Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
How do we manage water within the Urban environment?
Citation preview
Urban Ecology Assignment 2From Roof to Sea
LAND7041 Cora Lawton 1176872
ContentsIntroduction
Plan
Quantification
Swales
Rain Garden
Filter Strip
Living Roofs
Rain water tank
Permeable Paving
Vegetation
Stormwater train
Conclusion
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
References
IntroductionHighly built up urban areas have a detrimental effect on our environment. They have been engineered in ways to remove water as quick as possible, but in return these waters contain vast amounts of pollution and cause erosion and flooding. LIUDD (Low Impact Urban Design and Development) is a concept that focuses on reducing the effects human activities have on the environment with-in catchments in urban and peri-urban regions. It relies on new technologies that use natural processes to minimise the effect we have on the environment and links land, water, air, animal, plant life and amenity together providing a multifunctional landscape. This assignment focuses on using stormwater devices to reduce the amount of polluted water entering our harbours by improving the quality and reducing the quantity and speed of water entering our harbours. Our site lies within the broader catchment area of the Hauraki Gulf and I will be applying stormwater devices that work in combination with each other creating a stormwater train. Not only will these devices improve the management of the water on site, but the will also improve the amenity and ecology on Blum site and the surrounding Industrial zoned area. By applying these devices at this small scale we are providing innovative solutions to manage effects of storm water management at a larger catchment scale.The Blum site is located within the Business 6 zone of the Avondale Peninsula. Improving the LIUDD on this site will improve it for the surrounding indus-trial zone which will decrease the effects water pollution and runoff has on the Hauraki Gulf. To provide more ecological and water connections for this site I have also included the grass verge and 550m² of Rosebank Road and the Coastal Walkway.
SiteBusiness Zone
12456MU
º
1:25,000
Plan
1,132.749 m2
785.725 m2
110.870 m2 520.436 m
2
12.250 m218.982 m
2
15.325 m2
544.467 m2
25.528 m2
16.722 m2
15.207 m2
28.891 m2
31.833 m2
119.642 m2
39.126 m2
134.538 m2
445.021 m2
635.452 m2
250.804 m2
250.894 m2
250.884 m2
250.985 m2
256.931 m2
265.288 m2
132.644 m2
104.104 m2
124.616 m2
52.056 m2
410.250 m2
85.284 m2
24.196 m2
112.916 m2 298.096 m
2
539.081 m2
108.065 m2
32.788 m2
32.788 m2
31.027 m231.008 m
231.008 m
231.008 m
230.988 m
2
340.317 m2
60.717 m2
58.744 m2
58.744 m2
58.744 m2
58.744 m2
9.038 m2
9.038 m2
9.038 m2
2,124.030 m2
1,640.682 m2
296.293 m2
48.962 m2
295.167 m2
125.352 m2
20.936 m2
176.922 m2
59.385 m2
1,806.798 m2
Permeable Footpath
Rain Garden
Permeable Paving
Permeable Paving
Permeable PavingNative Vegetation/Herb Garden
Native vegetation and amenity garden to improvefront entrance to Blum show room. It also acts asdivision preventing trucks from driving on permeablepaving. Boardwalks will be created to access Blum show room
Brown Roofs
Brown Roofs
Permeable Paving
Deck
Lawn
Rain Garden
Filter strip
Asphalt drive
Permeable pavingsuitable for cars
Permeable Paving
Grass swale
Impermeable footpath
Asphalt Road
Scale: 1:500
Rain Garden
Coastal Walkway/Native Plantings
Permeable Paving suitablefor light vehichles
Quantification
Existing site impervious coverage= 13,693m² or 80%
Existing site pervious coverage= 3,556m² or 20%
The LIUDD aims to reduce impervious areas in Ur-ban Developments to less that 15% impermeable. This
means 85% (or 14,662m²) of the Blum site needs to be effective impermeable.
Proposed site impervious coverage= 2,799m² or 16%
Existing site runoff volume= 1, 028m³ of water
Proposed site effective pervious cover-age
= 14,450m² or 84%
SwalesObjectives
Size, Capacity, Placement
Construction Details
Planting Specifications
Fauna Habitat
Swales are channels containing low lying grass (100-150mm) that has a combined effect removing contaminants through infiltration, filtration and absorption whilst reducing the water velocity. This improves the quality and reduces the speed of water entering other storm water devices, water ways and eventu-ally harbours. The contaminant removal depends on the time water is present through the swale and the height of the water in comparison to the grass. They are a simple but effective way improving water quality reducing water quantity and they add amenity to built up urban environments.
I placed the swales next to the road in order for cars to maintain views of the busy Rosebank Road when existing the site. Because of this the vegetation in the device had to remain low. This factor along with the existing gradual slope and width of area between the road and footpath made swales the obvious choice for this location.It is important that the runoff for the road is dealt with to remove pollut-ants that sit on roads surfaces and within the asphalt i.e. lead, zinc, iron and aluminium. These swales will be used in conjunction with rain gardens to further the removal of these pollutants.The dimensions of the swales on site are 2.3x7m (16m²), 13x2.5m (31.8m²) and 58x2.3m (134.5m²).The success of these swales rely on the 1-5% longitudinal slope. When the wa-ter reaches the end of the swales it will then be directed into the rain gar-dens.Two of these swales are shorter in length, but they will however link together giving an overall length of 78m (as shown in picture opposite). These swales could also be linked to grass verges on surrounding properties.
According to TP10 Chapter 9 the most common grass used for swales in the Auck-land Region is perennial rye grass species. As this has been proven as a suitable grass species for swales I propose it be used on this site.
Although the planting in these swales is not significant it still provides habitats for insects,lizards and birds that in conjunction with all the other devices and plantings will increase the biodiversity on site. This device is focused more towards providing an amenity to the area breaking up the built up urban structures.
Linkage Example
Example of how the swales will link. Pic-ture from TP10.
2000-2500mm
200-300mm
Diagram retrieved from Swales and Filter Strips, Operation & Maintanence Guide from Auckland Council.
Rain GardenObjectivesRain gardens are a planted storm water device that remove sedimentation and contaminants through infiltration and storage. They not only remove particles of larger sizes, but because they have the capacity to store water they also remove smaller particles that fail to be removed in other devices like swales. Not only do rain gardens remove pollutants they also slow down the velocity of water before it flows into surrounding pipes, drains, streams and harbours.Vegetation is another element within these devices that also aids in the re-moval of sedimentation and contaminants and reduction of water velocity through root uptake and transpiration.
Size, Capacity, PlacementRain gardens have been placed throughout the site as secondary catchment de-vices to further improve water quality and reduce water velocity before it en-ters the Waitemata Harbour. They will help with collection of rain water from the roofs, swales and the filter strip. The dimensions of the gardens are 133x4m (544m²), 77x7m (520m²), 61x7m (445m²), 9x12m (111m²), 4x6.5m (26m²) and 9x47m (410m²). Based on the Paul Mathews Drive rain garden which is 260m² and successfully improves the quality of water and reduces the quantity of water for 5300m² of asphalt road runoff or 310m³ runoff volume. The rain gardens proposed in my design are 9.7 times the size of the Paul Mathew’s rain garden and according to my calculations it should treat an area 51,410m² or 3,007m³ of run off volume. This runoff vol-ume is greater than what already exists on-site so theoretically these devices could also serve surrounding properties or the surrounding industrial zone, contributing to the LIUDD of the area.
Construction Details
Planting Specifications
Fauna Habitat
I propose the rain gardens in the front of the site have specimen trees Pla-gianthus divaricatus (ribbonwood) that are under planted with a mass of Carex secta and Phormium tenax (harekeke). This keeps the plants in the front structured but the rain garden behind the Blum building will be planted in more of a natural aesthetic to mimic the Coastal Walkway. This garden will contain plants like Cordyline australis (cabbage tree), Phormium tenax and Cortaderia splendens (toitoi).
As the rain gardens will be multi-tiered with vegetation they will create mi-cro climates that provide habitats and food for insects, lizards and birds. The flower of the flaxes will entice birds like the Tui during flowering sea-sons. The ribbonwood also provides ecological connections for native bird species.
As the Paul Mathew’s rain garden successfully improves the quality of water and reduces the quantity and velocity, I propose using the same construction details as this site.
Filter StripObjectivesFilter strips are much the same as swales, but they are constructed on slopes and contain 500mm of soil for planting and they are vegetated. The sediments and contaminants settle out over the filter strip and the vegetation also con-tributes to removing sediments and contaminants by filtration, adsorption and biological uptake.
Size, capacity, placementThis device is located on a slope on the southern side of the Blum building next to the quarantine zone. I placed the filter strip here as it is at the bottom of the asphalt drive and will be able to remove contaminants form the run off produced by this drive. The device also suited the existing land-form of the site. A channel will need to be created at the low points near the path to divert water into the rain garden situated below it to improve the water quality even more before it enters the harbour. This device will also reduce the velocity of the water entering the rain garden.The dimension of this device is 6.9m x 43m (295m²) and it has a fall of ap-prox. 5m from the east to west.
Planting SpecificationsTo improve the biodiversity within the Avondale Peninsula I have chosen plants from the Tamaki Ecological District that would need to be eco sourced. As this device is located close to a quarantine area it is important to avoid plants from brushing up against the containers. Because of this I propose mass planting Apodasmia similis (oioi) throughout the area with specimen plantings of Rhopalostylis sapida (nikau) running along the foot path to frame it and draw people down to the proposed coastal walkway. The structure of the nikau not only provides an ecological connection for native birds but it also allows the path to be utilised at night without the fear of not being able to see as the foliage sits on top of the palm. The foliage of these plants contrast but complement each other and will im-prove the amenity in the built up site.
Fauna HabitatThe nikau’s will provide food for native bird species including wood pigeons and will also provide more connections throughout the peninsula for native bird species. The oioi will provide habitats for native fauna and provide more biodiversity.
Construction Details
Living RoofsObjectivesLiving roofs have a range of functions both environmentally and as a storm wa-ter device. They can retain water by way of storage or slow release, improve the water quality by reducing particles and pollution and reduce the water quantity through evaporation and plant uptake. Living roofs also insulate buildings. There are two types of living roofs, intensive which allows plant-ings of bigger species and access; and extensive which is a thin and light and has a maximum depth of 150mm. Because the existing structure of the buildings on the site only being able to maintain a light weight device I have proposed constructing a “Brown Roof”. This device focuses on providing habitats for native bird species.
Size, capacity, placementThe “Brown Roofs” are to be placed on all roofs within the site. However on the Blum building there are sky lights so metal strips will need to be placed along these to contain the pumice. The areas of the “Brown Roofs” on the Smith and Nephew buildings are 2,124m² and 1,641m²; and on the Blum roof they are 132m², 265m², 257m², 251m², 251m², 251m²,251m² and 125m². The pumice on these roofs will have a maximum depth of 100mm. Based on the researched gath-ered by Landscape Research, Green Roofs have the capacity to reduce the peak flow rate by 93% and reduce the runoff by 72%. The total roof coverage of the Blum site is 30%, so a Green Roof could have the capacity of reducing the site runoff volume by 303m³. The “Brown Roof” will improve the runoff volume sig-nificantly but as it contains no planting I suspect it will not be to the same volume as a Green Roof.
Planting SpecificationsAs I have proposed a “Brown Roof” comprising of pumice there is no need for plants. This type of roof focuses on producing a natural wasteland that at-tracts wildlife followed by flora. Plant species will eventually establish naturally on these roofs but because the growing medium I propose using has no nutritional value larger plants will not survive on the roof.
Fauna HabitatAs the site is located on the coast of the Waitemata Harbour I felt it was ap-propriate to create an environment that mimics the habitats of coastal bird species like the oyster catcher and other migrating species like the godwits, knots and sandpipers. Debris like drift wood could also be placed on the roofs to provide habitats and food for invertebrates of decaying wood like moths & beetles. As the roof ages and plants naturally establish on them it will provide even more habitats for native insects.
Construction DetailsThe first and most important material of this roof is the waterproofing mem-brane, this will be the Nuraply 3G Waterproof membrane produced by Nuraflow. This will be followed by Nuraflow drainage mat that controls water run-off into rain gardens or other devices that have been specified on plans. This mat also doubles as a thermal insulation. The next layer will be the VersiWeb Cellular Confinement Cells produce by Elmich to contain the pumice and prevent it from moving. The pumice will be contained by strips of metal that match the existing roofing material.
Materials
The maximum depth of these cells VersiWeb cells will be 50mm, this allows for 50mm above the cells for oyster catchers to form nests
Example of metal strip to contain pumice
Example of Oyster Catchers nest in stones in England photo retrieved from www.flickr.com
Rain water tankObjectivesThe purpose of rain water tanks on this site is to provide a device that col-lects water from the Blum building roofs store it for use in the toilets and irrigation of the gardens in the summer months. As water runoff has been al-ready been cleaned through the “Brown Roof” the overflow quality will be good, but to improve this quality even more and reduce the velocity of the water entering the Waitemata Harbour it will be linked to a rain garden before it flows into the Waitemata Harbour.
Size, capacity, placementI propose building a tank that is 2m deep and burying it 1.5m under the ground, under the deck. This tank will be 112m²x2m deep and will have the ca-pacity to hold 224,000 litres of water. It could easily service the toilets for the Blum site based on nine employees and irrigate the gardens in summer.
Construction Drawings
Permeable PavingObjectivesPermeable paving provides a solution to impervious paving. Rainwater from impervious surfaces will run straight off the surface, gathering pollutants, before returning to the waterways. Permeable paving allows water to quickly pervade the surface (filtering and removing pollutants during this process) and return it directly into the ground before it has opportunity to pick up too many impurities. It also assists with puddling and even flooding (a com-mon feature of Urban areas) by absorbing the rain water so that it doesn’t pool upon the surface. The reason I chose this product was to provide an at-tractive, hard wearing, highly porous and low maintenance surface, that re-flects a natural aggregate finish with no loose stone and that releases no toxins.
Size, capacity, placementIn my design I have placed two types of permeable paving. One for suited just for pedestrians and the other is suited for light vehicles. I have also placed a division between the asphalt and permeable paving to prevent trucks from entering the area. The paving suitable for light vehicles has been placed in carpark areas. This area accumulates to 1,868m² and the permeable path are accumulates to 1065m² making these areas 17% of the site.
Construction Details for paths
Construction Details light vehicles
Construction drawings retrieved from http://www.stonsetnz.co.nz
VegetationAlthough 13% of the site will be vegetated through the stormwater devices on site, there are also other areas that will contain plantings (14% of the site). One significant area is on the proposed Coastal Walkway. I envisage the area towards the south of this site being under planted with species like Cordyline australis (cabbage tree), Coprosma robusta (karamu), Myrsine aus-tralis (mapou), Macropiper excelsum (kawakawa) and Vitex lucens (puriri). As these plants establish the existing weed species could slowly be thinned out. This prevents loss of habitat for native fauna especially the puriri moth.The northern end of the Coastal Walkway will contain plant species with lower established heights. This is to maintain views of the harbour form the Blum show room. These plant species will include Cortaderia splendens (toetoe), Astelia banksii (wharawhara), Coprosma rhamnoides and Muehlenbeckia complexa (pohuehue).
Other plants to be used on site include Corynocarpus laevigatus (karaka) which will be used as specimen trees throughout carpark areas and under planted with masses of Astelia banksii. These plants (especially the karaka one estab-lished) will also improve the ecological connections throughout the region. All the plantings (including plants in stormwater devices) within the Blum site have been designed in the same way as the carpark areas to enhance the amenity on site provide a that feeling of structure and ‘cues to care’ for the public. But it is the ecological functions that the plants introduce to the area and public that is of the greatest importance for this site and region.
The vegetation right outside the Blum entrance will contain a natural aes-thetic. This enhances the importance of natural vegetation within our Ur-ban environments and strengthens the environmental focus of Blum as stated on their web site “We believe that responsible ecological behaviour has long-term economic benefits. That’s why we are implementing environmental protection measures in as many areas that our business affects as possible.” (Blum press release, 2005). Visitors to the show room will access it through a boardwalk situated amongst plantings that mimic natural coastal areas of this region.
I felt it was important to maintain the natural aesthetic of plantings in the Coastal Walkway as it re-introduces the public to what was once there and just how important these natural areas are within our urban landscapes.
Plants have a huge role in assuring the success of stormwater devices. They have a range of functions like:• Binding soil and preventing erosion.• Uptake of pollutants through roots.• Phytoremediation.• Prevention of raindrop erosion.• Reducing water quantity through water uptake.• Contaminant absorption.• Providing a surface for micro organism contaminant processing.• Aiding in slowing the water flow rate.• Contributing to the biodiversity.• Providing invertebrate habitats.• Improving landscape amenity.• Assisting with sedimentation.
• Providing habitats for fauna.• Providing food for fauna.• Contributing to the vegetation patch network.• Providing food and nesting areas.This is why plants have are so important to the success of storm water devices as they provide a range of elements that improve ecological functions of the site and surrounding environments.
To further improve the biodiversity in the area all plants that have been se-lected in this design are from the same Ecological District the site is locat-ed in, the Tamaki Ecological District. All plants will also be eco-sourced.
Stormwater train
1,132.749 m2
785.725 m2
110.870 m2 520.436 m
2
12.250 m218.982 m
2
15.325 m2
544.467 m2
25.528 m2
16.722 m2
15.207 m2
28.891 m2
31.833 m2
119.642 m2
39.126 m2
134.538 m2
445.021 m2
635.452 m2
250.804 m2
250.894 m2
250.884 m2
250.985 m2
256.931 m2
265.288 m2
132.644 m2
104.104 m2
124.616 m2
52.056 m2
410.250 m2
85.284 m2
24.196 m2
112.916 m2 298.096 m
2
539.081 m2
108.065 m2
32.788 m2
32.788 m2
31.027 m231.008 m
231.008 m
231.008 m
230.988 m
2
340.317 m2
60.717 m2
58.744 m2
58.744 m2
58.744 m2
58.744 m2
9.038 m2
9.038 m2
9.038 m2
2,124.030 m2
1,640.682 m2
296.293 m2
48.962 m2
295.167 m2
125.352 m2
20.936 m2
176.922 m2
59.385 m2
1,806.798 m2
Permeable Footpath
Rain Garden
Permeable Paving
Permeable Paving
Permeable PavingNative Vegetation/Herb Garden
Native vegetation and amenity garden to improvefront entrance to Blum show room. It also acts asdivision preventing trucks from driving on permeablepaving. Boardwalks will be created to access Blum show room
Brown Roofs
Brown Roofs
Permeable Paving
Deck
Lawn
Rain Garden
Filter strip
Asphalt drive
Permeable pavingsuitable for cars
Permeable Paving
Grass swale
Impermeable footpath
Asphalt Road
Scale: 1:500
Rain Garden
Coastal Walkway/Native Plantings
Permeable Paving suitablefor light vehichles
ConclusionThe LIUDD concept aims to look beyond the scale of developments to what is be-ing environmentally affected at the larger scale. By calculating the exist-ing water quantities of the Blum site I was able to calculate the environmen-tal impact just one industrial lot could potentially have on the bigger scale. This was just one site within an industrial zone that has a Impervious Catch-ment Class of 40-60%, although the existing site contains 80% impervious sur-faces. This class is quite low for an area zoned as industrial as in other regions of Auckland the industrial zones are classed as 60-80%. These zones remain quite high especially if the LIUDD aims to maintain the impervious sur-face rate below 15%.
My design of the Blum site contains a stormwater train that starts with the roofs, although these are not completely pervious they are effectively imper-vious as they are always going to runoff , but with the introduction of “Brown Roofs” the runoff quantity reduces and the quality of it improves. The Blum roof links to a rain water tank that services the toilets year round and the vegetation on the site during summer months. The Smith and Nephew roof run-off is linked with the rain gardens to improve the quality of runoff and re-duce the flow even more before it enters the Waitemata Harbour. The swales by Rosebank Road are also linked to these rain gardens. It was important to maintain the asphalt drive for trucks or heavy vehicles that frequent the site for deliveries, because of this the filter garden was placed at the bottom of the drive to improve water quality and reduce the quantity, this also links to a rain garden to further improve the runoff. Pervious pavements were placed in areas that didn’t need heavy vehicle access and the material I have chosen to use is also aesthetically pleasing compared to asphalt and the different paving materials used will contrast each other. I believe I have significant-ly improved the aesthetics of this site, breaking up the typical concrete look of industrial zones. Not only will this design provide a picture for people of how industrial sites can be improved but it also offers environmental solu-tions for the Avondale Peninsula and the Hauraki Gulf catchment.
My design although very close to 15% was unable to reach the impervious sur-face rate as specified for LIUDD. After careful research into the LIUDD con-cept and designing the Blum site I came to the conclusion that it is not the impervious coverage that matters, but the devices that are used to deal with the stormwater runoff. This is proven with the Paul Mathew’s rain garden. By applying the same calculations gathered from this site and applying to my rain gardens, it was evident that they could more than service the Blum site allow-ing an opportunity to link up with the wider industrial zone to improve storm-water runoff.
It is imperative that industrial zones be improved aesthetically which will also improve ecological processes, but they are regions that need to maintain a higher impervious rate. This is why it is important that a realistic bal-ance be maintained between ecological and human processes. It is important that amenity be improved within industrial zones in Auckland. This will not only help these areas aesthetically but it will also enhance the ecology with-in these zones. If these regions are not improved, they will continue to de-teriorate the Hauraki Gulf. I believe the 15% impervious rate is unrealistic and that the aim should be to reduce the runoff velocity and improve the run-off quality entering our harbours.
This can be achieved through stormwater devices as they are a resource within the landscape that can be used for a range of functions including ecological processes, irrigation, amenity and aesthetics. They just need to be placed within appropriate areas, not only servicing individual sites but also sur-rounding properties and zones. Water is a dynamic force and LIUDD has rec-ognised this and uses technology and relationships with landform, plants and structures to turn it into a device that contributes to the amenity, ecology whilst dealing with water issues that have the potential to ruin our harbours.
Appendix 1Soil Name Cover CN Area sqm CN x Area Product Area in km2Alluvial Road 98 580 56840 0.05684Alluvial Grass 61 1653 100833 0.100833Alluvial Trees 55 1770 97350 0.09735Alluvial Blum roof North 98 705 69090 0.06909Alluvial Blum roof south 98 705 69090 0.06909Alluvial Blum Lean to 98 240 23520 0.02352Alluvial Grass Verge 61 133 8113 0.008113Alluvial Drive 98 7977 781746 0.781746Alluvial Smith office 98 500 49000 0.049Alluvial Smith bulk n 98 1493 146314 0.146314Alluvial " " S 98 1493 146314 0.146314 Total m2 17249 Total Product 1.54821 Total km2 area 0.017249 Total Pervious areas m2 3556 Total pervious area km2 0.003556 CN Weighted 89.75650762 la weighted 1.030784393 Catchment Area 0.0175 Runoff Curve Number 89.7565076 Initial Abstraction (Ia) 1.014376997 Storage (S) S= (1000/CN-10)25.4 1.141253448 28.98783757 Average recurrance interval 2 2 year 24 hour rainfull depth 82 Peak Flow (qp) 80.985623 6558.671133 109.9734606 0.016767644 m3/s metres cube of water per second during peak flow Runoff depth Q24 80.96921561 6556.013876 109.9570532 59.62340465 mm Depth of runoff over 24 hour periodRunoff Volume V24 1028.444107 m3 Quantity of runoff over 24 hour period
Quantities for existing site
Quantities for devicesRain Garden: Paul Mathew’s 260m2 successfully deals with 5300m2 or 310m3 of runoff volume Site 2037m2 rain garden = 51,410m2 of impervious surfaces or 3,007m3 runoff volumeRain Tank: See Appendix 2Green Roof: Existing roof peak flow: 0.013m3 per second Existing roof runoff: 440.84m3 Proposed Brown Roof reduction based on Landcare outcomes: 0.001m3 per second (reduces peak flow by 93%) 119.03m3 (reduces runoff by 73%) This calculation is based on a Green Roof that contains vegetation. As my proposed roof doesn’t there will be a difference in the calculation and it wont be as affective as the green roof.
Appendix 2
ReferencesAuckland City Council. (2002). On-site Stormwater Management Manual. Retrieved October 30, 2011 from: http://www.moodle.unitec.ac.nz
Auckland Council. (2011). Rain Garden Construction Guide. Retrieved November 4, 2011 from: http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Auckland Council. (2011). Swale and Construction Guide. Retrieved November 4, 2011 from: http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Auckland Regional Council. (2011). State of Environment and biodiversity. Terrestrial biodiversity. Retrieved October 20, 2011 from: http://www.moodle. unitec.ac.nz
Auckland Regional Council. (2003). TP10 Design guideline manual stormwater treatment devices. Retrieved October 20, 2011 from: http://www.arc.govt.nz
Auckland Regional Council. (2003). TP108 Guidelines for stormwater runoff modelling in the Auckland. Retrieved October 20, 2011 from: http://www.arc.govt. nz
Boffa Miskel. (2008). Landscape and Ecology Values within Stormwater Management. Retrieved October 30, 2011 from: http://www.moodle.unitec.ac.nz
Gedge, D. (2008). Living Roofs and Walls. Technical Report: Supporting London Plan Policy. Retrieved October 30, 2011 from: http://www.moodle.unitec.ac.nz
Elmich. (2011). VersiTank Stormwater Management. Retrieved October 4, 2011 from: http://elmich.com.au
Ignatieva, M., Meurk, C., van Roon, M., Robyn Simcock, R. & Stewart, G. How to Put Nature into Our Neighbourhoods. Retrieved October 30, 2011 from: http:// www.moodle.unitec.ac.nz
Nuralite. (2008). Green Roofs Technical Brochure. Retrieved October 20,2011 from: http://www.nuralite.co.nz
Puddephatt, J. & Heslop, V. (2008). Guidance on an integrated process for designing, operating and maintaining low impact urban design and development de vices. Retrieved October 30, 2011 from: http://www.moodle.unitec.ac.nz
Haines. L. (2011). Lessons Powerpoints. Retrieved October 30, 2011 from: http://www.moodle.unitec.ac.nz
Simcock, R,, Fassman. E. & Voyde, E. (2011). Do living roofs perform to expectations in New Zealand?. Retrieved November 4, 2011 from: http://www.moodle. unitec.ac.nz Stoneset. (2011). Construction Detail Porous Driveway. Retrieved November 8, 2011 from: http://wwww.stonesetnz.co.nz
Stoneset. (2011). Construction Detail Porous Pathway. Retrieved November 8, 2011 from: http://wwww.stonesetnz.co.nz
van Roon, M. & van Roon, H. (2009). Low Impact Urban Design and Development: the big picture. Retrieved October 30, 2011 from: http://www.moodle.unitec. ac.nz
