from storm water management to artful rain water design

23
Landscape Journal 27:2–08 ISSN 0277-2426 © 2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System opportunities. As these new strategies are integrated into projects, they can either be concealed under- ground in pipes and vaults, or celebrated on the surface as site amenities that increase landscape attractiveness or value—this is artful rainwater design. Addressing the amenity aspect provides a useful strategy for ensuring that stormwater management “starts at the source,” as so many experts have advised (Richman 1999; Ferguson 1991; Liptan 2005; Schueler, Kumble, and Heraty 1992; Coman 2000; France 2002). This article oers a systematic analysis of the de- sign strategies used in 20 innovative ARD projects. Its purpose is (1) to clarify the goals and objectives of stormwater management conceived as site amenity, and (2) to provide transferable knowledge to designers interested in creating ARD projects. STORMWATER SYSTEMS AS SITE AMENITY: A REVIEW The concept of stormwater system as site amenity is not new. Skillfully designed detention systems (typi- cally naturalized ponds) have long been recognized for their aesthetic and community value (Bookout 1994a; Ferguson and Debo 1994; Tunney 2001). New storm- water management techniques such as bio-retention gardens that beautify the streetscape are taking hold in communities such as Maplewood and Burnsville, Minnesota (MPCA 2005). A few books and articles have identified the desirability of addressing the “amenity potential” of stormwater management (Göransson 1998; Wenk 1998; Niemczynowicz 1999; Thompson and Sorvig 2000; Dreiseitl, Grau, and Ludwig 2001; Dreiseitl and Grau 2005). In addition, Landscape Architecture has profiled many examples of ARD (for example, Leccese 1997; Thompson 1999, 2004; Brown 2001; Echols and Pennypacker 2006). However, only a few publications have tried to clarify what is meant by amenity in storm- water management. Two stand out: SUDS (Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems) literature in the United King- dom, and publications by Peter Stahre on eorts in the city of Malmö, Sweden. ABSTRACT New stormwater management techniques can use rainwater to create amenities that enhance a site’s attractive- ness or value. This concept—“artful rainwater design”—both ad- dresses stormwater management in environmentally responsible ways and creates expressive landscapes that celebrate storm- water. Through an analysis of 20 exemplary designs, the goals and objectives of stormwater management as a site amenity, as well as specific design techniques for its accomplishment, are explained. Five amenity goals drawn from the case studies— education, recreation, safety, public relations, and aesthetic richness—are identified, categorized, and described. The paper concludes by discussing the future of artful rainwater design. KEYWORDS Amenity, design, landscape, stormwater tech- niques, urban drainage R ain falls on developed land and is drained away in various ways. It is one thing to divert stormwater to underground pipes and concrete vaults, disposing of the water as a waste product with a high probability of degrading aquatic ecosystems downstream. It is an- other thing to address stormwater in environmentally responsible ways through best management practices (BMPs) that control runorate, volume, frequency, duration, and quality to promote the ecological health of our waterways. But it is another thing again to em- ploy environmental BMPs in designs that call attention to stormwater management in ways that educate and delight those who visit. This third approach—eective stormwater management as art form—is what we call “artful rainwater design” (ARD). 1 Stormwater management is an essential compo- nent of almost every land-planning and site-design project. 2 Although many view industrial activity as the major culprit in water pollution, 70 percent of water pollution in our country comes from non-point sources such as urban runo(USEPA 2005a). The re- appropriated Clean Water Act of 1972 and the subse- quent National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System now require thousands of municipal governments to implement stormwater management programs that reduce non-point source pollution. Traditional end- of-pipe, out-of-sight solutions will not work. Instead, the new paradigm of small, safe, integrated BMPs that manage runoclose to the source creates new design From Stormwater Management to Artful Rainwater Design Stuart Echols and Eliza Pennypacker

Upload: vunhi

Post on 30-Dec-2016

223 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

Land

scap

e Jo

urna

l27:2

–08

ISS

N 0

277-2

426

© 2

008 b

y th

e B

oard

of

Reg

ents

of

the

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

isco

nsin

Sys

tem

opportunities. As these new strategies are integrated into projects, they can either be concealed under-ground in pipes and vaults, or celebrated on the surface as site amenities that increase landscape attractiveness or value—this is artful rain water design. Addressing the amenity aspect provides a useful strategy for ensuring that storm water management “starts at the source,” as so many experts have advised (Richman 1999; Ferguson 1991; Liptan 2005; Schueler, Kumble, and Heraty 1992; Coffman 2000; France 2002).

This article offers a systematic analysis of the de-sign strategies used in 20 innovative ARD projects. Its purpose is (1) to clarify the goals and objectives of storm water management conceived as site amenity, and (2) to provide transferable knowledge to designers interested in creating ARD projects.

STORMWATER SYSTEMS AS SITE AMENITY: A REVIEW

The concept of storm water system as site amenity is not new. Skillfully designed detention systems (typi-cally naturalized ponds) have long been recognized for their aesthetic and community value (Bookout 1994a; Ferguson and Debo 1994; Tunney 2001). New storm -water management techniques such as bio- retention gardens that beautify the streetscape are taking hold in communities such as Maplewood and Burnsville, Minnesota (MPCA 2005). A few books and articles have identifi ed the desirability of addressing the “amenity potential” of storm water management (Göransson 1998; Wenk 1998; Niemczynowicz 1999; Thompson and Sorvig 2000; Dreiseitl, Grau, and Ludwig 2001; Dreiseitl and Grau 2005). In addition, Landscape Architecture has profi led many examples of ARD (for example, Leccese 1997; Thompson 1999, 2004; Brown 2001; Echols and Pennypacker 2006). However, only a few publications have tried to clarify what is meant by amenity in storm -water management. Two stand out: SUDS (Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems) literature in the United King-dom, and publications by Peter Stahre on efforts in the city of Malmö, Sweden.

ABSTRACT New storm water management techniques can use rain water to create amenities that enhance a site’s attractive-ness or value. This concept—“artful rain water design”—both ad-dresses storm water management in environmentally responsible ways and creates expressive landscapes that celebrate storm -water. Through an analysis of 20 exemplary designs, the goals and objectives of storm water management as a site amenity, as well as specifi c design techniques for its accomplishment, are explained. Five amenity goals drawn from the case studies—education, recreation, safety, public relations, and aesthetic richness—are identifi ed, categorized, and described. The paper concludes by discussing the future of artful rain water design.

KEYWORDS Amenity, design, landscape, storm water tech-niques, urban drainage

Rain falls on developed land and is drained away in various ways. It is one thing to divert storm water

to underground pipes and concrete vaults, disposing of the water as a waste product with a high probability of degrading aquatic ecosystems downstream. It is an-other thing to address storm water in environmentally responsible ways through best management practices (BMPs) that control runoff rate, volume, frequency, duration, and quality to promote the ecological health of our waterways. But it is another thing again to em-ploy environmental BMPs in designs that call attention to storm water management in ways that educate and delight those who visit. This third approach—effective storm water management as art form—is what we call “artful rain water design” (ARD).1

Storm water management is an essential compo-nent of almost every land- planning and site- design project.2 Although many view industrial activity as the major culprit in water pollution, 70 percent of water pollution in our country comes from non- point sources such as urban runoff (USEPA 2005a). The re- appropriated Clean Water Act of 1972 and the subse-quent National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System now require thousands of municipal governments to implement storm water management programs that reduce non- point source pollution. Traditional end- of- pipe, out- of- sight solutions will not work. Instead, the new paradigm of small, safe, integrated BMPs that manage runoff close to the source creates new design

From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

Stuart Echols and Eliza Pennypacker

Page 2: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

Echols and Pennypacker 269

fare are well established (Roesner and Matthews 1990; Tourbier 1994). Protecting or creating aquatic habitat has also become a leading goal (Coffman 2000; Hager 2001). Utilitarian goals commonly include promoting ground water recharge, reducing pollutant loads, pro-tecting stream channels, preventing increased overbank fl ooding, and safely conveying large fl oods (Schueler, Kumble, and Heraty 1992; USEPA 2005b). Common storm water management objectives (Ferguson and Debo 1994) and the varied techniques for accomplish-ing them (Hager 2001; Urbonas, Roesner, and Sonnen 1989) are presented in Table 1.

In contrast to the extensive publication on storm -water management utility goals, no methodical study of the goals, objectives, and techniques for the ame-nity component of ARD exists. The few current publi-cations that address amenity issues are limited to de-scribing or critiquing specifi c designs. Our intent is to move beyond this descriptive work to bring specifi city to amenity goals and objectives related to storm water management and to identify design techniques used to achieve those goals.

In the United Kingdom, policies introduced ame-nity factors as a facet of storm water management in the early 2000s through new concepts such as the “urban drainage triangle” (Figure 1). Sustainable urban drain-age regulations in the United Kingdom now require quality, quantity, and amenity to be considered equally in evaluating new drainage plans (CIRIA 2001). Al-though the SUDS defi nition of amenity focused initially on providing open space and wildlife habitat, SUDS in-cludes “community value, resource management (e.g., rain water use), multi- use of space, education, water features, habitat creation, biodiversity action plans” (National SUDS Working Group 2003, 60). Peter Stahre has taken a similar view: “The characteristic feature of the new approach to urban drainage is that quantity and quality issues are handled together with amenity” (Stahre 2005, 2). Stahre also identifi es the positive val-ues of open storm drainage as shown in Figure 2 (Stahre 2006, 13).

Abundant literature addresses the utility goals, ob-jectives, and techniques of storm water management. Though the goals and techniques are evolving, the basic principles of protecting public health, safety, and wel-

Figure 1. Development of more sustain-able urban drainage systems and the “urban drainage triangle” (CIRIA 2001).

Figure 2. Positive values of open storm drainage (Stahre 2006).

Page 3: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

270 Landscape Journal 27:2–08

“attractiveness or value” in terms of mainstream West-ern aesthetics. Second, for practical reasons the proj-ects studied herein are all in the United States. The true substance of this study—articulation of amenity goals and objectives, and exploration of the design tech-niques used to achieve them—is presented by parsing goals, objectives, and techniques into discrete catego-ries. This simple presentation format is intended to provide a clear explanatory system, but undoubtedly readers will categorize these differently and surely de-velop a more nuanced ARD outline for their own use.

A small number of design fi rms have pursued the innovative approach that we call artful rain water de-sign. The results are precedent- setting designs that em-ploy new storm water management strategies in artful and expressive ways. We developed a list of ARD projects from around the nation by reviewing the past ten years of ASLA and AIA awards for designs whose clear intent included storm water management systems devised to create site amenities, namely increased attractiveness or value focused on the experience of rain water. We then asked the project designers, as well as experts in storm water issues, to recommend other designs rep-resenting the best in ARD. We reviewed the most fre-quently recommended projects and arrived at a list that represents a diversity of setting, project type, and runoff treatment methods.

We acknowledge that this selection process was infl uenced by the exposure and relative popularity of specifi c ARD projects nationwide; admittedly, many exciting projects were omitted simply because they were unknown to us or to our informants. We have chosen to accept this as a necessary limitation of in-vestigating a new and evolving design subject. Hence, this selection process used information- oriented sam-pling as opposed to random sampling because we were interested in investigating current ARD projects with the richest design information. A glance at the list also reveals that most of the case studies are located in Seattle, Washington, and Portland, Oregon. Clearly this geographic restriction poses another limitation to this study, but it is not surprising that 18 of 20 consis-

Methods

We begin our analysis by offering our own defi ni-tion of ARD amenity: In the context of ARD, amenity is understood as a feature focused on the experience of storm water in a way that increases the landscape’s at-tractiveness or value. The rest of this paper identifi es and clarifi es the specifi c amenity goals, objectives, and design techniques of ARD. Certain assumptions and limitations are inherent in this study. First is the assumption that celebrating rain water in site design is desirable, and that any additional costs and effort are offset by the value added. The study also assumes that knowledge of a project’s design intent in combination with our design critique can result in understanding the experiential impact of a design. Related to this are two clear biases. First, this paper measures a design’s

Table 1. Goals, objectives, and techniques for the utility aspects of storm water management design

UTILITY GOALSProvide for hydrological function that protects

public health, safety, welfare, and aquatic habitat

OBJECTIVES To create systems that: DESIGN TECHNIQUES

Safely convey storm water away CONVEYANCE

Curbing Pipes Swales Ditches

Reduce downstream flooding DETENTION

Conventional dry basins Extended detention basins Micro- pool ponds

Hold storm water for reuse RETENTION

Wet ponds Multiple pond systems Water harvesting ponds Cisterns

Reduce storm water pollution F ILTRATION Bio- retention gardens Green roof systems Water quality inlets Constructed wetlands Sand filters Grassed swales Oil and grit separators

Promote ground water recharge INF ILTRATION

Dry wells (French drain) Infiltration trenches Infiltration basins Porous pavements

Page 4: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

Echols and Pennypacker 271

• Oregon Museum of Science and Industry, Portland, Oregon, by Murase Associates

• Outwash Basin at Stata Center MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, by Olin Partners

• Pierce County Environmental Services, Chambers Creek, Washington, by Miller | Hull and Bruce Dees & Associates

• Siskiyou Street, Portland, Oregon, by Portland Bureau of Environmental Services

• SW 12th Avenue, Portland, Oregon, by Portland Bureau of Environmental Services

• Water Pollution Control Laboratory, Portland, Oregon, by Murase Associates

• Waterworks Garden, Renton, Washington, by Lorna Jordan with Jones & Jones, Ltd., and Brown & Caldwell

We gathered information about these projects from published literature, websites, and telephone conver-sations with designers; we then visited each project and talked with designers and municipal officials. We documented the designs with journal notes, drawings, sketches, and photography. We did not collect con-struction documents or measured drawings, as we were interested in site amenity aspects and not construction methods.

The collected data were organized, reviewed, and analyzed to determine specifi c amenities in storm water treatment system designs. Initial categorization was guided by this question: What amenity aspects of storm -water management design enhance a project’s attrac-tiveness or value? Thus we developed a list of observed rain water- based amenities, compared it to a larger list of general amenity goals derived from published land- development literature (Beyard 1989; O’Mara 1988; Bookout 1994a; Bookout 1994b; Kone 2006), and dis-covered that our identifi ed ARD amenity goals formed a clear subset of this larger list.

The larger list of general land- development ame-nity goals generated by our literature review included:

1. Convenience: location, ease, or comfort

2. Education: favorable conditions for learning

tently acclaimed ARD projects hail from these metro areas. A variety of factors have made the Pacifi c North-west a noteworthy mecca of ARD. The consistently wet weather from October to May virtually requires that citizens develop strategies to “live with rain,” ranging from establishment of very strict storm water regula-tions to the development of innovative ways to trans-form rain water from a nuisance to an asset. We con-sequently chose to accept this geographic limitation based on the assumption that ARD examples from the Pacifi c Northwest currently offer a rich collection of exciting and potentially transferable ideas to designers nationwide.3

We chose the following 20 projects as case studies:4

• 10th@Hoyt, Portland, Oregon, by Stephen Koch Landscape Architect

• 110 Cascades, Seattle, Washington, by Seattle Public Utilities

• Automated Trading Desk, Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, by Nelson Byrd Woltz

• Buckman Heights, Portland, Oregon, by Murase Associates

• Cedar River Watershed Education Center, Cedar Falls, Washington, by Jones & Jones, Ltd

• Stephen Epler Hall, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, by Mithun Partners and ATLAS Landscape Architecture

• Glencoe Elementary School, Portland, Oregon, by Portland Bureau of Environmental Services

• Growing Vine Street, Seattle, Washington, by Carlson Architects, Peggy Graynor, Buster Simpson, Greg Waddell

• High Point Development, West Seattle, Washington, by Mithun Partners

• Melrose Edge Streets, Seattle, Washington, by Seattle Public Utilities

• Seven Corners Market, Portland, Oregon, by Ivan McLean

• New Seasons Market, Portland, Oregon, by Portland Bureau of Environmental Services

• Oregon Convention Center, Portland, Oregon, by Meyer / Reed

Page 5: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

272 Landscape Journal 27:2–08

and social interaction were not established through ARD in our projects.

Next, we reexamined each project to determine how (or whether) it uses storm water treatment systems to achieve each amenity goal. This review yielded a list of all design techniques observed in each discrete case to realize each ARD goal. The design techniques were then organized into a matrix to identify the common ARD objectives that those techniques fulfi ll. The tech-niques presented are not characteristic of every case study project, nor do they represent all possible design strategies for achieving an amenity objective. Each technique, however, is found in one or more of the case studies.

3. Recreation: favorable conditions for play and / or relaxation

4. Safety: freedom from exposure to danger or risk

5. Social interaction: commingling of individuals or groups

6. Public relations: semiotic expression of values of the designer and / or owner

7. Aesthetic richness: beauty or pleasure as a result of design composition

Of these, the amenity goals most clearly achieved in our ARD cases included education, recreation, safety, public relations, and aesthetic richness. Convenience

Table 2. Education objectives and associated design techniques

EDUCATION GOAL Create conditions to learn about rain water and / or storm water runoff–related issues

OBJECTIVES

To provide DESIGN TECHNIQUES

IDEAS TO LEARN Hydrologic cycle Make storm water trail visible and legible Create a narrative of storm water and / or the hydrologic cycle Employ expressive hydrologic symbols

Historical water condition Make storm water trail visible and legible Integrate storm water- related site artifacts into the design Create a narrative of the historical water condition Employ expressive symbols of historical water condition

Water treatment types Make storm water treatment system visible and legible Make storm water treatment system playful, intriguing, or puzzling Include variety of storm water treatment systems in design

Treatment system impact Create systems that visibly collect and store trash and / or pollution

Riparian plant types Provide a variety of visible plant types and communities

Riparian wildlife Provide a variety of interesting wildlife habitats: Use plants that provide wildlife food Provide different water depths Create shelter for wildlife such as bird and bat houses

WAYS TO LEARN Signage Provide simple signage or exhibits that use: Brief text Clear graphics Location, color, or motion that attracts people

Programming Design treatment system to invite educational games or activities

CONTEXT FOR LEARNING Visibility Create treatment systems that are visible and legible Create visual interest by varying the appearance of different parts of the storm water treatment system

Gathering Create a variety of spaces for groups to explore, gather, or sit near the storm water treatment system

Interactivity Create treatment systems that are touchable Create designs that encourage people to explore and play near or in the treatment systems

Page 6: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

Echols and Pennypacker 273

cur as a “lesson learned” or, less didactically, as an en-riched experience of place.

We categorized the variety of educational oppor-tunities in the case studies into three learning objective types: “ideas to learn,” “ways to learn,” and “context for learning.” Recurring objectives and design tech-niques gleaned from the case studies are presented in Table 2. The case studies offer some noteworthy de-sign techniques for providing education about storm -water management, including how “ideas to learn”

Findings

Findings are organized according to fi ve amenity goals, which are explained briefl y. Tables outline the key ob-jectives and design techniques used in the case studies. Notable examples of techniques found in specifi c case studies are then explained through text and images.

Education. In the context of ARD, education is un-derstood as creating favorable conditions for learning about rain water and related issues. Education may oc-

Figure 3. A meandering boardwalk at Pierce County Environmental Services, Chambers Creek, WA, invites visitors to view the wetland. (Design by The Miller | Hull Partnership, LLP, Bruce Dees & Associates, LLC; photograph by Stuart P. Echols, 2006)

Figure 4. The axial bioswale (back-ground) terminates in a “fl ow splitter plaza” (foreground) where signage explains different strategies used to convey and infi ltrate runoff. Pierce County Environmental Services, Chambers, Creek, WA. (Design by The Miller | Hull Partnership, LLP, Bruce Dees & Associates, LLC; photograph by Stuart P. Echols, 2006)

Page 7: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

274 Landscape Journal 27:2–08

The educational impact of the rain water design at Pierce County Environmental Services is augmented by effective signage at strategic spots. In our case studies, we found that signs presenting dense blocks of edge- to- edge text lack eye appeal and can seem too much like a lecture to pique a person’s interest. In fact, we found some signs so daunting that we photographed them for future reference rather than reading them on site! But at Pierce County a brilliant signage system cajoles visi-tors into learning: fi rst, the signs present small, digest-ible tidbits of information that can be read at a glance; second, the signs are located along major pathways, ensuring pedestrian encounters with the information; and third, their bright yellow color makes them highly visible. Thus a noticeable and enjoyable educational system is created.

Ideas about rain water can be expressed through artistic narrative as well as through instructional pre-sentation of facts. A stunning example of this educa-tional strategy is found at the Seven Corners Market in Portland, Oregon (Figure 5). Artist Ivan McLean transformed a scupper into an eye- catching sculpture that tells of the relationship between rain water and that prized fi sh of the Northwest, the salmon. McLean draped tendrils of stainless steel from the end of the scupper and attached stainless steel salmon silhouettes that seem to swim upstream toward the scupper. When rain water pours from the scupper, the salmon face the cascading water (the symbolic downstream current) to fi ght their way upriver. Even when dry, the sculpture suggests the impact storm water has on the downstream environment.

Taking the idea of artistic storm water narrative to full- site scale, landscape architect Carol Mayer Reed’s metaphorical landscape represents the hydrological cycle at the Oregon Convention Center in Portland

can be presented through visible / legible water trails or rich landscape narratives, and how signage provides effective “ways to learn.”

Making the storm water treatment system vis-ible and legible encourages visitors to notice and ei-ther instantly grasp it, or be compelled to piece the puzzle together to comprehend how the site manages runoff. Often, a visible storm water system combines effectively with signage to maximize the educational opportunity. The Pierce County Environmental Ser-vices Facility in Chambers Creek, Washington (The Miller | Hull Partnership, LLP, Bruce Dees & Associ-ates, LLC) focuses considerable design energy on this combined educational strategy. The water trail begins at a corner of the building at a dramatic scupper from which water falls into a concrete basin incised with a spiral runnel. When it rains, water spirals from that basin into an adjacent wetland that visitors view from a meandering boardwalk (Figure 3). At the end of the wetland, the water disappears briefl y under a roadway to reemerge in a bioswale lined with river stone and riparian plants, interspersed with pieces of driftwood to drive home the water theme. The bioswale forms a 250-foot- long axis, edged on one side by a parking lot and on the other by a walking trail that ensures maxi-mum visibility of the water treatment system. At the end of the bioswale, the water system again disap-pears under a roadway, to end in a plaza with three vis-ible valve heads (Figure 4). Signage explains that this is a “fl ow splitter plaza” channeling runoff into two different treatment swales, one grass- lined and one rock- lined, while a third diverter awaits development of future treatment strategies. Throughout the linear system, multiple water “lessons” and a high level of craft refl ect the designers’ effort to call attention to the rain water treatment system.

Figure 5. Scupper with attached stainless steel salmon silhouettes at Seven Corners Market, Portland, OR, allows viewers to mentally connect storm water to river. (Sculpture by Ivan McLean; photograph by Stuart P. Echols, 2005)

Page 8: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

Echols and Pennypacker 275

storm water treatment system in relaxing, amusing, or refreshing ways. In contrast to the education goal, the focus is playful interaction; enjoyment is the intent. The distinction between education and recreation is admit-tedly nuanced, but we present them separately to as-sist designers who may wish to emphasize one over the other.

We identifi ed three objectives of recreational inter-action with ARD: “view” (the opportunity to see water or the water system while relaxing in the landscape), “enter” (the ability to step into the water or water sys-tem and come into physical contact with it), and “play

(Figure 6). Four huge scuppers protrude from the con-vention center building and convey rain water from its fi ve- acre roof into a detention and biofi ltration system designed as an urbane abstraction of a regional river. Native basalt columns punctuate a tiered channel of sequential runnels, pools, and weirs; and native plants are elegantly arranged in and along the channel. The design tells the story of the water’s journey from rooftop to river.

Recreation. As a design goal in ARD, recreation means providing conditions favorable for interacting with the

Figure 6. At the Oregon Convention Center, Portland, OR, an urbane river abstraction tells the story of the water’s journey from rooftop to river. (Design by Mayer / Reed; photograph by Stuart P. Echols, 2005)

Page 9: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

276 Landscape Journal 27:2–08

ing to the designers, students emerge from the dormi-tories during storms to watch the rain water show (Mc-Donald 2006).

Recreational paths in strategic locations can also ensure that features are noticed. One strategy is to con-nect off- site destinations through on- site paths, com-pelling people to encounter the storm water system as they traverse the site. At the Water Pollution Control Laboratory in Portland (Murase Associates) pedestrians and bicyclists traveling to or from a number of off- site destinations pass through the designed landscape and encounter the storm water management system.

A second noteworthy example of a strategically placed path system is found at Waterworks Garden in Renton, Washington (Lorna Jordan, Jones & Jones, Brown & Caldwell). Seattle artist Lorna Jordan trans-formed a storm water treatment system adjacent to a county waste water treatment plant into a sequence of garden rooms that follow the water trail downhill: the Knoll, the Funnel, the Grotto, the Passage, and the Re-lease. The garden rooms appear on a recreational path (Figure 8) that exhibits virtually all the characteristics cited by the Kaplans as the “mystery” promoting a “de-sire to explore” (1998, 16).5

Another type of ARD recreational interaction en-courages visitors to enter the storm water treatment

in” (the opportunity to engage with or modify the water or water system). These categories and design tech-niques used to achieve them in the case study projects are presented in Table 3. Some recreation- focused de-sign techniques stand out in the case studies: one en-courages relaxed viewing through effective placement of seating; two provide views of the storm water treat-ment to those traveling along strategically placed paths; and one allows visitors to enter and play in the storm -water s ystem.

To encourage viewing of a landscape feature, there’s nothing quite as effective as providing a place to sit. Whether wall, bench, or table and chairs, a seat invites people to pause and view their surroundings. The best example we found was a pair of sheltered benches located to view a dramatic storm water show outside Stephen Epler Hall, a dormitory on the urban campus of Portland State University (Figure 7). During rain events, water shoots down a fi ve- story downspout into a rock- fi lled basin, gushes out a small scupper into a runnel that directs water across the space, then falls into a “biopaddy” (a sunken plant- fi lled basin). Lo-cated under a freestanding roof (particularly accom-modating for use during the rain), the two benches are backed by a wall, resulting in a sense of “prospect and refuge” that renders them even more inviting. Accord-

Table 3. Recreation objectives and associated design techniques

RECREATION GOAL Create conditions for interacting with the storm water system in a way that is relaxing, amusing, and / or refreshing

OBJECTIVES

Create opportunities to DESIGN TECHNIQUES

VIEW Pass by Provide paths in strategic locations that ensure encounters with the storm water treatment system Connect on- site trails to off- site trail systems and destinations that ensure encounters with the storm water treatment system

Pause Create overlooks with views of the storm water system Create destination points related to storm water treatment systems

Rest Provide seating using walls, benches, or tables and chairs with views of the storm water system

ENTER Wayfinding Provide clear points of entry into the storm water system Make entry points visually inviting or mysterious

Access Make entry points easily accessible Provide places to sit within the storm water system design

PLAY IN Explore Provide a variety of small and large places to play in or explore Make areas that invite climbing and physical exploration while balancing perceptions of safety with adventure

Interact Create systems that can be safely modified by the user such as small movable river rocks and weirs

Page 10: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

Echols and Pennypacker 277

one of the weirs (Figure 9). Once in, the adventuresome may clamber across the rocks or simply sit and enjoy the lush surroundings. On our site visit, we observed carefully placed piles of river stone from the treatment system, clearly crafted by visitors who took advantage of the opportunity to enter and play (Figure 10).

system. At the previously described Oregon Convention Center in Portland, the river abstraction is separated from the nearby sidewalk by a lush lawn, and is even more clearly separated from pedestrians by a border of thick plantings and rocks along its lawn edge; but at certain points the border opens, and a fl at rock laid fl ush with the lawn allows visitors to enter the “river” at

Figure 7. Runoff at Stephen Epler Hall, Portland State University, travels from downspouts (on columns) into basins at their bases, then travels via below- grade runnels across the space to “biopaddies.” (Design by Mithun Partners, ATLAS Landscape Architecture; photograph by Stuart P. Echols, 2005)

Figure 8. At Waterworks Garden, Renton, WA, an enticing trail leads pedestrians past wetlands and water treatment ponds. (Design by Lorna Jordan, Jones & Jones, Brown & Caldwell; photograph by Stuart P. Echols, 2006)

Page 11: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

278 Landscape Journal 27:2–08

Figure 9. The abstracted river corridor at the Oregon Convention Center, Portland, OR, is separated from the sidewalk (right of photo) by lush lawn and a thick plant border along the “river” edge (left of photo). (Design by Mayer / Reed; photograph by Stuart P. Echols, 2005)

Figure 10. River rocks carefully placed on a weir in the abstracted river landscape, left by adventuresome visitors who entered the storm water system. Oregon Convention Center, Portland, OR. (Design by Mayer / Reed; photograph by Stuart P. Echols, 2005)

Page 12: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

Echols and Pennypacker 279

den, another technique renders storm water visible but inaccessible. In the garden room called the Release, vis-itors meander among wetland pools that fi lter storm -water before its release into Springbrook Creek; though virtually immersed in a landscape of pools, visitors are prevented by massed riparian and wetland plantings from reaching the water’s edge. Surprisingly, plantings are absent on a few pond edges very close to the path, and these spots may be dangerous. Waterworks Garden employs each of the three general techniques to limit access to water that we found across the cases: by struc-ture, by planting, and by placing the visitor above the storm water treatment system.

Control of water quantity is the safety objective ad-dressed at 110 Cascades in Seattle (Seattle Public Utili-ties Natural Drainage Systems), a storm water treatment system that steps down the side of a sloping suburban residential street. Here a series of terraced weirs controls both water velocity and depth. Stepped pools created by the weirs distribute standing water along the water trail into shallow basins. At the same time, the verti-cal drop of water at each weir slows the water velocity: waterfl ow energy is dispersed by its drop and impact (Figure 12). Over the course of the storm water treat-ment system, the weirs transform a potential downhill torrent of storm water into a series of shallow pools and calmly cascading water.

Finally, the Glencoe Elementary School reten-tion and biofi ltration basin offers a simple technique to limit storm water depth that is found in many of the

Safety. In ARD, this goal focuses on safe interaction with water by mitigating the dangers associated with storm water. In our litigious society, this goal is central to making ARD possible. Both standing and running water often form a central element of ARD; but how do we prevent it from being (and being perceived as) a drowning hazard?6 Case studies have focused on con-trolling access to water and controlling water quantity (both velocity and depth). Table 4 presents these miti-gation types and an array of design techniques to ad-dress them. Within the case studies, three design tech-niques addressing safety stand out: limiting physical access to water; limiting water velocity; and limiting water depth.

In the previously described Waterworks Garden, Lorna Jordan employed a number of design techniques to limit physical access to storm water while ensur-ing satisfying water views. At the garden entrance (the Knoll), visitors walk down an “allée” of basalt columns toward an enticing overlook. Along that walk, storm -water appears literally beneath the visitor’s feet, safely out of reach yet very striking: steel grating traverses the stone terrace in a stream- like shape, and the babbling water runs below. Flowing water, central to that entry experience, is rendered safe by a simple walking grate (Figure 11).

At the overlook the stream cascades off the terrace into the fi rst of a series of settling ponds (the Funnel). Here, a railing at the terrace edge controls physical ac-cess to the standing water below. Elsewhere in the gar-

Table 4. Safety objectives and associated design techniques

SAFETY GOAL Promote safe interaction with storm water treatment system by mitigating danger associated with water

OBJECTIVES DESIGN TECHNIQUES

CONTROL ACCESS Vertical barrier Provide walls, screens, or railings that allow views but prevent access to storm water Provide upland, riparian, or wetland plant massing that allow views but prevents access to storm water

Horizontal barrier Use bridges, boardwalks, or platforms to allow users to view storm water from above

Water containers Use water- themed aboveground storm water storage facilities such as rain barrels, water towers, or cisterns

CONTROL QUANTITY Depth Do not collect storm water in large centralized storage facilities Disperse storm water into shallow storage facilities using flow splitters or tiered basins Limit storm water depth by creating horizontal space for water to spread out Limit storm water depth by adding large river stones to basins where people could have access

Velocity Do not collect or move storm water in large centralized conveyance facilities Disperse storm water into small conveyance facilities using level spreaders or flow splitters Create “ water brakes” to slow storm water by abruptly changing flow direction Slow storm water by creating small waterfalls that dissipate energy

Page 13: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

280 Landscape Journal 27:2–08

composition and choice of materials. That PR message, along with both sub- messages (“we are aesthetically re-fi ned” and “we are distinctive”) is successfully commu-nicated at 10th@Hoyt, the interior entry courtyard of an upscale apartment building in Portland’s Pearl District. The courtyard displays an understated orthogonal com-position on axis with the courtyard entry; a restrained palette of materials, colors, and textures creates an aura of subdued elegance (Figure 14). The storm water system is both unusual and consistent with the over-all courtyard aesthetic: the courtyard axis is marked by a simple copper downspout running down the face of the fi ve- story building. Storm water from the downspout then takes a fascinating path along a runnel within a stepped aqueduct, dropping into a river rock-fi lled ba-sin to re circulate in Cor- ten fountains (Figure 15). Other downspout- and- runnel systems in two corners of the space have variations on the same theme. The composi-tion creates an appropriate atmosphere for the urbane citizens of this rapidly gentrifying district and the visual suggestion that treating runoff as a valuable resource is “hip.” And it apparently works: the apartment developer Trammel Crowe has asked Koch to design ARDs for ad-ditional projects, based on their assessment that the de-sign has helped attract tenants (Koch 2006).

The PR objectives “we care” and “we are progres-sive” can be communicated through clarity of the en-vironmental mission in ARD—the design can overtly

case study projects. The detention basin on the uphill side of a weir is fi lled to the brim with river rocks, the mass of rounded rock creating voids that permit water to collect in the basin. Storm water either disappears into the interstices or rises slightly above the rock sur-face (Figure 13). River rocks are particularly appropri-ate in this application, both for their water- shaped form and for the water- retaining voids between them.

Public relations. As an ARD goal, public relations (PR) means that either a discrete feature or the character of the overall design makes a semiotic statement about the values of those who created and / or own the site. Four broad PR objectives frequently delivered through ARD emerged from our analysis: “we care,” “we are pro-gressive,” “we are smart,” and “we are sophisticated.” We also found it useful to classify these broad PR mes-sages into sub- messages that can be expressed alone or in tandem with others. Table 5 presents the PR objec-tives and some associated design techniques found in the case studies.

Two projects present particularly effective design techniques addressing PR: one says “we are sophisti-cated” through compositional elegance and restraint along with careful choice of materials; the second, through a range of techniques site- wide, says both “we care” and “we are progressive.” Achieving the “we are so-phisticated” message is largely a matter of elegant design

Figure 11. Flowing storm water at Waterworks Garden, Renton, WA, is made safe with a simple walking grate. Note the railing at the destination overlook. (Design by Lorna Jordan, Jones & Jones, Brown & Caldwell; photograph by Eliza Pennypacker, 2006)

Page 14: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

Echols and Pennypacker 281

street right- of- way. Brightly colored signs with brief text and graphics are strategically located along community roads and sidewalks, briefl y explaining how each facet of the storm water treatment system works. Indeed, a focus on storm water pervades the whole community: select sidewalks are incised with concentric rings remi-niscent of a waterdrop’s impact on a pool; decorative concrete castings of dragonfl ies adorn drain inlets; even the splash guards at the base of some downspouts are decorated with storm water- related imagery. Thus, two types of PR points are made: fi rst, the sheer range of

exhibit what hydrological benefi t is accomplished, and how. Is this a form of education as well? Most defi -nitely, but the focus here is on the PR objective and technique—the values that are promoted and the ways that the rain water design expresses those values. “We care” and “we are progressive” are two value messages evident at High Point, a new neo- traditional residential community in West Seattle (Mithun Partners, Nakano Landscape Architects). This design displays a range of contemporary storm water treatment systems, from po-rous sidewalks and driveways to bioswales lining every

Figure 13. A detention basin at Glencoe Elementary School, Portland, OR, is fi lled to the brim with river rock allowing storm water to safely collect in the basin. (Design by Portland’s Bureau of Environmental Services; photograph by Stuart P. Echols, 2005)

Figure 12. A series of terraced weirs at 110 Cascades in Seattle controls both water velocity and depth. (Design by Seattle Public Utilities Natural Drainage Systems; photograph by Stuart P. Echols, 2006)

Page 15: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

282 Landscape Journal 27:2–08

tactile, or olfactory experience; but because our case studies lack examples of olfactory richness, our fi ndings are limited to the visual, auditory, and tactile. Table 6 presents these three types of experience in terms of the compositional elements and principles most effectively employed in the case studies, then explains some de-sign techniques by which they can be accomplished.

An array of case study projects exhibit noteworthy techniques for creating aesthetic richness focused on storm water treatment. These include a visually inter-esting line in the water trail, a strong rhythm through repetition of storm water- focused elements, a visual contrast between rocks and plants, an element of audi-tory interest, and an element of tactile appeal.

Visual emphasis of the linear storm water trail is a frequent ARD technique: the line can be straight and

Table 5. Public relations objectives and associated design techniques

PUBLIC RELATIONS GOAL Create symbolic storm water statements about the values and qualities of those who created and own the site

OBJECTIVES

To express or communicate DESIGN TECHNIQUES

WE CARE We are environmentally Create a variety of highly visible storm water treatment systems responsible and want you Locate storm water treatment systems near entries, courtyards, or windows for high visibility to learn about storm water Use signage explaining storm water treatment and intent Create opportunities for programming educational activities

We want you to know Use commonly available materials that you can do this Create small-scale replicable interventions yourself Utilize common settings such as sidewalks and parking lots

WE ARE PROGRESSIVE We are experimental Utilize new and innovative storm water treatment methods Use signage that explains treatment and intent

We are innovative Utilize new forms and materials Utilize traditional storm water treatment methods in new ways

WE ARE SMART We are resourceful Be opportunistic by using small, leftover, and unexpected spaces and clever Achieve additional functions such as traffic calming and beautification

We know you will notice Make the storm water trail easy to find and follow the treatment if it’s fun Make the storm water trail mysteriously disappear and reappear Make the storm water or water treatment system touchable Make the storm water audible: plunge pools, downspouts Make the storm water move in different ways: tumble, run, splash Encourage walking in or climbing on the water treatment system

WE ARE SOPHISTICATED We are aesthetically Create elegantly simple composition refined Use refined and expensive materials Use refined and expensive construction methods Use restraint in diversity of materials and forms Design for manicured look: clipped, trimmed, clean

We are distinctive Make unusual line of storm water trail Use unusual water presentation forms and themes

BMPs sends the message that the developers care; sec-ond, the BMPs are highly visible, aesthetically appeal-ing amenities that show how progressive the developers are in celebrating storm water as a resource.

Aesthetic richness. In ARD, aesthetic richness means that the design is composed to create an experience of beauty or pleasure focused on the storm water. One could argue that aesthetic richness is embedded in all ARD goals presented here; but sometimes richness of experience is created simply by the composition itself through an arresting combination of forms, colors, and sounds. We believe that an articulation of strategies that encourage attention to storm water strictly through compositional means is worth calling out. In broadest terms, the composition may address visual, auditory,

Page 16: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

Echols and Pennypacker 283

entirely visible, making the trail very pronounced and bold; it can dart or disappear in spots, making the trail puzzling or mysterious; or it can curve to underscore water’s captivating liquidity, as is the case at the Ce-dar River Watershed Education Center (Jones & Jones Architects and Landscape Architects, Ltd) (Figure 16). Here, runoff is conveyed from the roof via downspout into a sculpted basin; from that point it traverses a stone terrace in a most elegant meander. This S- curve recalls Hogarth’s “line of beauty” (1997, 33). The serpentine storm water trail is both visually enhanced and made safe by a steel grating perforated with curves that ex-tend the liquid theme. Whatever the compositional de-cision, thoughtful design of the line of the storm water trail is itself a celebration of rain water.

Another noteworthy compositional technique is repetition of storm water- focused elements to create vi-sual rhythm—a strategy that can also aid the hydrologi-cal function. By repeating a series of small treatment elements (bioswales, retention basins, or weirs) a de-signer can create a more effective and extensive storm -water treatment system than one limited to a single lo-cation. A particularly notable example is the SW 12th Avenue Green Street Project in Portland (Sustainable Storm water Management Program, City of Portland, Or-egon). Storm water is diverted from the urban street into retention basins that fi lter runoff. A sequence of four concrete- edged, orthogonal sunken basins, planted with rushes, sedges, and street trees, creates a visual rhythm that is also functional in that runoff fl ows from one basin to the next (Figure 17).

A third means of creating visual richness in ARD is to contrast color and texture by juxtaposing river rock and riparian grasses, especially rushes and sedges. Many of the case study projects exhibit this combina-tion that appropriately connects with the water theme, as both are water- related materials. When further con-trasted with a straight- lined edging of concrete, cut stone, or even Cor- ten steel (each found in one or more case study projects), the effect is even more striking (Figure 18).

An excellent example of auditory consideration

Figure 14. A crisp axial composition and refi ned materials create an aura of subdued elegance at 10th@Hoyt, Portland, OR. (Design by Stephen Koch Landscape Architect; photograph by Eliza Pennypacker, 2005)

Figure 15. The storm water trail at 10th@Hoyt, Portland, OR, is both eye- catching and elegant. (Design by Stephen Koch Landscape Architect; photograph by Stuart P. Echols, 2005)

Page 17: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

284 Landscape Journal 27:2–08

Table 6. Aesthetic richness objectives and associated design techniques

AESTHETIC RICHNESS GOALCreate an interesting experience of beauty or pleasure focused on the storm water

OBJECTIVES

To create DESIGN TECHNIQUES

VISUAL INTEREST

Point Create water collection basin as a feature or focal point Create visual emphasis on storm water direction change using scuppers, basins, cisterns, splash blocks, or rain chains

Line Use downspouts, runnels, flumes, or bioswales to draw attention to the line of the storm water trail, enhancing legibility as well as interest and curiosity

Plane Stack horizontal and vertical planes such as pools and falls to exploit visual interest of storm water flowing over surfaces, plunging down planes, through weirs, or over edges

Volume Create visual interest or themes with basins that hold plants and water: sunken, raised, orthogonal, curved, organic, geometric, small, or large

Color and Texture Contrast natural elements such as plant and rock with man- made elements, such as clipped lawn, steel, or concrete Juxtapose river rock and riparian grasses for compositional contrast

Axis Create storm water trail using axial runnels, downspouts, and bioswales Dramatize implied axis using aligned treatment systems, basins and runnels connected by the water trail

Rhythm and Repetition Create unified design themes by using multiple bioswales, basins, weirs, ponds, or rain gardens

AUDITORY INTEREST

Volume Create a variety of volumes by allowing storm water to fall from various heights onto different materials such as stone or steel

Pitch Create changes in pitch by allowing storm water to fall on different forms such as flat block, metal tubes, drums, and ponds

Rhythm Create different rhythms by varying the amount and rate of storm water falling and flowing through the treatment system

TACTILE INTEREST

Texture Use a variety of water- related plants such as rushes and grasses Use various water- related hardscape such as river pebbles or driftwood to provide interesting surfaces

Wetness Allow people to touch storm water in different forms such as flowing, falling, splashing, standing, and sheeting, or on damp surfaces where water can soak in or evaporate

is virtually a crime. Few examples of touchable storm -water are found in the case studies, probably due to our contemporary fear of water that hasn’t been made antiseptic by chemical treatment and the perceived liability of accessible water. But the “Cistern Steps,” a storm water feature along a block of Vine Street in Seat-tle (Carlson Architects, Peggy Gaynor, Buster Simpson, Greg Waddell), invites water interaction. Small, shallow (“safe”) basins and weirs cascade down the hill in a play-ful rhythm; and water is rendered particularly touch-able by wrapping pedestrian steps around the basins, allowing passers- by to touch the water as it drops from each cantilevered scupper into the basin below (Fig-ure 19).

is found at the previously mentioned urban courtyard at 10th@Hoyt, where storm water movement results in a symphony both during a storm and after—the lat-ter thanks to a cistern that detains storm water and re- circulates it into fountains. At 10th@Hoyt, water can be heard running through fl umes and corrugated chutes, dribbling across Cor- ten fountain surfaces, and dropping into river stone–fi lled basins for up to 30 hours after the rain stops.

Finally there is the tactile experience of water. In his landmark book and documentary fi lm The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (1980), William H. Whyte ar-gued that touchable water is an asset in urban spaces, and that presenting visible water but prohibiting touch

Page 18: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

Echols and Pennypacker 285

6. Inspire and motivate designers who are addressing storm water management in projects from plazas to parking lots.

It was truly exciting for the authors to explore these innovative projects at the crest of the ARD wave. But we hope and expect the novelty of ARD to subside as this ap-proach becomes mainstream. Evidence of this trend al-ready exists. Consider Robert Murase’s groundbreaking 1990 design of a biofi ltration swale system in the park-ing lot of the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry in Portland, Oregon. It was a stunning innovation at the time but today seems nearly commonplace, as parking lot biofi ltration swales are now found nationwide in facilities as diverse as whole foods grocery stores and shopping malls. In our opinion, the ARD approach is so responsive to new storm water regulations and holds so many benefi ts that we look forward to the day when ARD is simply a prerequisite for good design.

This paper represents our effort to hasten ARD’s arrival in the design mainstream. To that end, we have defi ned the overall amenity intent of ARD, identifi ed specifi c ARD amenity goals, and presented a wide array of project objectives and associated design techniques for new ARD efforts. Some of the techniques may be

SUMMARY, OPPORTUNITIES, AND CHALLENGES

Every project in the study presents fascinating strate-gies to transform the utilitarian task of storm water management into a rich experience of rain water. We believe that the application of creative ARD strategies, such as those demonstrated by the selected projects, could have benefi cial results that reach beyond the site- level, to include the following:

1. Raise property values through amenities and so encourage developers to exceed baseline storm water management requirements;

2. Help municipal policy planners and design review boards grasp the impact of storm water management as amenity, offering an impetus for regulation revision;

3. Increase public exposure to, and education about, ecological storm water design for the protection of aquatic systems;

4. Present a strategy for integrating storm water management site- wide;

5. Encourage regular maintenance of storm water management systems by making them a clear “added value”; and

Figure 16. At Cedar River Watershed Education Center, Cedar Falls, WA, the storm water trail is celebrated in an appealing “S- curve.” (Design by Jones & Jones Architects and Landscape Architects, Ltd.; photograph by Stuart P. Echols, 2006)

Page 19: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

286 Landscape Journal 27:2–08

Figure 17. A rhythmic repetition of sunken basins at the 12th Avenue Green Street Project, Portland, OR, unifi es the composition and serves the water treatment system. (Design by Sustainable Storm water Management Program, City of Portland, Oregon; photograph by Stuart P. Echols, 2005)

Page 20: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

Echols and Pennypacker 287

wholly transferable to future designs while most will necessarily morph to fi t each project’s context. By these means we expect that each reader and designer will ex-pand, refi ne, and further develop a personal storehouse of ARD ideas, using this paper as a foundation.

To encourage creative design when thinking about ARD, we offer an observation and issue a design chal-lenge. This project required scrutinizing ARDs from many perspectives, including by BMP type (tradition-ally identifi ed as conveyance, fi ltration, detention, re-tention, and infi ltration). We found that some treatment methods more effectively combine utility and amenity than others. Conveyance, for example, is easily used to create amenity by exposing storm water in troughs, run-nels, fl umes, and waterfalls. However, while conveyance is an important facet of all treatment systems, it is not a true BMP as it does not address storm water rate, vol-ume, frequency, duration, or quality. Conveyance can certainly create awareness of storm water but it does not inherently educate about environmental issues or treatment potential. One true BMP used frequently in the case studies to create storm water- focused amenity is fi ltration via colorful gravel fi lters, rain gardens, or bio- paddies with elaborate textures and colors. Filtra-tion poses a great opportunity to “do the right thing” and send a strong “we care” PR message by displaying aesthetically rich storm water- fi ltering systems in stra-tegic, high- visibility locations. The case studies reveal fewer examples of detention or retention methods re-sulting in storm water- focused amenity. Admittedly there exists a tradition of using wet ponds as detention systems, but people rarely realize that these ponds treat storm water (unless the designer has employed the ARD technique of didactic signage). Detention and retention systems can, however, be built underground using re-circulating pumps and fountains to create compelling visual, auditory, and tactile amenities as well as collect water for irrigation. This strategy offers signifi cant op-portunity for urban areas with high land costs. Finally, infi ltration may present the greatest amenity challenge, evident in the fact that most of the case study rain gar-dens and porous surfaces depend on signage to reveal

Figure 18. Striking compositional contrast can be achieved by combining river rock, riparian grasses, and cut stone, as here at Stephen Epler Hall, Portland State University. (Design by Mithun Partners, ATLAS Landscape Architecture; photograph by Stuart P. Echols, 2005)

Figure 19. Cistern steps wrap around the basins at Seattle’s Growing Vine Street, allowing pedestrians to reach out and touch the storm -water. (Design by Carlson Architects, Peggy Gaynor, Buster Simpson, Greg Waddell; photograph by Eliza Pennypacker, 2006)

Page 21: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

288 Landscape Journal 27:2–08

gel also commented on the preponderance of innovation in

Portland and Seattle, explaining that “Portland and Seattle

have perhaps come closest to designing natural storm water

management for an urban density that would please urban-

ists of all stripes” (2006, 79).

4. Photographs and additional information about these proj-

ects are available at www.artfulrain waterdesign.net.

5. These include “the suggestion that there is more to see,”

through such means as a curving path and vegetation that

partially obscures what lies beyond.

6. We focus on the issue of safety from drowning. Other mis-

haps that occur through contact with water (tripping, slip-

ping, falling) are omitted because they not exclusive to ARD.

Danger related to water- borne disease is also omitted, as it

has been addressed in common storm water management

design manuals.

REFERENCES

Beyard, Michael D. 1989. Business and Industrial Park Develop-

ment Handbook. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.

Bookout, Lloyd. 1994a. Value by Design: Landscaping, Site Plan-

ning, and Amenities. Washington, DC: Urban Land Insti-

tute.

———. 1994b. Residential Development Handbook. 2nd ed.

Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.

Brown, Brenda. 2001. Harvesting what you can’t hold tight: Water—

from sustainable infrastructure to graceful amenity, from

dramatic actor to scenic prop. Landscape Architecture 91

(7): 98–99.

CIRIA. 2001. Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems: Best Practice

Manual. Report C523. London: Construction Industry Re-

search and Information Association.

Coffman, Larry. 2000. Low- impact Development Manual. Prince

George’s County, MD: Department of Environmental Re-

sources.

Dreiseitl, Herbert, and Dieter Grau, eds. 2005. New Waterscapes:

Planning, Building and Designing with Water. Berlin: Birk-

häuser.

Dreiseitl, Herbert, Dieter Grau, and K. H. C. Ludwig, eds. 2001.

Waterscapes: Planning, Building and Designing with Water.

Berlin: Birkhäuser.

Echols, Stuart P., and Eliza Pennypacker. 2006. Art for Rain’s Sake.

Landscape Architecture 97 (9): 24–32.

Ferguson, Bruce. 1991. The failure of detention and the future of

storm water design. Landscape Architecture 81 (12): 75–79.

Ferguson, Bruce, and Thomas Debo. 1994. On- Site Storm water

the infi ltration story to the average visitor. We raise these observations to challenge designers to consider all runoff treatment methods as potential amenities and to design accordingly.

Many questions remain in artful rain water design. What are the unique maintenance, inspection, and man agement expectations and requirements? How can we ensure that these ideas are considered and inte-grated in the early design phases of projects? How can the LEED protocol be adapted to recognize the value of ARD? Where are the best retrofi t opportunities? What are the life cycle costs? How will new policies and regu-lations impact ARD? Some of these questions will be answered through academic research, others through professional design. We contend that it is worth the effort, providing landscape architects the opportunity to be good stewards of land and water while creating meaningful places for people to experience.

NOTES

1. The term “artful rain water design” was coined by the au-

thors. William McElroy and Daniel Winterbottom use the

term “infra- garden” to describe “a landscape utilizing infra-

structure facilities to support ecological and social values”

(1997), a concept closely related to ARD. Stahre speaks of

the values of “open storm drainage” (2006). Kathy Poole uses

the term “civic hydrology” to “denote the potential to use

water infrastructure to build better cities and communities”

(2005), a component of which is amenity oriented.

2. In this article, “storm water” refers to runoff from large storms

that could pose a safety hazard; “rain water” describes runoff

from small to moderate storms, as well as the fi rst fl ush

quantities captured from larger storms and treated for water

quality. Rain water quantities do not pose a safety hazard,

but must be managed to control frequent- nuisance standing

water and reduce non- point source pollution. “Storm water

management” refers to the treatment of both large and small

runoff quantities.

3. In her article, “Moving toward High Performance Infrastruc-

ture” (2006), Mary Vogel similarly described a number of in-

novative storm water treatment designs nationwide. Many

of the projects she chose to highlight appear in this article

as well, which we see as corroboration of our selection. Vo-

Page 22: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

Echols and Pennypacker 289

O’Mara, W. Paul. 1988. Office Development Handbook. Washing-

ton, DC: The Urban Land Institute.

Poole, Kathy. 2005. Watershed management as urban design: The

civic hydrology of Bellevue, Washington. In Facilitating

Watershed Management: Fostering Awareness and Steward-

ship, ed. Robert L. France, 337–349. New York: Bowman

and Littlefi eld.

Richman, Tom. 1999. Start at the Source: Design Guidance Man-

ual for Storm water Quality Protection. San Francisco: Bay

Area Storm water Management Agencies Association.

Roesner, L., and R. Matthews. 1990. Storm water management for

the 1990s. American City and Country 105 (3): 33.

Schueler, Thomas, Peter Kumble, and Maureen Heraty. 1992. A

Current Assessment of Urban Best Management Practices:

Techniques for Reducing Non- Point Source Pollution in the

Coastal Zone. Washington, DC: Metropolitan Washington

Council of Governments.

Stahre, Peter. 2005. 15 years experiences of sustainable urban

storm drainage in the City of Malmö, Sweden. In World

Water and Environmental Resources Congress 2005, ASCE

Conference Proceedings, ed. Raymond Walton, May 15–19,

2005, Anchorage, AK.

———. 2006. Sustainability in Urban Storm Drainage: Planning

and Examples. Stockholm, Sweden: Svenskt Vatten.

Thompson, J. William. 1999. The poetics of storm water. Land-

scape Architecture 89 (1): 61.

———. 2004. Remembered rain: In Portland, a rain water garden

celebrates rain falling on an urban setting. Landscape Ar-

chitecture 94 (9): 60–63.

Thompson, J. William, and Kim Sorvig. 2000. Sustainable Land-

scape Construction: A Guide to Green Building Outdoors.

Washington, DC: Island Press.

Tourbier, J. T. 1994. Open space through storm water manage-

ment: Helping to structure growth on the urban fringe.

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 49 (1): 14–21.

Tunney, Kathleen. 2001. Innovative storm water design: The role

of the landscape architect. Storm water, the Journal for

Surface Water Quality Professionals, 2 (1): 30–40, 42, 43,

http: // www.forester.net / sw_0101_innovative.html (ac-

cessed September 12, 2006).

US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2005a. Storm

water phase II fi nal rule—urbanized areas: Defi nition and

description. EPA fact sheet 833-F- 00-004, http: // www.epa.

gov / npdes / pubs / fact2–22.pdf (accessed September 14,

2006).

———. 2005b. National management measures to control

Management: Application for Landscape and Engineering.

New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

France, Robert. 2002. Handbook of Water Sensitive Planning and

Design. Boca Raton, FL: Lewis Publishers.

Göransson, C. 1998. Aesthetic aspects of storm water manage-

ment in an urban environment. In Sustaining Urban Water

Resources in the 21st Century, Proceedings of an Engineer-

ing Foundation Conference, ed. A. C. Rowney, P. Stahre,

and L. A. Roesner, 406–419. New York: ASCE / Engineering

Foundation.

Hager, Mary. 2001. Evaluating fi rst fl ush. Storm water, the Jour-

nal for Surface Water Quality Professionals 2(6): 10–20,

http: // www.forester.net / sw_0109_evaluating.html (ac-

cessed September 8, 2006).

Hogarth, William. 1997. The Analysis of Beauty. Ed. Ronald

Paulsen. New Haven: Yale University Press. (Orig. pub

1753.)

Kaplan, Rachel, Stephen Kaplan, and Robert L. Ryan. 1998. With

People in Mind. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Koch, Steven. 2006. Koch Landscape Architecture. Telephone

conversation, April 28.

Kone, Daisy Linda. 2006. Land Development. 10th ed. Washing-

ton, DC: National Association of Home Builders.

Leccese, Michael. 1997. Cleansing art. Landscape Architecture 87

(1): 130.

Liptan, Tom. 2005. Environmental specialist for the City of Port-

land’s Bureau of Environmental Services. Interview, Port-

land, OR, September 9.

MacElroy, William P., and Daniel M. Winterbottom. 1997. Toward

a new garden: A model for an emerging twenty-fi rst cen-

tury middle landscape. Critique of Built Works 4:10–14.

McDonald, Steve. 2006. Mithun Partners. Interview with the au-

thors, Seattle, WA, March 8.

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). 2005. Minnesota

storm water manual. Version 1.0, vol. 2, ch. 14. St. Paul,

MN: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, http: // www

.pca.state.mn.us / water / storm water / storm water

- manual.html#manual (accessed September 14, 2006).

National SUDS Working Group. 2003. Framework for sustainable

urban drainage systems (SUDS) in England and Wales,

http: // www.environmentgency.gov.uk / commondata /

105385 / suds_book_902564.pdf (accessed September 14,

2006).

Niemczynowicz, Janusz. 1999. Urban hydrology and water man-

agement—present and future challenges. Urban Water

1:1–14.

Page 23: From Storm water Management to Artful Rain water Design

290 Landscape Journal 27:2–08

AUTHORS STUART ECHOLS holds a BLA and an MLD from Texas A&M University, and an MLA and PhD from Virginia Poly-technic Institute. He is Assistant Professor of Landscape Archi-tecture at Pennsylvania State University. He has taught courses in storm water management, urban design, land development, environmental site construction methods, design research meth-ods, land- use assessment, and design implementation. His re-search focuses on the management of urban runoff as a natural resource.

ELIZA PENNYPACKER holds a BA from St. John’s College and an MLA from the University of Virginia. She is Professor of Land-scape Architecture at Pennsylvania State University where she has served in both teaching and administrative roles. In addition to artful rain water design, she conducts research in design studio pedagogy.

nonpoint source pollution from urban areas. EPA- 841-

B- 05-004. Washington DC: Environmental Protection

Agency, http: // www.epa.gov / nps / urbanmm / pdf / urban

_guidance.pdf (accessed September 12, 2006).

Urbonas, Ben, Larry Roesner, and Michael Sonnen. 1989. Design

of Urban Runoff Quality Controls. New York: American So-

ciety of Civil Engineers.

Vogel, Mary. 2006. Moving toward high performance infrastruc-

ture. Urban Land 65 (1): 73–79.

Wenk, William E. 1998. Storm water as civic and ecological urban

framework. In Sustaining Urban Water Resources in the

21st Century, Proceedings of an Engineering Foundation

Conference, eds. A.C. Rowney, P. Stahre, and L.A. Roesner,

434–453. New York: ASCE / Engineering Foundation.

Whyte, William H. 1980. The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces.

Washington, DC: The Conservation Foundation.