Barriers and Opportunities.pdf

8102019 Barriers and Opportunitiespdf

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullbarriers-and-opportunitiespdf 124

Barriers and Opportunitiesfor Low Impact DevelopmentCase Studies from Three

Oregon Communities

Derek Godwin Betsy Parry Frank Burris Sam Chan

Oregon Sea Grant Extension

Amanda Punton

Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development



ext by Derek Godwin Betsy Parry

Frank Burris Sam Chan and Amanda

Punton editing by Rick Cooper design

by Patricia Andersson

copy 2008 by Oregon State University

Tis publication may be photocopied or

reprinted in its entirety or noncommer-cial purposes o order additional copies

o this publication call 541-737-4849 Tis

publication is available in an accessible

ormat on our Web site at httpseagrant

oregonstateedusgpubsonlinepubshtml

For a complete list o Oregon Sea Grant

publications visit httpseagrant

oregonstateedusgpubs

Tis report was prepared by Oregon Sea

Grant under award number NA16RG1039

(project number AESG-06) rom theNational Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administrationrsquos National Sea Grant

College Program US Department o

Commerce and by appropriations made

by the Oregon State legislature Te state-

ments findings conclusions and recom-

mendation are those o the authors and do

not necessarily reflect the views o these

unders

Cover photo copy iStockphotocomJim

Jurica All other photos copy Oregon Sea

Grant unless otherwise noted

Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU-W-06-002

Contents

Executive summary 3

Introduction 6

The challenge of rapid growth in Oregon communities 8

What we learned from growing communities 11

Results of similar efforts18

Moving from challenges to actions using a

Logic Model framework 19

Suggested organizations for assistance 22

References 22

Acknowledgments 23



3Barriers and Opportunities for Low Impact Development

IIt is anticipated that by the year 2030

Oregonrsquos population will grow 40 per-

cent Such growth could have enor-

mous negative effects on local natural

resources especially water sources

and streams Communities that wish

to avoid costly inadvertent effects ontheir local resources and economies

must consider adopting low impact

development (LID) designs

In 2006 Oregon State Universityrsquos

Sea Grant Extension Program con-

ducted needs-assessment workshops

with local decision makers and

residents in three Oregon com-

munities o vastly different popula-

tionsmdashPortlandMetro Grants

Pass and Brookings Te workshops

addressed (1) the biggest barriers to

planning and implementing uture

development while minimizing

impacts to water resources (that is

adopting LID practices) (2) their

needs or education training or

other resources on these issues and

(3) the audience(s) to which these

efforts should be directed

Key findings and proposedactions

Despite geographic and demographic

differences in size and location con-

sistent themes emerged rom these

three Oregon communities

Executive summary

1 LACK OF BASIC UNDERSTAND983085

ING OF PLANNING AND THE

IMPACTS OF GROWTH

Te workshopsrsquo most significant

theme was a lack o basic under-

standing o the connection between

todayrsquos land use and developmentdecisions and tomorrowrsquos conse-

quences in terms o both costs and

resource quality Neither the public

nor local officials grasp the effects

that individual planning decisions

will have on inrastructure capacity

stormwater management and

water quality

WORKSHOP SUGGESTIONS

Employ computer-generated

visualization tools or ldquobuild-outrdquo

scenarios to convey the consequences

o planning decisions on the uture

o a community An independent or-

ganization in partnership with local

leaders and communities should

develop and hold orums to raise

awareness o the social and environ-

mental consequences o conventional

development versus LID practices

and to present research-based

LID inormation Provide help in

analyzing the costs and benefits o

incorporating LID practices into a

communityrsquos ordinances




Te challenge in managing stormwaterto protect water quality is to mimichow water moves through a well-vegetated landscape (lef) when theland is developed (below) using im-

pervious areas (streets driveways

roofops parking lots etc) compactedsoils and efficient storm-drainage pipe collection systems Low impactdevelopment aims to meet thischallenge

2 NEED FOR ACTIVE LEADERSHIP

Participants expressed a need or

strong administrative support

and direction to incorporate LID

practices into codes or to encourage

developers to try LID projects It is

unreasonable to expect a local gov-

ernment staff person to deviate rom

normal practices without significant

support rom superiors Leadership

also needs to play a role in coordinat-

ing education and outreach between

government (or example public

saety planning and health) and in-

dustry (developers contractors real

estate pros landscapers suppliers

etc) and across jurisdictions (such

as departments and governments)


Develop co-sponsor and und

educational orums and outreach

campaigns to oster the needed lead-

ership and teamwork to simpliy LID

practices permits and incentives

bull Forums on natural resource

planning to inorm political and

industry leaders Help leaders

understand the long-term ldquocostsrdquo

o doing business as usual (or

example via build-out analysis)

Coordinate educational efforts and

communication between local gov-

ernment and industry groups and

encourage consistent standards




or green buildings and alternative

development methods


Using a orum setting explore

bull what unding sources have been

tapped in other jurisdictions to

pay or inrastructure and open

space associated with any new

development

bull the real costs o not fixing

problems in existing and uture

inrastructure (or example

reduced water quality or quantity

limitations in al lowed hookups

building moratoriums)

bull the differences in property values

and public inrastructure costs

between the status quo and LID

methods o development employ

economists or others with special-

ized knowledge

bull the short- and long-term values o

ldquogreen developmentrdquo designs in

terms o natural resource quality

and inrastructure needs and

marketability or developers Canthese techniques save money and

resources while yielding a high-

er-value more marketable finished

product

NEXT STEPS University Extension Service staff

will use these scoping workshop

results to develop unding proposals

partnerships and programs to assist

jurisdictions with several identifiedLID issues

Incentives and disincentives Host

cross-discipline discussions to

identiy incentives or developers

to incorporate LID techniques into

their designs LID designs would beeasier or developers to implement i

the codes and enorcement became

more consistent among adjacent

jurisdictions (or example in street

and highway design) Reduce the

ldquodisincentiverdquo o risk to developers

rom uncertain timelines o approval

by establishing a known streamlined

process or approving LID designs

Outreach capacity Participantssuggested establishing a regional

position to assist local jurisdictions

in educating local builders on LID

techniques enorcing existing regu-

lations and developing new ones and

coordinating enorcement among

adjacent jurisdictions

4 FUNDING ECONOMICS

AND INCENTIVES

Small jurisdictions do not have the

staff or unding to develop revise

and enorce new codes or regula-

tions or to educate builders and

developers on LID techniques How

can local governments generate the

unding required to cover the

ldquodelayedrdquo costs o growth to

taxpayers that is demands on

inrastructure (insufficiently sized

roads stream crossings stormwater

acilities maintaining open spaces)Can a local government afford to

offer financial incentives to develop-

ers to employ alternative designs I

the local public is educated on LID

techniques and benefits will it create

the economic demand and incentive

and enorcement among adjacent

jurisdictions Present inormation

on how LID techniques can be in-

corporated into affordable housing

bull Forums to empower citizen

advisory committees planningdepartments and local chapters o

the Home Builders Association to

address LID issues

bull Forums to spark demonstration

projects to amiliarize builders the

public and community officials

with LID techniques Identiy local

champions o these techniques

3 NEED FOR TECHNICAL

INFORMATION AND ASSISTANCE echnical impediments to instituting

LID practices included a basic una-

miliarity with low impact techniques

and designs and a difficulty in shep-

herding these designs through the

local government approval processes


echnical resources and assistance

Local planning departments need

introductory workshops streamlinedaccess to LID technical assistance

unding sources technical assistance

or demonstration projects short- and

long-term costbenefit analyses and

suggestions on how LID practices

might be adapted in special environ-

ments (low-permeability soils hill

slopes) o streamline local approvals

o these designs departments need

help reviewing current codes and

ordinances and creating new ones tosupport LID Local agencies also need

inormation on unding and technical

consultation to help them develop

standards and become proactive in

implementing LID




OOregon is nationally known or its

bountiul natural resources and con-

servation-minded approach to land

use development However recent

rapid population growth has chal-

lenged the ability o many communi-

ties to keep up with developmentpressures (or example meeting

inrastructure needs) without jeopar-

dizing the long-term health o their

local environment

In response to this need the water-

shed education program o Oregon

Sea Grant (OSG) began exploring

its potential role in helping commu-

Introduction

Tis pervious parking strip in Portland is one example o low impact designImage copy Bureau o Environmental Services Portland Oregon

nities manage growth and land use

development in ways that promote

the health o their economy and

natural resources

Many Oregon communities are ac-

ing rapid growth without a commen-

surate increase in planning staff and

resources to evaluate and guide their

growth options In response OSG

conducted workshops to determine

what these communities needed to

better protect their natural resources

while accommodating growth We

ocused on areas where the need was

greatest the rapidly growing smaller




More examples o low impact design Lef eco-roo planted with sod Right flow-through plantersImages copy Bureau o Environmental Services Portland Oregon

Low impact development (LID)

ldquoA stormwater management strategy that emphasizes conservation and use of

existing natural site features integrated with distributed small-scale stormwater

controls to more closely mimic natural hydrologic patterns in residential commercialand industrial settingsrdquo (Puget Sound Action Team 2005)

scale stormwater controls to more

closely mimic natural hydrologic

patterns in residential commercial

and industrial settingsrdquo (Puget Sound

Action eam 2005) Examples o

such practices include bioretention

areas (bioswales rain gardens etc)pervious pavement vegetated roos

and soil amendments Such practices

may be incorporated into existing as

well as newly built developments in a

community

Grants Pass and Brookings We chose

these locations to represent a range

in population size and in the local

capacity to address development is-

sues Te Portland metropolitan area

is the most populated concentration

o communities in Oregon but thesmaller cities within it ace difficulties

similar to those elsewhere

In this report we use the term low

impact development (LID) to mean

ldquoa stormwater management strategy

that emphasizes conservation and

use o existing natural site eatures

integrated with distributed small-

communities that are ofen so over-

whelmed with todayrsquos demands that

they cannot anticipate tomorrowrsquos

We assessed what orces were driving

their land use decisions and what

educational or other resources the

Oregon State University (OSU)Extension Service OSG or their col-

laborators could provide that might

help these communities engage in

low impact development planning

We enlisted local state and national

partners to join us in presenting

ldquoscoping workshopsrdquo in three different

communities in Oregon Portland




O

The challenge of rapid growthin Oregon communities

1Under Oregon law each city or metropoli-tan area in the state has an urban growth

boundary (UGB) which controls urbanexpansion onto arm and orest lands Landinside the UGB supports urban servicessuch as roads water and sewer systems parks schools and fire and police protec-tion (Metro Web site)

Portland

Grants Pass

Brookings

area include vigorous suburbs such

as Beaverton (population 84000) as

well as small enclaves such as Wood

Village (population 3000) and King

City (population ~2000 situated

on 250 acres) Recent additions to

Metrorsquos urban growth boundary 1

arespurring master planning or vast

acreages o rapid urban development

For example the City o Damascus

incorporated in 2004 boasts 10000

to 11000 acres and ewer than 10000

people in 2006 but over the next

20ndash30 years it is anticipated to house

90000 people (Clackamas County

Web site Liberty 2006)

Te second workshop sitemdashGrants

Passmdashhas a population o 30390 and

is located in the rapidly growing Rogue

River Valley in southern Oregon It

has seen a population growth o 133

percent since 2000 and 495 percent

since 1990 (US Census City o

Grants Pass Web site 2007) Te third

workshop was held in Brookings

Oregon a small somewhat isolated

community on the rugged and scenic

southwest Oregon coast just north o

Oregonrsquos population is anticipated to

grow 40 percent between 2000 and

2030 (US Census 2000) Te three

workshop communitiesmdashPortland

Metro Grants Pass and Brookingsmdash

represent a broad range in current

population and local government sizePortland is the statersquos population cen-

ter with approximately two million

peoplemdashroughly 57 percent o the

statersquos populationmdashin the greater met-

ropolitan area Portland is ar larger

than the next-most-populated metro-

politan areas in Oregon (Salem and

Eugene at 200000 each) wenty-five

cities and three counties lie within

ldquoMetrordquo the regional government that

serves the Portland metropolitan areaJurisdictions within Metrorsquos planning




2 Monies rom the Secure Rural Schools Act

W a t e r s h e d i m p e r v i o u s n e s s (

)

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Stream degradation

Waterway health and watershed-impervious surfacesAdapted from Schueler et al 1992

DEGRADED

IMPACTED

PROTECTED

in the 20th century covering existing

landscape elements with impervious

suraces such as asphalt cement and

roofing was an accepted eature o

urbanization However these suraces

prevent water rom percolating into

the soil thus disrupting the natural

water cycle and affecting both the

quantity and quality o local waterresources Research has shown that

the amount o impervious surace in

a watershed is a reliable indicator o

the impacts o development on water

resources Tese impacts may include

increased flooding and streambank

erosion and degraded water quality

in streams rom polluted runoff which

are particularly undesirable outcomes

in the salmon-sensitive Northwest A

change in development patterns is nec-essary i the local natural resources

are to be preserved or remain unc-

tional Adopting low impact develop-

ment (LID) designs and techniques

can greatly relieve these inadvertent

impacts on local resources

o new development on local natural

resources As the number o permit

applications increases planning staff

find it harder to perorm tasks such as

code updates A weightier problem is

that existing codes ofen contain con-

flicts that effectively hinder cities rom

protecting water quality and manag-

ing stormwater such as restrictionsagainst disconnecting downspouts

or requiring streets to have curbs

and gutters instead o the option o

curbless streets draining to bioswales

Te upshot is that as a ldquopackagerdquo the

bits and pieces scattered throughout

a cityrsquos development codes and public

works standards become their de acto

stormwater regulations even i they

were not originally written or that

purpose and they omit importantconsiderations (C Harper pers

comm)

Te rapid growth rates described

above can lead to development

patterns that do not protect or even

consider the consequences to indige-

nous natural resources For example

the Caliornia border Brookings had a

population o 6185 people in 2006 and

has experienced 135 percent growth

since 2000 (US Census 2000 Proehl

2007) largely driven by an influx o

retirees Tis rapid rise in population

has ueled proposals or increasingly

larger residential developments in

recent years (Ross 2004)

Many local planning and public works

departmentsmdashand municipal staffing

in generalmdashhave not kept pace with

population growth Fast-growing

cities ofen ace complaints rom

the development community about

long delays in permitting Teir staff

unding source also plays a role in

their ability to keep up with demand

For example some planning and

public works departments are tied

to development ees so i growth is

ast-paced there are more ees to pay

or more positions But this unding

is not secure as development slows

the same communities must ldquotighten

their beltsrdquo and lay off or stop hiring

needed staff

Another issue several Oregon

counties are acing today is the loss o

annual ederal revenues2 Although

these cuts were avoided in fiscal

year 2007 many counties including

Josephine and Curry have already

laid off a high percentage o their staff

and have no plans to hire them back

(C Harper pers comm)

Oregon state law requires localgovernments to be ldquoproactiverdquo by

addressing urban planning elements

in their approved comprehensive

plans However many do not have

updated standards and review pro-

cesses in place to consider the impacts




Te Metro workshop included a tour o recent developments with low impactdesigns sponsored by the Oregon Homebuilders Association

3Te ldquononpointrdquo part o their name reers toldquononpoint source pollutionrdquo the type o di- use water pollution resulting rom a varietyo land uses (including urban runoff) ratherthan rom a ldquopointrdquo discharge source suchas a pipe or outall Te decisions that com-munities make about where and how to grow can influence the amount o nonpoint pollution flowing into their waterways

network has empowered local com-

munities around the US to address

these issues We then discussed

and sought audience input on two

questions

1 What are the biggest issues and

barriers conronting your ability to

plan and implement uture develop-

ment while minimizing impacts to

water resources

2 What education training or

additional resources would help you

address these issues and to what

audience(s) should these efforts be

targeted

Conservation and Developmentrsquos

(DLCDrsquos) Coastal Management

Program the local hosting agencies

and the Rogue Valley Council o

Governments Te local hosts helpeddevelop the list o workshop partici-

pants We suggested that they invite

individuals in their communities rep-

resenting a range o interests linked to

watershed management such as city

county or regional planners repre-

sentatives rom the local engineering

departments planning commission

members watershed council mem-

bers developers major landowners

and other interested publics

Te three workshops ollowed the

same general ormat Te national

partners began by delivering an

overview o the impact o growth

and development on stormwater and

water quality Tey included specific

examples o how the national NEMO

Community workshops

We used a ldquoscoping workshoprdquo

approach to solicit input rom local

decision makers and residents to de-

termine what orces were driving local

land use decisions in their communi-

ties what education or resources they

needed to allow them to pursue low

impact planning and development

and how OSU OSG or their partners

might be able to address some o

those needs



scoping workshops in these three

communities Te national partnerswere rom the Nonpoint Education

or Municipal Officials (NEMO)

program based in Connecticut3 Te

National NEMO network is a coned-

eration o programs in 30 states that

seeks to help local decision-makers

understand how land use decisions

affect the quality o the communityrsquos

water and other natural resources

(NEMO 2006) Tey emphasize ace-

to-ace educational workshops orlocal officials

Te Metro regional government in

Portland the City o Grants Pass and

the South Coast Watershed Council

agreed to host the event in their

respective communities In addition

to OSU Extension staff our primary

state and local partners included

the Oregon Department o Land




T

What we learned fromgrowing communities

barriers and opportunities

good approximation or combination

o all these low impact issues Te

NEMO program has resources on

related issuesmdasheconomics orest

and habitat ragmentation etc But

i you broaden the issues too much

when working with a community yoursquoll lose ocus and the community

may become paralyzed So ocusing

on impervious suraces can serve

many o these purposes in one easi-

er-to-handle packagerdquo

mdashNEMO representative

ldquoTere is not one audience Tere are

the commissions the developers the

city staff Wersquore all part o the solu-

tion it wonrsquot go orward without all

playersrdquo

mdashGrants Pass participant

ldquoWhen the public meeting is about

changing the development code no

one shows up even though they may

be more affected by that than by one

particular development that gets

them in the door Terersquos much citizen

apathyrdquo


Te most significant theme to emerge

rom the workshops was a lack o

basic understanding o the connec-

tion between todayrsquos land use and de-

velopment decisions and tomorrowrsquos

consequences in terms o both costs

and resource quality For example

Te input we received rom these

three communities was surprisingly

consistent despite their differences

in size location and situation

Tough expressed at each venue

some o the common issues were

more or less prominent dependingon community size Te ew differ-

ences we encountered were primarily

reflective o the varying geographic

terrain o the local communities

(that is steep slopes versus flat val-

leys and coastal sites versus inland)

BarrierLACK OF BASIC UNDERSTANDING

OF PLANNING AND THE IMPACTS

OF GROWTH

ldquoWe need broad public education

that enhances the basic understand-

ing o water quality the hydrologic

cycle soils infiltration and how we

influence it how water quality affects

insects and fishmdashhow the transport o

pollutants affects aquatic organisms

including fish What are the real costs

o reduced water quality and how can

we assess the costs o not fixing the

problemsrdquo

mdashWatershed council member at

Brookings workshop

ldquoIn the NEMO education modules we

do start by examining water quality

issues but quickly broaden to other

land use topics Water quality is a






and city engineersmdashthat can support

implementation o LID projects Build

acceptance across the board or code

updates In the case o several smaller

cities explore means to provide a

county-wide LID coordinator

5 Hold orums examining how

Oregonrsquos UGB density requirements

may alter the way or the scale at which

the LID model o clustering develop-

ment and retaining open space would

be implemented

6 Present inormation on how LID

techniques can be incorporated into

affordable housing or a variety o

income levels

7 Support the adoption o LID-

related standards (or example or

stormwater and erosion) where such

standards have already been devel-

oped but not adopted

8 Match communities with others

that have adopted LID standards

so they can learn rom othersrsquo

experience

9 Work with stakeholder groups to

ensure that their expectations and

ears about permitting hurdles are

being adequately addressed

10 Reinvigorate and empower citizen

advisory committees planning

departments and local chapters o the

Home Builders Association (or related

groups) and deliver NEMO-style edu-

cational programs to prepare them to

address LID issues Support this shif

by acilitating discussion between

these groups and the elected officials

and jurisdictional staff

11 Instigate demonstration projects

to amiliarize builders the public

and community officials with LID

bull coordinating education between

government and industry as well

as across jurisdictions

bull alleviating concerns that new codes

and techniques could make new

housing more costly adding to thecurrent inability o locals to buy

homes in their own community

(already difficult due to real-estate

inflation)

bull resolving perceived conflicts

between Oregonrsquos UGB density

requirements and the common

LID practice o pairing clustered

development with open space

OpportunitiesWorkshop participants made the

ollowing suggestions to oster the

necessary leadership and teamwork to

overcome these hurdles

1 Deliver educational programs that

address natural-resource issues such

as the NEMO modules to prime

political and industry leaders

2 Help leaders understand the

long-term ldquocostsrdquo o doing business

as usual (or example via build-out

analysis) Explore the differences

between using incentive tools to

encourage LID practices versus de-

velopment-restriction tools a switch

that would put local leadership in a

proactive rather than a reactive role

3 Coordinate educational efforts

and communication between local

government and industry groupsencourage inormation sharing

among jurisdictions and encourage

consistent standards and enorce-

ment among adjacent jurisdictions

4 Build inter-jurisdictional teamsmdash

o surace-water managers land use

planners planning commissioners

is required rom both these groupsrdquo

mdashMetro workshop participant

ldquoWe need a local champion that

can instigate active partnerships

and they donrsquot have to be large-scale

demonstration projects A championcan be a great communicator and

partner-builder I can think o a ew

projects in my area suitable or LID

techniques but on a smaller scale

And much o the development still

happens in two-acre parcels In act

the big projects are not my biggest

concern itrsquos the myriad small devel-

opment projects that add up to non-

point impacts hererdquo

mdashConcurrence between a regional

state planning representative and

a soil- and water-conservation

district representative at Grants

Pass workshop

Workshop participants expressed a

need or strong administrative sup-

port and direction to incorporate LID


developers to try LID projects Many

elt that it is unreasonable to expecta local government staff person to

risk his or her reputation or the saety

and timeliness o permit decisions

to deviate rom the norm without

significant support rom superiors

For example even though the Metro

regional government actively supports

LID methods the staff at some indi-

vidual jurisdictions within the Metro

region elt a lack o administrative

support to suggest designs that wouldcreate additional permit reviews

Without tangible support rom their

superiors local staff members do not

eel empowered to make decisions

concerning low impact development

Workshop participants also elt that

leadership would need to play a role in




Vegetated swale designed to infiltrateand filter stormwater runoffPhoto City o Grants Pass

Inlet to stormwatervegetated swale

ldquoDevelopers are not opposed to LID

technology Tey need a streamlined

processmdashwhat is the straight answer

rom code reviewers What is the

schedule or approvals what are the

most important elements or the design

approval process Te inormation

must be presented to the developers

in the right settingmdashmatching their

schedules and priorities Remember

that regulators are also rushedrdquo

mdashCity environmental program

manager at the Metro workshop

Workshop participants requently

identified two orms o technical im-

pediments to instituting low impact

development practices (1) basic una-


and design options and (2) difficulty

shepherding these alternative designs

through the local land use or engi-

neering approval processes which

ofen avor the status quo

IMPEDIMENT 1

Basic unamiliarity with low impact

techniques and design options

OpportunitiesWorkshop participants provided a

number o suggestions or amiliariz-

ing local planning departments with

the principles specific design eatures

and perormance o LID designs in

local conditions o minimize the

investment o their own staff time

they need streamlined access to LID

technical assistance including details

on local examples o LID designs inpractice (photos directions to sites

etc) inormation on unding sources

become inormed they start asking

different things o the developers who

may respond but then the contractors

donrsquot know how to install these alter-

ative designs so now contractor train-

ing comes into the picture as wellrdquo


ldquoEach jurisdiction has its own inter-

nal struggles A developer may be

willing to use innovative designs but

every time you change something you

need individual approval to deviate

rom each engineering standard and

drawing Terersquos just too much process

involved Jurisdictions are going to

have to pull ahead and start doing

this process themselvesmdashmust update

the engineering design manuals

Either there are no existing specifi-

cations or these alternative designs

or the specifications are not flexible

enough Our needs are to (1) update

the engineering manuals to have

flexible specs and (2) help city permit

reviewers look at plans or LID design

opportunitiesrdquo

mdashCity planner at the Metro workshop

BarrierNEED FOR TECHNICALINFORMATION AND ASSISTANCE

ldquoDevelopers want to know what is

expected o them (clear costs steps

timelines etc) in a timely manner

We need to ocus our efforts to inte-

grate LID into a system o codes and

provide developers with a clear path

or review and approval o projects

and plansrdquo

mdashWatershed council member atBrookings workshop

ldquoIn our experience the development

community is supportivemdashthey just

want to know what the rules are As

the NEMO education teaches good

basic planning the goals and objectives

or a community will be clarified

thereore making it less likely that a

local developer will be wasting his or

her time pursuing LID techniquesOnce the planning commissions

techniques and lower the barriers

or acceptance o new stormwater

management codes Identiy local





permitting process In addition find-

ing the time to review and revise local

engineering standards to allow LID

designs or alternatives to standard

stormwater management techniques

presents a significant challenge to

a small city staff beleaguered by a

backlog o applicants

OpportunitiesSuch discussions yielded the ollowing

questions providing guidance or

uture assistance efforts

bull How can those who approve

design proposals at the local level

(city engineers planners etc) gain

amiliarity with and confidence inalternative designs

bull Can planners and engineers

suggest LID practices to developers

when they eel they are appropri-

ate and how can they gain the

support o their superiors to do so

bull What resources or guides are

available to help local planners

and council members overhaul

their existing codes so that LID

practices are encouraged and

acilitated

bull Can we establish a streamlined

process to get LID designs ap-

proved at the local level to reduce

developersrsquo risk in trying some-

thing new

bull Will it be easier to implement LID

designs i the development codes

and enorcement become more

consistent among adjacent juris-

dictions (or example in street and

highway design)

bull In rural areas can we coordinate

such codes at a larger regional

scale rather than separately or

each town

and their crews to teach plant se-

lection and landscaping techniques

that support LID open space man-

agement and water conservation

bull Create and use natural resource

inventories that will support LIDplanning and decision making

991266 Identiy what tools and data

already exist or the local area

(data layers GIS stations etc)

991266 Assess local capacity to use these

tools and develop and obtain

new ones

991266 Facilitate education on how to

use these tools

991266 Identiy and obtain additional

useul tools

991266 Use these inventories to illustrate

the resource-based approach to

growth planning

bull Use technical tools to analyze u-

ture cumulative impacts on water

quantity and quality groundwater

inrastructure required travel

distances or daily activities etc

bull Partner with the Home Builders

Association to identiy their mem-

bersrsquo needs or technical assistance

then design trainings and develop

materials to meet those needs

bull Provide consultation on site

designs or new developments to

recommend the incorporation o

LID and stormwater practices into

construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2

Difficulty in shepherding alternative

designs through local approval processes

Tere was significant discussion at all

three workshops about the difficulty

and uncertainty o getting LID de-

signs approved through the standard

or technical help to develop a demon-

stration project a breakdown o the

short- and long-term costsbenefits

associated with these practices how

to implement LID practices at the site

and neighborhood scale and sugges-

tions on how LID practices might be

adapted in special environments (or

example soils with low permeability

hill slopes and high rainall areas)

Participants submitted the ollowing

specific ideas or inormation and

resources that could be offered by

OSG the OSU Extension Service or

our partners

bull Develop a technical design manualthat includes costbenefit analyses

or implementing LID techniques

appropriate to Oregon climates

and at a scale that is applicable to

the audience being addressed

bull Create a library o trusted sources

collaborators and partners that

supply useul research-based LID

inormation and share proessional

experience to build on existing

efforts

bull Facilitate Web sites or a listserve to

share inormation and real-world

experience using LID techniques

in Oregon Possibly partner with

annual ldquoStreet o Dreamsrdquo pro-

grams to showcase LID practices

bull Work toward establishing regional

standards (or example road

standards) that allow the flexi-

bility needed to implement LIDtechniques Work with existing

recommended standards where

available

bull Develop educational materials

and deliver workshops targeting

home-owners the landscape in-

dustry and public land managers




uncertain state-wide economic times

Developers are used to paying these

charges elsewhere and are making

quick bucks In Curry County beore

we put these things in place Curry

County does not have SDCs but

the City o Brookings does Terersquos

a lack o inrastructure throughout

the county both inside and outside

cities including designated enterprise

zone areas Terersquos a timing problem

too Subdivision developers have

to pay or their own inrastructure

costs but downstream systems need

to be upsized as well which they

donrsquot pay or yet the downstream

improvements must go in first beoreany SDC money arrives SDCs allow

developers to be part o the solutionrdquo

mdashBrookings participant

ldquoIn Medord the housing developers

did things the same old way because

i thatrsquos all that was available thatrsquos

what people would buy But with

a local champion when the locals

began to have the choices there was a

surprisingly huge consumer demand

or the greener housing optionsrdquo

mdashRegional coordinator o the

Governorrsquos Economic Revitalization

eam at Grants Pass workshop

Small jurisdictions ofen ace serious

financial limitations when it comes to

developing new programs training

staff or hiring additional staff to ad-

minister new programs Participants

rom all workshops voiced concerns

that local jurisdictions do not have thestaff or unding to develop revise and

enorce new codes or regulations or

to educate builders and developers on

LID techniques and they requested

unding assistance Teir unding

concerns included

educating local builders and develop-

ers on new LID techniques enorce

existing regulations and develop new

ones and coordinate enorcement

among adjacent jurisdictions

Participants suggested establishing a

regional position to provide this type

o assistance

BarrierFUNDING ECONOMICS AND

INCENTIVES

ldquoTe City o Brookings is currently

reviewing their comprehensive plan

and we have discussed these concerns

We wonder how to motivate builders

to do things differently than they havein the past What incentives will it

take to get them to incorporate new

LID techniques into their develop-

ments We havenrsquot identified the

carrot yetrdquo

mdashBrookings City Councilman

ldquoGrowth has outpaced inrastructure

We (city staff council and planning

commissions) have held two workshops

so ar we identified the problems and perhaps some solutions but how do we

come up with dollars and cents how to

und these projects NOW even i much

o the money will be recouped rom

developers later We have ailing traffic

intersections NOW Developers must

be part o this solutionrdquo


ldquoWe need system development charges

(SDCs) here We are so ar away

rom really being effective mdashthese

concerns have been going on or

years but ew actions have been

taken and implemented to solve these

age-old problems perhaps due to

unding We need to identiy possible

sources o unding which is tough in

SUMMARY OF TECHNICAL

OPPORTUNITIES

In summary the ollowing themes

and suggested remedies ell under the

ldquotechnical assistancerdquo heading

1 echnical resources and assistanceLocal jurisdictions need assistance in

reviewing codes and ordinances and

creating new ones to support LID

Te regulations should be scruti-

nized against the LID planning goals

to identiy inconsistencies In some

cases model codes may be available

(or example DLCDrsquos Water Quality

Model Code Guidebook or Metrorsquos

Model Ordinance or Habitat-

Friendly Development Practices)

(DLCD 2000 and Metro 2007 re-

spectively) but smaller jurisdictions

may lack dedicated person-hours or

the expertise needed to complete the

task Funding and technical consul-

tation should be made available to

help local agencies develop standards

and become proactive in implement-

ing LID

2 Incentives and disincentivesParticipants suggested cross-disci-

pline discussions to identiy incen-

tives or developers to incorporate

LID techniques into their designs

Local governments (public works

roads and planning staff) need

resources and direction on how to

create incentives in their existing and

new regulations and they may learn

rom other jurisdictionsrsquo models

Reducing the ldquodisincentiverdquo o risk todevelopers (rom uncertain timelines

o approval) is perhaps the most im-

mediate need Establishing a known

streamlined process or approving

LID designs is the proposed solution

3 Outreach capacity Local juris-

dictions lack capacity to assist in




Stormwater wetland on Hamilton Creek in Ashland Photo Rogue ValleyCouncil o Governments

BarrierUPPING THE ANTE991252RAPID

LARGE983085SCALE URBANIZATION

AND IMPACTS

In some specific regions o Oregon

large parcels o land without existinginrastructure are being urbanized

quickly Tis ldquoall-at-oncerdquo scenario

heightens the social and environ-

mental consequences o a planning

decision and orestalls introducing

innovation gradually over time In

our workshops we heard specifically

about the challenges in creating a

new city Damascus in the Portland

Metro area (slated to increase rom

10000 to 90000 people on 11000acres over the next 30 years) (Liberty

2005) and the UGB expansion and

large developments under way in

Brookings Oregon In Brookings

(population 6000) or example

a development o 1000 new units

is under construction on recently

annexed city land (Brookings Oregon

limitations in allowed hookups and

building moratoriums) need to be

identified and presented in a orum

setting Build-out scenarios could

show the differences in property

values and public inrastructure

costs between the status quo and LIDmethods o development Workshops

would benefit rom the participation

o people with particular knowledge

o these subjects (or example econ-

omists) Other orums could discuss

interrelated economic issues such

as the monetary costs and values o

ldquogreen developmentrdquo designs as well

as their short- and long-term values in

terms o natural-resource quality and

inrastructure needs and marketabil-ity aspects or developers Previous

demonstration projects may provide

practical inormation on how these

techniques can save money and re-

sources while yielding a higher-value

more marketable finished product

bull Current growth-related demands

on inrastructure will have cu-

mulative costs to local taxpayers

Examples include insufficiently

sized roads stream crossings

stormwater structures water

treatment acilities etc Given that

these costs cannot be tied to any

one proposed development how

can a local government generate

the unding required to cover these

delayed costs o growth

bull Where will the unding come

rom to manage and maintain

open spaces associated with new

development such as parks and

greenways as well as LID land-scape eatures

bull Can a local government afford to

offer financial incentives or devel-

opers to utilize alternative designs

bull Without knowledge o low impact

techniques and their benefits

the local public will not create an

economic demand or green build-

ings and homes and alternative

development methods

OpportunitiesWorkshop participants identified

a number o ways in which OSG

OSU Extension or our partners

could assist in addressing these

economics-related issues Clearly

there is a need to research what

unding sources (or example system

development charges [SDCs] or

others) may have been tapped in other jurisdictions to pay or the increased

costs o inrastructure and open space

associated with any new development

In addition the real costs o not

fixing problems in existing and uture

inrastructure (or example effects

o reduced water quality or quantity




I

Results of similar efforts

projects were not likely to get off the

ground unless the Rainstorming

partners offered specific designs or

examples or the target area as these

communities lacked the technical

materials to design LID projects

or even to set up a permit processavorable to them Tey also ound

that local staff had limited capacity

to effect code changes when model

codes were suggested to them In

sum the Rainstorming partners

learned that to be successul in these

circumstances they had to provide

practical hands-on assistance and

continue working with the staff on a

step-by-step basis rom developing

code changes to adopting them(Godwin 2005a) Because the speed

o these local processes was slow in

relation to the Rainstorming projectrsquos

timeline the partners created a

binder o reerence materials beore

the two-year project ended (Godwin

2005b) Te lessons learned rom

the Rainstorming efforts provided

insight and served as a springboard

to plan the scoping workshops dis-

cussed in this paper

In the second project the Oregon

Environmental Council (OEC)

is developing strategies to reduce

stormwater impacts rom Oregonrsquos

urban areas In a scoping process

parallel to our own OEC first con-

In our workshops we learned (a) that

these three communities ace several

challenges when it comes to putting low

impact development concepts into prac-

tice (b) what those challenges are and

(c) that these challenges are very similar

Teir similarity despite variation incommunity size and staffing capacity

suggests that these challenges are likely

shared by many other growing com-

munities in Oregon wo recent grant-

unded projects tend to support our

findings namely OSUrsquos ldquoRainstormingrdquo

project and the Oregon Environmental

Councilrsquos (OECrsquos) Stormwater Solutions

eam project

OSUrsquos Rainstorming project

provided assistance to small commu-

nities in coastal Oregon watersheds

rom 2003 to 2005 OSU partnered

with DLCD and the Department o

Environmental Quality to assist with

land use planning issues (or exam-

ple code review and stormwater

management plans) and to acilitate

LID stormwater demonstration proj-

ects in communities o ewer than

10000 Tey ound that overbur-dened local staff ofen did not have

enough time to take advantage o

additional resources when available

For example i a hal-time city plan-

ner had to find time to write a grant

application to obtain assistance the

money would remain on the table

Likewise local LID demonstration

Area Inormation Web site 2007)

Te local governments in these areas

expressed a need to be able to orecast

the real environmental and monetary

consequences o such proposed devel-

opments and to persuasively calculate

both the short- and long-term costsand benefits o adopting LID prac-

tices as an alternative to status quo

development

Opportunities Workshop participants suggested

using visualization tools economic

data and orecasting to answer ldquobig

picturerdquo questions related to uture

growth show the possible contribu-

tions LID techniques could make toameliorate long-term environmental

impacts and examine long-term cost

benefit analyses Tey also suggested

borrowing appropriate techniques

rom special area-management plan-

ning to address large expansion areas

or areas that have unique environ-

mental challenges Te suggestions

made previously in this articlemdashsuch

as educating political leaders and

stakeholders acilitating discussionand building inter-jurisdictional

teamsmdashwould be o the utmost prior-

ity in these situations




T

Moving from challenges toactions using a Logic Model

framework

Participants rom throughout the Portland Metropolitan area participate in aworkshop on low impact development sponsored by Oregon Sea Grant Extensionand Metro

serves as a planning and evaluation

tool As a planning tool it can help

educators identiy what they will put

into a given program (inputs) and

what they hope to do and whom they

hope to reach (outputs) Te model

also identifies short- medium- andlong-term outcomes or the program

As an evaluation tool it can help

educators see what and when to

evaluate (Arnold 2002) We suggest

using a logic model approach to

plan and evaluate LID assistance to

communities in Oregon

Te scoping workshops and related

efforts have identified target audi-

ences activities and other types

o assistance that would support

adoption o low impact development

in Oregon communities Responding

to such complex needs and issueseffectively would require the partner-

ship o many organizations A tool

becoming popular with University

Extension services nationwide is the

ldquologic modelrdquo which acilitates edu-

cation programs with multiple team

members (Figure 1) A logic model

ducted a Web-based survey to better

understand the barriers and chal-

lenges acing Oregon communities in

reducing nonpoint source pollution

and improving stormwater manage-

ment Teir January 2007 survey o

local government staff homebuild-ers developers and stormwater

practitioners in small and large

Oregon cities yielded results very

similar to our three scoping work-

shops Te 150 respondents identified

the ollowing challenges to adopting

alternative stormwater management

techniques

bull Obstacles embedded in codes

and rules

bull Insufficient government staff

capacity and resources

bull General resistance to change

bull Concerns about maintaining LID

acilities over time

bull Concerns about the designsrsquo ap-

plicability to al l sites (or example

with limited space on steep slopes

or specific substrates)

bull Concerns about delays in design-ing and permitting these acilities

with possible financial conse-

quences to developers

Te specific survey results are included

in the Stormwater Solutions eamrsquos

ensuing report (see Huntsinger 2007)




Figure 1 Logic Model

department staff and consultants)

Land Use Development Practitioners

(or example developers builders

landscapers engineers architects

landscape architects realtors and

the workorce) Decision Makers

(or example elected officials

stakeholders planning groups) andEngaged Citizens (homebuyers

or people wanting to be a part o

planning processes to provide

community leadership or to conduct

projects on their own property)

Regardless o the categories used

it is important to characterize the

are available to address stormwater

and water quality issues Tese

unding opportunities are increased

when organizations partner in devel-

opment and delivery

STEP 2 DESCRIBE OUTPUTS

Also compiled here is an extensivelist o outputs which the logic

model divides into participants and

activities Te participants or target

audiences or the LID educational

programming include these our

categories Land Use Planning

Practitioners (or example planning

STEP 1 DEFINE SITUATION AND

IDENTIFY AND QUANTIFY INPUTS

Our scoping workshops provided

many o the logic model compo-

nents or delivering educational or

technical assistance on stormwater

management and LID (Figure 1)

We gathered the background inor-mation necessary or defining the

situation (barriers and issues) acing

growing communities Te inputs

or programmatic investments will

need to be identified and quantified

by each organization As or unding

a variety o state and ederal sources




Building roo collection Stormwater flows to inlets then to stormwater detention pond elsewhere on site Photo City o Grants Pass

Inlet

applied in community activities

(Arnold 2002)

Tis report has highlighted the chal-

lenges acing many growing communi-

ties in Oregon identified opportunities

or Oregon Sea Grant and other orga-nizations to engage a variety o target

audiences toward meeting those chal-

lenges and provided a ramework in

which to plan and evaluate these uture

programs Te issues acing rapidly

growing communities are complex and

will require the partnership o a broad

group o organizations and engaged

citizens In the coming years Oregon

Sea Grant hopes to build the capacity

and partnerships to deliver programs

addressing stated needs Meanwhile

the ollowing section is provided as

a basis or building interdisciplinary

groups that link growing communities

with stormwater and water quality

solutions

STEP 4 DESIGN EVALUATIONS

TO MEASURE OUTCOMES

Program evaluation is too ofen

overlooked and lef out o the

planning phase however this

element is essential in measuring

whether outcomes are achieved

and whether and how the program

delivery should be modified It is also

critical or obtaining and reporting

accomplishments to unding

agencies Evaluation methods range

rom simple to complex depending

on the outcomes being measured

and several methods are ofen

combined For example evaluations

at the conclusion o trainings could

measure program quality and

increases in knowledge and skills

while ollow-up surveys could be

used to quantiy how these were

conditions such as improved water

quality or increased capacity in a

planning department

target audiences assess how they are

making decisions and identiy what

to provide to best meet the desired

outcome

Tis report provides many sugges-

tions or activities that could be provided to the target audiences Tese

range rom providing technical

assistance such as GIS-based build-

out scenarios in a orum setting to

opportunities that build leadership

within citizen advisory committees

to acilitating demonstration proj-

ects Te activities should be creative

and designed to resonate with

the target audience Te trainersrsquo

background and experience are

ofen important in ensuring that the

audience is receptive For example

consultants and building contractors

with experience in implementing

LID practices can be very effective in

teaching their peers We recommend

employing a variety o learning

styles to effectively reach audience

members

STEP 3 PROJECT OUTCOMESTe paper has not specifically

discussed outcomes or the target

audiences However the barriers

and issues listed could be used in

creating short- medium- and long-

term outcomes Here ldquoshort-term

outcomesrdquo reers to an increase in

learning such as an elected official

understanding the impacts o

particular development practices on

stormwater runoff Medium-termoutcomes are measured by actions

such as a citizen becoming involved

in the land use planning process or

building a rain garden on her or his

property In our application it could

include revisions to local codes ldquoLong-

term outcomesrdquo reers to changes in




ReferencesSuggested organizationsfor assistance

Arnold Mary E 2002 ldquoBe lsquoLogicalrsquo

about Program Evaluation Begin

with Learning Assessmentrdquo June

2002 Journal o Extension 403

Brookings Oregon Area Inormation

Web site Accessed December 6 2007

wwwbrookingsremaxcom

brookings_oregonphpaction=page_

displayampPageID=5

City o Grants Pass Web site

Accessed December 6 2007

wwwgrantspassoregongovIndex

aspxpage=329

Clackamas County Web site


wwwcoclackamasorusabouthtm

Department o Land Conservation

and Development and Department

o Environmental Quality 2000

Water Quality Model Code and

Guidebook Also ound online at

wwwparoleboardstateorusLCD

OCMPWQ_modelcodeshtml

Godwin Derek 2005a Rainstorming

Assisting Coastal Communities

in Reducing Stormwater RunoffImproving Water Quality and

Meeting Water Quality Standard

Final Report rom OSU Extension

OSU Sea Grant on DEQ Agreement

No 002-04

Rogue Valley Council o

Governments (RVCOG)mdash

wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o

Environmental Quality (DEQ)mdash

wwworegongovDEQ

Portland Bureau o Environmental

Services (BES)mdash

wwwportlandonlinecombes

National NEMO Networkmdash

httpnemonetuconnedu

Oregon Environmental Councilmdash

wwwoeconlineorgrivers

Oregon State University (OSU)

Extension Servicemdash

httpextensionoregonstateedu

Oregon Sea Grantmdash

httpseagrantoregonstateedu

Oregon Department o LandConservation and Development

(DLCD)mdashwwwlcdstateorus

bull ransportation and Growth

Management (GM) program

in partnership with the Oregon

Department o ransportationmdash

wwwlcdstateorusLCDGM

indexshtml

bull Resources or Stormwater

Management PlanningmdashwwworegongovLCDOCMP

WatQual_Introshtml Resources_

or_Stormwater_Management_

Planning

Metro Regional Governmentmdash

wwwmetro-regionorg

bull Nature in Neighborhoods Programmdash

wwwmetro-regionorgpssp

cmProgServID=122

bull Green Streets Programmdash

wwwmetro-regionorgarticle

cmarticleID=235




Te authors and OSU Extension

Service staff would like to thank

Oregon Watershed Enhancement

Board (OWEB) or financial assis-

tance on delivering these workshops

We also thank the ollowing partner

organizations or their contributionstowards the NEMO scoping work-

shops and this publication

National NEMO Network (Chet

Arnold and Dave Dickson)


Governments (Craig Harper)

Metro Regional Government (Stacey

riplett and Gail Shaloum)

Acknowledgments

Proehl Risa S 2007 ldquoPopulation

Estimates or Oregon July 1 2006rdquo

Portland State University Population

Research Center wwwpdxedu

mediaprprc_2006_Population_

Reportpd

Puget Sound Action eam and

Washington State University Pierce

County Extension Service 2005

Low Impact Development echnical

Guidance Manual or Puget Sound

January 2005 (Revised May 2005)

Publication No PSA 05-03

Olympia WA

Ross Winston 2004 ldquoCoastal boom

on the tide Controversial 1000-home

development may be the first o threeor Brookingsrdquo Te Register-Guard

Eugene OR August 22 2004

University o Wisconsin Cooperative

Extension 2003 ldquoProgram Actionmdash

Logic Modelrdquo UWEX-Cooperative

Extension Program Development amp

Evaluation wwwuwexeducespdande

US Census 2000 wwwcensusgov

Godwin Derek 2005b

Rainstorming Water Quality and

Inormation Guide Inormational

binder a product o the final report

rom OSU ExtensionOSU Sea Grant

on DEQ Agreement No 002-04

Harper Craig September 25 2007

Personal communication

Huntsinger eresa 2007 Stormwater

Solutions urning Oregonrsquos Rain

Back into a Resource Oregon

Environmental Council Portland OR


Liberty Robert 2006 ldquoIntroductionrdquo

at Metro Area Workshop on Low

Impact Growth May 23 2006

Metro Regional Government Web

site 2007 UGB definition may be

ound at wwwmetro-regionorg

indexcmgobywebid=277 the

Habitat Protection Model Ordinance

at wwwmetro-regionorgindexcm

gobywebid=15311

National NEMO Network Web site

2006 httpnemonetuconnedu



Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002



ext by Derek Godwin Betsy Parry

Frank Burris Sam Chan and Amanda

Punton editing by Rick Cooper design

by Patricia Andersson

copy 2008 by Oregon State University

Tis publication may be photocopied or

reprinted in its entirety or noncommer-cial purposes o order additional copies

o this publication call 541-737-4849 Tis

publication is available in an accessible

ormat on our Web site at httpseagrant

oregonstateedusgpubsonlinepubshtml

For a complete list o Oregon Sea Grant

publications visit httpseagrant

oregonstateedusgpubs

Tis report was prepared by Oregon Sea

Grant under award number NA16RG1039

(project number AESG-06) rom theNational Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administrationrsquos National Sea Grant

College Program US Department o

Commerce and by appropriations made

by the Oregon State legislature Te state-

ments findings conclusions and recom-

mendation are those o the authors and do

not necessarily reflect the views o these

unders

Cover photo copy iStockphotocomJim

Jurica All other photos copy Oregon Sea

Grant unless otherwise noted

Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU-W-06-002

Contents

Executive summary 3

Introduction 6

The challenge of rapid growth in Oregon communities 8

What we learned from growing communities 11

Results of similar efforts18

Moving from challenges to actions using a

Logic Model framework 19

Suggested organizations for assistance 22

References 22

Acknowledgments 23



































Executive summary



IMPACTS OF GROWTH











water quality






























































development methods







development












ized knowledge








product


























4 FUNDING ECONOMICS

AND INCENTIVES

























address LID issues






























implementing LID













local environment





Introduction





natural resources






























community
































O




Portland

Grants Pass

Brookings



















































)

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Stream degradation


DEGRADED

IMPACTED

PROTECTED












































comm)
































needed staff

























questions





water resources





targeted























Community workshops











those needs


























T



















playersrdquo








apathyrdquo























OF GROWTH











problemsrdquo


Brookings workshop





















be implemented




income levels









experience


























inflation)



















































Pass workshop



















































IMPEDIMENT 1







































opportunitiesrdquo










and plansrdquo











































acilitated





thing new






highway design)




each town












new ones


use these tools


useul tools



growth planning















construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2





















our partners











efforts












available

















































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002



































Executive summary



IMPACTS OF GROWTH











water quality






























































development methods







development












ized knowledge








product


























4 FUNDING ECONOMICS

AND INCENTIVES

























address LID issues






























implementing LID













local environment





Introduction





natural resources






























community
































O




Portland

Grants Pass

Brookings



















































)

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Stream degradation


DEGRADED

IMPACTED

PROTECTED












































comm)
































needed staff

























questions





water resources





targeted























Community workshops











those needs


























T



















playersrdquo








apathyrdquo























OF GROWTH











problemsrdquo


Brookings workshop





















be implemented




income levels









experience


























inflation)



















































Pass workshop



















































IMPEDIMENT 1







































opportunitiesrdquo










and plansrdquo











































acilitated





thing new






highway design)




each town












new ones


use these tools


useul tools



growth planning















construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2





















our partners











efforts












available

















































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002













































development methods







development












ized knowledge








product


























4 FUNDING ECONOMICS

AND INCENTIVES

























address LID issues






























implementing LID













local environment





Introduction





natural resources






























community
































O




Portland

Grants Pass

Brookings



















































)

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Stream degradation


DEGRADED

IMPACTED

PROTECTED












































comm)
































needed staff

























questions





water resources





targeted























Community workshops











those needs


























T



















playersrdquo








apathyrdquo























OF GROWTH











problemsrdquo


Brookings workshop





















be implemented




income levels









experience


























inflation)



















































Pass workshop



















































IMPEDIMENT 1







































opportunitiesrdquo










and plansrdquo











































acilitated





thing new






highway design)




each town












new ones


use these tools


useul tools



growth planning















construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2





















our partners











efforts












available

















































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002





development methods







development












ized knowledge








product


























4 FUNDING ECONOMICS

AND INCENTIVES

























address LID issues






























implementing LID













local environment





Introduction





natural resources






























community
































O




Portland

Grants Pass

Brookings



















































)

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Stream degradation


DEGRADED

IMPACTED

PROTECTED












































comm)
































needed staff

























questions





water resources





targeted























Community workshops











those needs


























T



















playersrdquo








apathyrdquo























OF GROWTH











problemsrdquo


Brookings workshop





















be implemented




income levels









experience


























inflation)



















































Pass workshop



















































IMPEDIMENT 1







































opportunitiesrdquo










and plansrdquo











































acilitated





thing new






highway design)




each town












new ones


use these tools


useul tools



growth planning















construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2





















our partners











efforts












available

















































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002













local environment





Introduction





natural resources






























community
































O




Portland

Grants Pass

Brookings



















































)

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Stream degradation


DEGRADED

IMPACTED

PROTECTED












































comm)
































needed staff

























questions





water resources





targeted























Community workshops











those needs


























T



















playersrdquo








apathyrdquo























OF GROWTH











problemsrdquo


Brookings workshop





















be implemented




income levels









experience


























inflation)



















































Pass workshop



















































IMPEDIMENT 1







































opportunitiesrdquo










and plansrdquo











































acilitated





thing new






highway design)




each town












new ones


use these tools


useul tools



growth planning















construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2





















our partners











efforts












available

















































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002



















community
































O




Portland

Grants Pass

Brookings



















































)

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Stream degradation


DEGRADED

IMPACTED

PROTECTED












































comm)
































needed staff

























questions





water resources





targeted























Community workshops











those needs


























T



















playersrdquo








apathyrdquo























OF GROWTH











problemsrdquo


Brookings workshop





















be implemented




income levels









experience


























inflation)



















































Pass workshop



















































IMPEDIMENT 1







































opportunitiesrdquo










and plansrdquo











































acilitated





thing new






highway design)




each town












new ones


use these tools


useul tools



growth planning















construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2





















our partners











efforts












available

















































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002




O




Portland

Grants Pass

Brookings



















































)

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Stream degradation


DEGRADED

IMPACTED

PROTECTED












































comm)
































needed staff

























questions





water resources





targeted























Community workshops











those needs


























T



















playersrdquo








apathyrdquo























OF GROWTH











problemsrdquo


Brookings workshop





















be implemented




income levels









experience


























inflation)



















































Pass workshop



















































IMPEDIMENT 1







































opportunitiesrdquo










and plansrdquo











































acilitated





thing new






highway design)




each town












new ones


use these tools


useul tools



growth planning















construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2





















our partners











efforts












available

















































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002






)

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Stream degradation


DEGRADED

IMPACTED

PROTECTED












































comm)
































needed staff

























questions





water resources





targeted























Community workshops











those needs


























T



















playersrdquo








apathyrdquo























OF GROWTH











problemsrdquo


Brookings workshop





















be implemented




income levels









experience


























inflation)



















































Pass workshop



















































IMPEDIMENT 1







































opportunitiesrdquo










and plansrdquo











































acilitated





thing new






highway design)




each town












new ones


use these tools


useul tools



growth planning















construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2





















our partners











efforts












available

















































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002










questions





water resources





targeted























Community workshops











those needs


























T



















playersrdquo








apathyrdquo























OF GROWTH











problemsrdquo


Brookings workshop





















be implemented




income levels









experience


























inflation)



















































Pass workshop



















































IMPEDIMENT 1







































opportunitiesrdquo










and plansrdquo











































acilitated





thing new






highway design)




each town












new ones


use these tools


useul tools



growth planning















construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2





















our partners











efforts












available

















































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002




T



















playersrdquo








apathyrdquo























OF GROWTH











problemsrdquo


Brookings workshop





















be implemented




income levels









experience


























inflation)



















































Pass workshop



















































IMPEDIMENT 1







































opportunitiesrdquo










and plansrdquo











































acilitated





thing new






highway design)




each town












new ones


use these tools


useul tools



growth planning















construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2





















our partners











efforts












available

















































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002

















be implemented




income levels









experience


























inflation)



















































Pass workshop



















































IMPEDIMENT 1







































opportunitiesrdquo










and plansrdquo











































acilitated





thing new






highway design)




each town












new ones


use these tools


useul tools



growth planning















construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2





















our partners











efforts












available

















































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002















be implemented




income levels









experience


























inflation)



















































Pass workshop



















































IMPEDIMENT 1







































opportunitiesrdquo










and plansrdquo











































acilitated





thing new






highway design)




each town












new ones


use these tools


useul tools



growth planning















construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2





















our partners











efforts












available

















































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002





























IMPEDIMENT 1







































opportunitiesrdquo










and plansrdquo











































acilitated





thing new






highway design)




each town












new ones


use these tools


useul tools



growth planning















construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2





















our partners











efforts












available

















































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002





























acilitated





thing new






highway design)




each town












new ones


use these tools


useul tools



growth planning















construction plans

IMPEDIMENT 2





















our partners











efforts












available

















































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002













































concerns included








o assistance


INCENTIVES









carrot yetrdquo























OPPORTUNITIES























ing LID
























AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002







AND IMPACTS



































































development methods



















I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002




I

















































eam project




























development






















T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002




T


framework









































techniques


and rules





acilities over time

































opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002























opment and delivery



























Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002





Inlet


(Arnold 2002)




















solutions


TO MEASURE OUTCOMES






















planning department




outcome





















members






























displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002













displayampPageID=5




aspxpage=329

















No 002-04



wwwrvcogorg

Oregon Department o


wwworegongovDEQ


Services (BES)mdash



httpnemonetuconnedu















indexshtml





Planning


wwwmetro-regionorg



cmProgServID=122



cmarticleID=235


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002


















Acknowledgments






Reportpd








Olympia WA











Godwin Derek 2005b






















gobywebid=15311





Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002



Oregon Sea Grant

Corvallis Oregon

ORESU W 06 002

Documents

Barriers and Opportunities.pdf