects and project teams, including:
• Environmental Criteria Manual, Drainage Criteria Manual, GSI Maintenance Manual, & Rain Garden Guide published by WPD
- WPD Environmental Criteria Manual, Drainage Criteria Manual, GSI Maintenance Manual, Rain Garden guide - •Implementation
Implementationof of
an an Austin-specific
Austin-specific GI plan
GI plan
• WPD- Green Infrastructure
WPD Green Working
Infrastructure Group
Working Groupformed as part of CodeNEXT
for CodeNEXT - •Requirements
Requirementsor or economic
economic incentives
incentives for green
for green infrastructure
infrastructure incorporation
incorporation on projects
on projects
- Technical details for practitioners, catered to Central Texas climate
- •City-wide
Technicalawareness
details forand
practitioners, catered to Central Texas climate
education program
- •More
City-wide awareness
success andshowcase
projects that education program
GI as a positive improvement (aesthetically and environmentally)
• More success projects that showcase GI as a positive improvement (aesthetically and environmentally)

Conclusion 2: A fear of risk, including both permitting issues due to discordant city department procedures and the
WPD Small-Scale GI Map lack of a maintenance program, discourage the implementation of green over gray infrastructure.
CONCLUSIONS
Recommendation: Development of a streamlined permitting & maintenance

2
Rio Grande

36% of interviewees
Conclusion 2: A fear of risk, including both permitting issues due to discordant city department procedures and the lack of
process that integratesprogram, city policy and departments.
only
City of Austin Green Infrastructure Projects Vegetated Filter Strip a maintenance discourage the implementation of green over gray infrastructure.
BACKGROUND Table 3: Categories of perceived barriers, in order of interview prominence Frequency Across Interviews
Recommendation: Development of a streamlined permitting & maintenance process that integrates city
1. Lack of City Guidance (27) Recommendedpolicy
formation of an integrated GI unit within the City, accomplished by:
and departments.
ANALYSIS & findings
a.
b.
c.
Regulations (barrier to implementation or contradictory)
City requirements (including not being required by the city)
Right tools and processes not available
had previous education in GI
8
7
6
-
-
Performance of an audit across city departments and documents to identify existing gaps and disconnects as it pertains to GI
Bundling of GI knowledge, policy creation, andofpermitting responsibilities
d. Not required by City 3 Recommended formation an integrated GI unit within the City, accomplished by:
e. Clear manual / criteria 2
f. Lack of knowledge of future city infrastructural plans 1 - Development of a robust •
GIPerformance
maintenanceofand monitoring process that eliminates
an audit across city departments questions of
and documents tolong-term performance
identify existing gaps and disconnects as it pertains to GI
2. Fear of Risk (21) • Bundling of GI knowledge, policy creation, and permitting responsibilities
a. Chance of success 5
b.
c.
Fear (risk)
Metrics of performance not available
4
3
• Development of a robust GI maintenance and monitoring process that eliminates questions of long-term performance
d. Client requires guaranteed solutions / GI risky and more variable 3

1 Texas Center Rio Grande

e.
f.
Psychological aversion
Holistic thinking/buy-in challenges time frame
2
2
Vegetated Filter Strip g. Lack of data on increase in effective rent 1

Rain Garden h. False branding as "green", whitewashing 1

3. Resistant Culture and Tradition (19)

a. Civil Engineers Resistance (Experience, Education, Fear, Tradition) 5
b. Aesthetics 4
c. Tradition 3
1 Texas Center Rio Grande Street Sand Beach d. Cultural (engineers and grey infrastructure, big machines) 2
e. Uninterested client 2
Rain Garden Vegetated Filter Strip Biofiltration Pond
Rio Grande
f. Pressures from development community for less rigour 2
g. Lack of imagination and creativity 1

1 Texas Center
CITYVegetated
Rain Garden
OF AUSTIN Filter Strip
PROJECTS Sand Beach 4. Financial Concerns (18)
a. Financial/cost/funding 9
Biofiltration Pond b.
c.
Developer doesn't reap benefits immediately
Does not pencil out economically (private projects driven by this)
2
2
d. Inability to do research/cost-benefit analysis (within project costs) 2

LITERATURE REVIEW: e.
f.
g.
Client developer that plans to turnover the project after completion
Life cycle costs
Developer can't give up substantial amount of land for GI
1
1
1
EPA Permitting Guidance
CITY OF AUSTIN PROJECTS Sand Beach Documents
Biofiltration Pond
• Planning for Green Infrastructure 5. Lack of Experience and Education
a. Lack of education
(17)
5

• Municipal and Regional Green Infrastructure Initiatives b.

c.
Lack of experience
Only place in TX w. stormwater controls - Eds Aq. (Other areas don't)
3
2

• Valuation of Green Infrastructure

d. Architects design and unwillingness/lack of knowledge to prioritize GI 2
e. Landscape not incorporated at beginning of project 2
f. Uneducated landscape firms 1
• Perceptions and Values of Green Infrastructure g.
h.
Difficulty in recreating natural system
No standard details for GI available
1
1
City of Philadelphia
6. Difficult Site Conditions (15) GI Maintenance Crew
Finding: gap in literature on perceptions a.
b.
c.
Site conditions not ideal
Lack of flexibility with land constraints
“Perceived” site conditions (ex, soil types for infiltration)
7
3
2 EPA Permitting Guidance Documents Philadelphia GI Maintenance Crew
d. Scale (too small) 2

3
e. Design requirements prevent GI 1

METHODS:
7. Maintenance Concerns
a. Maintenance (cost, knowledge, training)
(10)
7 CONCLUSIONS
Conclusion 3: GI project delivery suffers from a general lack of related education amongst practitioners and the resulting
Conclusion 3: GI project delivery suffers from a general lack of related education amongst practitioners and the
b.
c.
Inspection
Dispersal of infrastructure in private realm (requires maintenance buy-in)
2
1 segregation of design
resulting segregation approaches.
of design approaches.
Recommendation:
Recommendation: Integrated education
Integrated within all
education design
within allfields
design fields
Semi-structured
Sand interviews
Beach with 11 Austin practitioners in both public and private sectors, asking questions relating to 8. Poor Permitting Process
a. Poor permitting review/process
(7)
4

Green Infrastructure awareness,

Biofiltration Pond acceptance & implementation
b. Coordination of disjointed city departments 3
Need to unify and promote improved collaboration amongst project teams, including architects, landscape architects, engineers and
Needdevelopers
to unify and promote
through improved collaboration amongst project teams, including architects, landscape architects,
education:
• Public: 1 civil engineer & 2 policy / administration employees in the City of Austin Watershed Protection Department engineers and developers through education:
- Creation•ofCreation of interdisciplinary
interdisciplinary university
university level coursework thatlevel coursework
lays the that
foundation for lays thediscussion
collaborative foundation for collaborative discussion and awareness
and awareness
• Private: 3 civil engineers, 4 landscape architects, 1 developer with a civil engineering background - Creation•ofCreation
of opportunities
opportunities for cross-disciplinefor cross-discipline
continuing continuingbeyond
education opportunities, education opportunities, beyond formal education
formal education
Table 4: Categories of ideal conditions, in order of interview prominence Frequency Across Interviews - Education of developers & community members
• Education of developers & community members
1. City-led Initiatives, Incentives & Requirements for GI (22)
a. Incentives 5
Table 1: Interview Questions for City Practitioners b. Regulatory bodies setting required standards (ex, San Antonio River Authority) 3
c. Effort on the City's part to shift efforts and integrate GI 2
d. Payment-in-lieu funds for GI projects 2
1. What is the general definition and perception of green infrastructure (GI) in your department? e. Adverse Impact Policy (prevents too much stormwater going into creeks) 2
2. Did your formal education or continuing education incorporate coursework focused on the design and implementation of GI f.
g.
Promotion through the City GI project tracking website
City council support (gives watershed dept more clout)
2
2
projects? If yes, please elaborate on this experience. h. "Green" branding for the city 2
i. Austin Green Building (AGB) & LEED Project Requirements 1
3. In your experience, what barriers prevent wider implementation of GI in Austin (site conditions, industry acceptance, funding, etc.)? j. LCRA ordinance and manual 1
4. What benefits, if any, does the City associate with implementing GI into a project?
5. Is the City actively promoting awareness of the benefits of GI in Austin amongst city employees, local practitioners or within the 2. Improved Education & Exposure to GI (21)
a. People realizing that they'll benefit from cost savings 4
public realm? If yes, please elaborate. b. Offering the right tools so owner can decide how to adapt GI to site 4
6. Are there any successful examples of GI in Austin? What were the ideal conditions that made these GI project successful? c.
d.
Technical criteria for developers
Education to prove reduced costs vs. gray infrastructure
3
3
7. Does the city currently have any mandatory requirements for either public or private projects to incorporate GI into their design? If e. Proven metrics (Economic as well as Environmental) 2
f. Having multiple configurations of types of GI that could be adjusted to site 1
not mandatory, does the City actively encourage or incentivize private developers to incorporate GI into new projects? Please g. Educational shift 1
elaborate. h. Would be helpful to have data on GI effects on rental rates, maintenance 1
i. Grey + Green could be an optimal approach, sometimes 1
8. Where do city directives, recommendations, or strategies for using GI originate (i.e. Office of Sustainability, Engineering j. Proactive education of project teams (ex, Biohabitats Conservation Group) 1
Departments, outside sources)?
9. Does the city refer to any specific documents outlining Best Practices for Implementing GI? If yes, are these made publically 3. Successful Projects to Promote Environmental Benefits of GI (21)
a. Having examples of successful projects breaks down barriers 5
accessible to developers or professionals working on the design of projects? b. Stormwater management and improving water quality 5
Interdisciplinary Education
c. Rain gardens; easily mowed and maintained by average citizen 4
d. Interaction/involvement with GI at public schools for visibility/awareness 2
e. Wildlands preserve and bringing back biodiversity 1
f. WPD working w/ neighborhoods and Parks Dept. to implement Grow Zones 1
g. WPD 's erosion control program and stream restoration program 1
h. Stormwater reuse and lowering demand on water supply 1

4. Integrated and Progressive Design Team (13)

FUTURE RESEARCH QUESTIONS:

a. Having a well-rounded team is important in design phase for success 8
Table 2: Interview Questions for Private Sector Practitioners b. Progressive civil engineer and landscape architect on the design team 3
c.
d.
Having sensitivity, creativity, inspiration, and appreciation
Integrated team that thinks holistically
1
1
CONCLUSIONS
1. How do you understand Green Infrastructure (GI) in general and in relation to your work?
2. Do you believe there is a general industry-wide awareness of GI practices within the [civil and environmental engineering] [design] 5. Owner Initiative and Interest
a. Tenants willing to pay more in rent if they know they will save on utilities
(9)
3 • How can educators at the University of Texas Austin better incorporate green infrastructure into curriculum and
community?
a. If yes, how is GI perceived? Are they seen as common, integral tools or are they seen as unconventional/specialized
b.
c.
Client interested in GI / that wants to be marketed as "sustainable"
Having developers be the ones to contact City Council about using GI
3
1 encourage interdisciplinary work to prepare future GI teamwork?
d. Client willing to follow-through on GI (not just interested) 1
methods? e. Client/owner that will own their property long-term and benefit from life cycle costs 1
b. If no, to what do you attribute this lack of awareness? • What would an effective outreach program include for educating practitioners, owners and the public on GI?
METHODS
3. What benefits do you associate with GI? What disadvantages?
6. Improved Permitting Process
a. A better City permitting process
(7)
4
4. Does your organization regularly engage in the design of green infrastructure? Please provide examples.
• How can multiple City departments collaborate on the implementation, maintenance and continued performance monitoring of green infrastructure?
b. Partnerships between city departments 3

5. What are the ideal conditions or regulations (owner interest, city requirements, site conditions, cost, etc.) that allow for the 7. Advantageous Site Conditions (6)
integration of GI into a design solution? a. Need to improve aesthetics 2
6. What typical barriers (owner disinterest, city requirements, site conditions, cost, etc.) prevent the integration of GI into a design b.
c.
More time for project delivery
Suburban sites where topo shifts to edge
1
1
• How can both cities and the private sector overcome barriers related to maintenance?
solution? d. Drought (leads people to want to save potable water costs) 1
e. Site that is big enough for GI 1
7. Do you consider interdisciplinary teams with multiple fields represented (planning, design, development) to be a necessary and/or
important component of GI projects? 8. Private Public Partnerships (3)
• What types of funding are best suited for green infrastructure projects at the City level?
8. Did your formal education incorporate coursework on the design and implementation of GI projects? If yes, please elaborate on this a. Cost-sharing between private and public entities 2

experience.
b. Private implementation (easier to get buy-in versus dealing with city) 1
• What is the relationship between effective rent and green infrastructure design solutions?
9. Do you have access to regular continuing education at the local and/or national level that addresses how to integrate GI concepts 9. Improved Maintenance Process (3)
a. Having a way to enforce privately maintained facilities to be maintained 2
and technologies into your practice? If yes, please elaborate on these opportunities. b. Having a way to inspect every year 1 • Are there contexts in which regulatory requirements can achieve an increase in GI projects for private development or will requirements be too confining to achieve
performance standards?
 methods

Semi-structured Interview Questions conclu

analysis & findings recomm
Perceptions of GI related to:
awareness
acceptance
implementation

Conclusion 1: Despite strong watershed policies in

implementation at the
Recommendation: Increased city le
PARK(ing) DAY Proposed lab for Waller Creek Mueller Community a visible framework that individual p
METHODS
es Need to develop a more muscular green infrastruc
and project teams, including:

- Implementation of an Austin-specific GI plan

- Requirements or economic incentives for green infrastructur
- Technical details for practitioners, catered to Central Texas c
- City-wide awareness and education program
- More success projects that showcase GI as a positive improv

11 Austin practitioners in the public and private sectors

PUBLIC:
1 civil engineer in the Watershed Protection Department
2 policy and administration employees in the Watershed Protection
s Department.

PRIVATE:
3 engineers only 36% of interviewees
4 landscape architects ANALYSIS & findings had previous education in GI CONCLUSIONS
1 developer with an engineering background

Table 3: Categories of perceived barriers, in order of interview prominence Frequency Across Interviews
Conclusion 2: A fear of risk, including both permitting is
1. Lack of City Guidance (27) lack of a maintenance program, discourage the implem
a. Regulations (barrier to implementation or contradictory) 8
b.
c.
d.
City requirements (including not being required by the city)
Right tools and processes not available
Not required by City
7
6
3
Recommendation: Development of a
e.
f.
Clear manual / criteria
Lack of knowledge of future city infrastructural plans
2
1
process that integrates city policy a
2. Fear of Risk (21)
METHODS
Table 1: Interview Questions for City Practitioners
a.
b.
c.
Chance of success
Fear (risk)
Metrics of performance not available
5
4
3 Recommended formation of an integrated GI unit
d. Client requires guaranteed solutions / GI risky and more variable 3
e. Psychological aversion 2 - Performance of an audit across city departments and documents
f. Holistic thinking/buy-in challenges time frame 2
1. What is the general definition and perception of green infrastructure (GI) in your department? g. Lack of data on increase in effective rent 1 - Bundling of GI knowledge, policy creation, and permitting respons
2. Did your formal education or continuing education incorporate coursework focused on the design and implementation of GI h. False branding as "green", whitewashing 1 - Development of a robust GI maintenance and monitoring process
projects? If yes, please elaborate on this experience. 3. Resistant Culture and Tradition (19)
3. In your experience, what barriers prevent wider implementation of GI in Austin (site conditions, industry acceptance, funding, etc.)? a.
b.
Civil Engineers Resistance (Experience, Education, Fear, Tradition)
Aesthetics
5
4
4. What benefits, if any, does the City associate with implementing GI into a project? c. Tradition 3
d. Cultural (engineers and grey infrastructure, big machines) 2
5. Is the City actively promoting awareness of the benefits of GI in Austin amongst city employees, local practitioners or within the e. Uninterested client 2
f. Pressures from development community for less rigour 2
public realm? If yes, please elaborate. g. Lack of imagination and creativity 1

6. Are there any successful examples of GI in Austin? What were the ideal conditions that made these GI project successful?
4. Financial Concerns (18)
7. Does the city currently have any mandatory requirements for either public or private projects to incorporate GI into their design? If a. Financial/cost/funding 9
not mandatory, does the City actively encourage or incentivize private developers to incorporate GI into new projects? Please b.
c.
Developer doesn't reap benefits immediately
Does not pencil out economically (private projects driven by this)
2
2
elaborate. d.
e.
Inability to do research/cost-benefit analysis (within project costs)
Client developer that plans to turnover the project after completion
2
1
8. Where do city directives, recommendations, or strategies for using GI originate (i.e. Office of Sustainability, Engineering f. Life cycle costs 1
g. Developer can't give up substantial amount of land for GI 1
Departments, outside sources)?
9. Does the city refer to any specific documents outlining Best Practices for Implementing GI? If yes, are these made publically 5. Lack of Experience and Education (17)
a. Lack of education 5
accessible to developers or professionals working on the design of projects? b. Lack of experience 3
c. Only place in TX w. stormwater controls - Eds Aq. (Other areas don't) 2
d. Architects design and unwillingness/lack of knowledge to prioritize GI 2
e. Landscape not incorporated at beginning of project 2
f. Uneducated landscape firms 1
g. Difficulty in recreating natural system 1
h. No standard details for GI available 1

6. Difficult Site Conditions (15)

a. Site conditions not ideal 7
b. Lack of flexibility with land constraints 3
c. “Perceived” site conditions (ex, soil types for infiltration) 2
d. Scale (too small) 2
e. Design requirements prevent GI 1

7. Maintenance Concerns (10)

a. Maintenance (cost, knowledge, training) 7
b. Inspection 2
c. Dispersal of infrastructure in private realm (requires maintenance buy-in) 1
EPA Permitting Guidance Documents P

Table 2: Interview Questions for Private Sector Practitioners 8. Poor Permitting Process
a. Poor permitting review/process
(7)
4

METHODS CONCLUSIONS
b. Coordination of disjointed city departments 3

1. How do you understand Green Infrastructure (GI) in general and in relation to your work?
2. Do you believe there is a general industry-wide awareness of GI practices within the [civil and environmental engineering] [design]
community?
a. If yes, how is GI perceived? Are they seen as common, integral tools or are they seen as unconventional/specialized
methods?
Table 4: Categories of ideal conditions, in order of interview prominence Frequency Across Interviews
b. If no, to what do you attribute this lack of awareness?
Conclusion 3: GI project delivery suffers from a general
3. What benefits do you associate with GI? What disadvantages?
4. Does your organization regularly engage in the design of green infrastructure? Please provide examples.
1. City-led Initiatives, Incentives & Requirements for GI
a. Incentives
(22)
5
resulting segregation of design approaches.
Recommendation: Integrated educa
b. Regulatory bodies setting required standards (ex, San Antonio River Authority) 3
5. What are the ideal conditions or regulations (owner interest, city requirements, site conditions, cost, etc.) that allow for the c. Effort on the City's part to shift efforts and integrate GI 2
integration of GI into a design solution? d.
e.
Payment-in-lieu funds for GI projects
Adverse Impact Policy (prevents too much stormwater going into creeks)
2
2
6. What typical barriers (owner disinterest, city requirements, site conditions, cost, etc.) prevent the integration of GI into a design f.
g.
Promotion through the City GI project tracking website
City council support (gives watershed dept more clout)
2
2
solution? h.
i.
"Green" branding for the city
Austin Green Building (AGB) & LEED Project Requirements
2
1 Need to unify and promote improved collaboration amo