Page 1

Green Infrastructure Plan For MD Anderson Campus, Houston

May 2016 1

University of Texas | School of Architecture & the Environmental Science Institute


This report was produced by a group of Community and Regional Planning, Landscape Architecture and Urban Design students in the School of Architecture at The University of Texas at Austin as part of the course, “Urban Ecological Infrastructure,� taught by Dr. Sarah Dooling. May 12, 2016 School of Architecture 310 Inner Campus Drive B7500 Austin Texas 78712 https://soa.utexas.edu

2


Contributors

Community and Regional Planning

Landscape Architecture

Urban Design

Editor

3

Caroline Bailey Nathlie Booth Christopher Sailer Plumeria Alexander Tian Bian Siwen Fang Yinglei Lei Haoyang Li Nicolas Odekon Nieve Tierney Meng Wang Rachel Warburton Aparajita Bhatt Ashwin Dharmadhikari Tatum Lau Dr. Sarah Dooling


4


Table of Contents

1. Vision.......................................................................................................................................................... 7 • Definitions • Why Green Infrastructure? 2. Introduction................................................................................................................................................8 • Existing Conditions at MD Anderson Campus • Precedents 3. Ecosystem services...................................................................................................................................... 15 • Green Roofs • Therapeutic Gardens • Bioswales 4. Green Infrastructure as the Construction of Trophic Communities........................................................ 17 • Green Walls • Therapeutic Gardens • Bioswales 5. Modular Site Designs by Typology........................................................................................................... 22 • Green Walls • Green Roofs • Therapeutic Gardens • Bioswales 6. Monitoring Program................................................................................................................................. 34 • Potentials and Approach • Partnerships • Research Framework 7. Appendix................................................................................................................................................... 38 8. Bibliography............................................................................................................................................. 51 5


6


1.0 Vision

Our Vision The M.D. Anderson Green Infrastructure Plan establishes a dynamic, connected network of ecosystems that will promote the healing and rejuvenation properties of the living landscape. The plan grows with M.D. Anderson in order to ensure the wellbeing of the campus community now and in the future. M.D. Anderson’s Vision ‘We shall be the premier cancer center in the world, based on the excellence of our people, our research-driven patient care and our science. We are Making Cancer History.’

--The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

Green Infrastructure as an organizing principle Green Infrastructure is an innovative approach to urban planning and design that acknowledges the important services the living landscape provides urban communities. Much like traditional “gray” infrastructure — the pipes, roads, wires, and other networks that make cities function —- Green Infrastructure is “a critical public investment” that “provides benefits to both nature and people” (Benedict and McMahon 2006). But unlike traditional infrastructure, Green Infrastructure is multi-functional (Benedict and McMahon 2006); it is safe to fail, not just fail-safe (Ahearn 2011); and it is supportive of human health, not merely human lifestyle (Tzoulas 2007). When embedded within the urban environment, green infrastructure transforms the landscape into a living machine, increasing the capacity of urban spaces to support healthy human and natural activities (Strang 2006). Although Green Infrastructure is innovative, it is not new. It is a centuries-old set of principles that has new meaning and new importance in an era where toxic threats to human health abound, and where new scientific tools give researchers the ability to rigorously measure the true benefits of wellperforming landscapes for human and natural communities. Accordingly, we conceive of this Green Infrastructure Plan as a set of researchable questions. Each proposal is a generative endeavor intended to develop new knowledge on the presently understudied linkages between landscape performance and human health. We believe that investments in Green Infrastructure are powerful opportunities for M.D. Anderson to advance its mission of being the world leader in research-driven patient care, since the knowledge these “landscape experiments” generate may have far-reaching implications for patients and care providers on M.D. Anderson’s campus and beyond.

7


2.0 Introduction

2.1 Why Green Infrastructure and Cancer Research? Every day, M.D. Anderson is making cancer history. Tens of thousands of patients, care providers, family members, and others come from around the world to the M.D. Anderson Campus because they believe M.D. Anderson can help them achieve and maintain a new level of health. Green Infrastructure provides psychological and physiological benefits that can be important factors in overall health, not just for patients, but for the staff members who suffer the stressful burden of providing excellent care, and for the family members who must endure the painful anxiety of a loved one’s illness. As a global leader in cancer research and treatment, MD Anderson has the capacity to integrate green infrastructure, and the performance of the landscape, into human health and well-being strategies that promote the conjoint health of landscapes and people. M.D Anderson has the capacity to investigate the potential of green infrastructure to promote health for humans and living systems. 2.2 Which regional issues have been considered? 2.2.1. Air Quality

protection, including protection against decreased visibility and damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings. Understanding the AQI The AQI scale runs from 0 to 500. The higher the AQI value, the greater the level of air pollution and the greater the health concern. For example, an AQI value of 50 represents good air quality with little potential to affect public health, while an AQI value over 300 represents hazardous air quality. The AQI is divided into six categories. (Refer to Dig 1). Air Quality in Houston Persistently high levels of air pollution, especially ozone, place Houston residents, including M.D. Anderson patients and staff, at risk for a variety of respiratory illness and cancer. Pollutant levels are driven by: tailpipe emissions from cars, trucks and buses; toxic pollutants emitted into the air by more than 400 chemical manufacturing facilities, the petrochemical complex along the Houston Ship Channel and the Port of Houston; and many small operations spread geographically across Greater Houston, such as surface coating processes, dry cleaners, gas stations, printing processes, restaurants, charcoal barbecues, and gasoline-fueled lawn maintenance equipment.

DIG 1: CRITICAL POLLUTANTS FOR HOUSTON

Source: Greenhoustontx.gov/airquality.html

How is Air Quality measured? The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has provided a scale called the Air Quality Index (AQI) for rating air quality. This scale is based on the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and is described in the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 58, Appendix G. National Ambient Air Quality Standards The Clean Air Act, which was last amended in 1990, requires EPA to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (40 CFR part 50) for pollutants considered harmful to public health and the environment. The Clean Air Act identifies two types of national ambient air quality standards. Primary standards provide public health protection, including protecting the health of “sensitive” populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly. Secondary standards provide public welfare

DIG 2: CRITICAL MONTHS FOR HOUSTON

Source: epa.gov 8


TABLE 1. POPULATON AND PERCENTAGE POPULATON BY RACE IN HOUSTON

DIG 3: WATERSHEDS IN HOUSTON REGION

Race in Houston Population Percentage White 2,682,615 62.83% African American 807,519 18.91% American Indian/Native Alaskan 20,728 0.49% Asian 274,354 6.43% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 2,892 0.07% Other 392,861 9.20% Total 4,269,608 Caption Source: Google

Source: Harris County Flood Control District DIG 4: RATE OF EVAPOTRANSPIRATION IN ENVIRONMENTS WITH NATURAL GROUND COVER VERSUS IMPERVIOUS GROUND COVER

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. www.epa.gov

9

2.2.2 Demographics Houston is the second fastest growing area with a population change of +35,700 (over a total pop. 2.2 million) between 201314 (cnn.com). It also boasts an average household size of 2.89/ dwelling unit, which is greater than the national average. In addition it has a median household income of $ 53,822 which is also greater than the national average. The MD Anderson campus which lies in the heart of this city undergoes all these pressures of growth while dealing with a sensitive ecological context. The ecological and social pressures of more people living in a place that is experiencing subsidence, poor air quality, persistent flood risk, and sea level rise demands that innovative approaches be developed for mitigating these risks. The Green Infrastructure Plan for the campus considers these factors as opportunities during its development.

2.2.3 Water Houston’s receives an average of 49.77 inches of rainfall per year, and on average the most in June, where it receives on average almost 6 inches. Most of the county falls into the San Jacinto watershed, which contains a network of Bayous and creeks. The MD Anderson campus is located in the Brays Bayou watershed, which means any water will drain into this Bayou from the campus. Regional plans that provide support and funding for water conservation, flood mitigation and irrigation within Harris county and the MD Anderson site are available. Refer to Appendix page 42 for detailed information about the plans and specific funding opportunities.


2.2.4 Open Space Houston rates first among the nation’s 10 most populous cities in total acreage of parkland and third behind only San Diego and Dallas in park acreage per capita, according to a study by The Trust for Public Land. The City of Houston offers more than 300-mile interconnected bikeway network spread over 500 square miles and more than 128 miles of hike and bike trails that loop within its parks or are linear and run along bayous and outside park boundaries. Harris County offers 45 hike and bike trails totaling 228.8 miles. This provides the MD Anderson Cancer Research Center with a unique opportunity to tie into and connect different publicly accessible green spaces in the city. Our proposal looks at green space at a larger scale aims to create a connection between the golf course on the North East of the MD Anderson Campus to the Bayou in the South. 2.3 Which issues are most relevant to the Campus?

TABLE 2: CLINICAL ACTIVITY BY TYPE ON MD ANDERSON CAMPUS DURING YEARS 2010 AND 2014

Clinical Activity

FY10

FY14

Hospital Admissions

23,995

27,761

% Change in 4 yrs +16%

Average number of inpatient beds Outpatient clinic visits, treatments, procedures Pathology/laboratory medicine procedures Diagnostic imaging procedures Surgery hours Total active clinical research protocols

546

654

+20%

1,132,338

1,363,008

+20%

10,754,560

12,005,766

+12%

538,514

523,297

-3%

61,873 1,009

69,506 1,101

+12% +9%

DIG 5: PARKLAND PER SQUARE MILE PER PERSON WITHIN CITY LIMITS

Source: persquremile.com

2.3.1 Campus Demographics Since 2010, the nursing training is the only shrinking program. Excluding that, the rest of the numbers show an increase of 21% in the last 4 years. Considering this rate as the change rate, the estimated number of students in 2018 would be a total of 6200. It implies that there is a growth in the staffing at MD Anderson and that it will trigger additional requirements in terms of spaces and maintenance.

10


Hydrology & Soils_ soil compaction group

DIG 6: SOIL COMPACTION IN HOUSTON REGION

URLX

Bg

Mu

As

2.3.2 Soil The site is dominated by soils categorized as urban land use. This soil type is characterized as having poor integrity, often containing urban fill debris. The National Resource Conservation Services identify the following characteristics of urban soils:

Bg BadA

W Bg

TeuB

URLX W

VauA

• Very slow infiltration • Moderate-low erodibility along southern boundary • Predominantly clay soil groups with some silt and sand • High rock fragment content • High compactability along southern boundary

BadA URLX Lu Bg

URLX

These soil characteristics are problematic because compaction reduces water infiltration. Reduced infiltration contributes to flooding problems. Adding to these conditions, the site is within the hundred year floodplain zone.

BadA

Lu Mu

Hydrology and Soil Maps

BadA URLX

The site is almost covered with urban land soil and half of the site is within 100-hundred year floodplain zone. The complex mixture of soil types make it difficult to analyze the soil condition. With the data from URLXNRCS website, certain charURLX actristics of soil can be concluded as follows: • • • • •

Not Rated High Compactability larger_boundary

Very slow infiltration Moderate-low erodibility along southern boundary Predominantly clay soil groups with some silt and sand High rock fragment content High compactability along southern boundary

±

0 5001,000

2,000

3,000

Campus Boundary

Feet 4,000

Harris County, Texas (TX201) Map Unit Symbol As BadA Bg Lu Mu TeuB URLX VauA W Totals for Area of Interest

11

Legend

BadA

Soil Type Index__ Data from NRCS Soil Servey

Map Unit Name Aris-Urban land complex "Bacliff-Urban land complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes" Bernard-Urban land complex Lake Charles-Urban land complex Verland-Urban land complex "Texla-Urban land complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes" Urban land Vamont-Urban land complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes Water

TABLE 3: SOIL TYPE INDEX

Acres in AOI 600.6 680.8

Percent of AOI 13.6% 15.4%

387.7 1,465.9 106.2 9.7

8.8% 33.1% 2.4% 0.2%

871.7 298.4

19.7% 6.7%

7.8 4,428.9

0.2% 100.0%

Source for both map and table: National Resources Conservation Services


2.3.3 Water and Topography The site is relatively flat with a few high points through the site. These high points lie along Holcombe Dr. and the northern part of the MD Anderson campus. The bayou also creates a change in the topography of the site on the southern side. Overall the elevation ranges from 5 feet to 75 feet, with the majority ranging from 35 feet to 45 feet. The floodplain map reveals critical risk zones in case of a flood event in which the darker blue indicates 1% risk of annual flooding. The Brays bayou in the southern part of MD Anderson campus creates a floodplain around it, which extends into the northern part of the site and across. The contours in the site also affect the overall direction of the flow of the water, especially near Holcombe Dr. DIG 7: CONTOUR MAP OF M.D. ANDERSON CAMPUS

Source: Google

DIG 8: ONE PERCENT ANNUAL FLOODPLAIN MAP OF M.D. ANDERSON CAMPUS

Source: Google 12


2.4 What are the risks and potential impacts? Impervious Cover W METHODIST CHURCH

IL KIN S

Pervious Cover

ET

MO UR SU N

RT BE

RA NE

Impervious Cover Impervious surfaces are mainly artificial structures—such as pavements (roads, sidewalks, driveways and parking lots) that are covered by impenetrable materials such as asphalt, concrete, brick, stone—and rooftops. Soils compacted by urban development are also highly impervious. We estimate that the MD Anderson campus has approximately 8% pervious cover. The two major impacts as a result of such high percentage impervious surfaces are that, rainwater infiltration, and natural groundwater recharge are eliminated. These impacts increase the risk of flooding during storm events, as well as reduced storm water quality.

pervious ST RE

D

ST

Road

RE ET

VE

Building TMC PARKING GARAGE 6

BAYLOR RESEARCH BUILDING

TIRR MEMORIAL HERMAN

THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS DENTAL RESEARCH BUILDING

MITCHELL BUILDING

TIRR MEMORIAL HERMAN

MO UR SU N

CLINIC RESEARCH BUILDING

RADIOTHERAPY

BERTNER AVE

D

ST

MD ANDERSON BLVD

GIMBEL

RE ET

Urban heat island An urban heat island (UHI) is a city or metropolitan area that is significantly warmer than its surrounding rural areas due to human activities. The significant portions of impervious cover create UHI conditions on the M.D. Anderson campus. This condition contributes to significant cooling costs for the built environment, as well as lowered comfort for patients, visitors, and staff who visit, live , or work on the campus.

ZAYED RESEARCH BUILDING BATES FREEMAN

ALKEK HOPITAL

JONES RESEARCH BUILDING

ANDERSON CENTRAL

ANDERSON EAST ST. LUKE’S HOSPITAL

ANDERSON WEST ETV

LUTHERAN HOSPITAL PAVILION

BATES STR EET

CLARK CLINIC

CLARK CLINIC

LOVE CLINIC

LE MAISTRE CLINIC

MD ANDERSON BLVD

DOCK BUILDING

PARKING GARAGE 10

ANNEX CHAPEL

BA TE SS

PARKING GARAGE 2

TR EE

SS TE BA

T EE TR

T

PARKING GARAGE 5

HOLCOME BLVD

HOLCOME BLVD

HOLCOME BLVD

50 ft

100 ft

150 ft

DIG 9: MAP OF PERVIOUS COVER ON MD ANDERSON CAMPUS

13


2.5 Precedents Case studies and precedents provide documentation of integrating green infrastructure strategies into hospital campuses and operations. GI strategies include: bioswales, living walls, green roofs, and healing gardens. The benefits of such strategies have been studied extensively, which includes air purification, carbon sequestration, reduced maintenance costs, reduced stormwater flows, increased habitat, and aesthetic value (Sherman, Varni, Ulrich, & Malcarne 2005; Mentens, Rae, & Hermy, 2006). Of particular interest are case studies relating to green infrastructure at hospital institutions, and how green infrastructure is contributing to institutional performance. One framework that could be adopted by M.D. Anderson would be the PlaNYC long-term planning effort for New York City. Rather than divide sustainability and resiliency goals into individual components, PlaNYC is holistically integrating sustainability and long-range planning. PlaNYC is addressing the challenges facing New York City in the future, most notably, climate change. Climate change will affect many aspects of daily life, and only a holistic approach to planning will be able to mitigate or reduce any of the effects of climate change. More than 25 city agencies and other organizations were involved in the creation of PlaNYC, and annual progress reports as well as updates every four years are required, which ensures commitment and accountability.

Typology

Definition

Living wall

A wall that may be partially or completely sheathed in foliage, usually with growing media in planters. Living walls can be indoors, outdoors, attached to existing walls, free-standing, and come in different sizes.

Image

Source: Rubens Hotel

Hospital Green Infrastructure

Site

Description

Benefits

Exterior wall of the The 10,000 plants are irrigated by harvested rainwater that is caught 1. Improve air quality Rubens at the Palace in dedicated storage tanks on the roof. The flowers have been chosen 2. Decrease indoor hotel in Victoria temperature London, UK to ensure the wall is 'in-bloom' all year round, attracting wildlife such 3. Way-finding as birds, butterflies and bees, and the permanent feature will provide a 4. Reduce surface water vibrant focal point for the local area. flooding 5. Provides aesthetic value M.D. Anderson Cancer M.D. Anderson built their Mid Campus Building (1MC) to be more 1. Reduces heating/cooling Center costs energy-efficient, and also installed an innovative heating and Houston, TX 2. Reduces waste ventilation system that collects condensation for use as irrigation, 3. Provides aesthetic value

saving more than one million gallons of water per year.

Source: M.D. Anderson

Green Roofs

Rooftop gardens or vegetated roofs that are comprised of a vegetation layer and a drainage layer. There are two types: extensive and intensive. Source: Greenroofs.com

M.D. Anderson The labyrinth garden at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Orlando, 1. Mitigate storm runoff Cancer Center 2. Reduce costs of heating/ FL is a 5,000 sq ft rooftop garden that was built in 2001. Labyrinth Vegetated cooling buildings Roof Garden 3. Reduce impact of Urban Orlando, FL Heat Island Effect 4. Increased urban wildlife habitat 5. Sound Insulation 6. Improve air quality 7. Increased green space

Bioswales

Bioswales are “vegetated, mulched, or xeriscaped channels that provide t re a t m e n t a n d re t e n t i o n as they move stormwater from one place to another.” They filter and moderate stormwater runoff. (EPA).

K e n d a l l L i b r a r y & When the Houston Public Library planned a new library to replace 1. Filter pollutants from Community Center rainwater their aging one, they designed the new library to have paved surfaces Houston, TX 2. Provide a natural habitat sloping towards bioswales. The bioswales are connected to a tank 3. Reduce speed of storm

underground that stores the water for irrigation. Native landscaping was also utilized for the new library (City of Houston).

Source: Asakura Robinson

PlaNYC

New York City, NY

A long-term plan for New York City that integrates sustainability and 1. Commitment to established resiliency into its goals and policies in order to address the challenges of a future affected by climate change. One such goal is achieving a 30% carbon reduction by 2030.

Refer to Table 4 for descriptions of the case studies and the associated benefits of green infrastructure

water flows

sustainability goals 2. Benchmarks to meet 3. Holistic approach to systems thinking

Source: NYC.gov

Healing Gardens

A healing garden is "a (Sherman et al, natural space where physical symptom relief, 2005). st re ss re d u c t i o n , a n d / o r improvement in one's sense of well-being can occur through passive or quasipassive activities, such as observing, listening, strolling, sitting, or exploring in that space."

Carley's Magical Gardens Children’s Hospital and Health Center San Diego, CA

The authors studied three healing gardens located at a children’s 1. Provides an escape for hospital in San Diego, looking closely at the relationship between usage of the gardens and effects on health and well-being. The three gardens were all of different sizes with different spaces for people to use how they wished.

patients, visitors, and staff 2. Reduces stress and improves mental health 3. May improve recovery time for patients

Source: Rady Children's Hospital San Diego

Table 4: LANDSCAPE PRECEDENT TYPOLOGIES

14


3.0 Ecosystem Services

DESIGN STRATEGIES, INTERVENTIONS, POLICIES

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

CONSTITUENTS OF HUMAN WELL BEING

Supporting

Primary production Nutrient cycling Hydrological cycle Trophic system

Idling regulations

‘Ecosystem services are a function of complex interactions among species and their abiotic environment; complex use and utilization patterns; and various perceptions by beneficiaries.’

Security

Safety for sensitive populations Wayfinding Disaster security Accessibility to amenities

Current means of measuring the value of ecosystem services have focused on assigning a monetary value to each service. Though this is a common means for calculating the benefits provided by the service, it is still a novel approach and is quite controversial amongst many conservation biologists and ecologist. Monetizing ecosystem services is reductive and may not take into account the second or third tier relationships between different systems.

Institutional land management program

Regulating

Flood regulation Air quality Habitat provision Water management Water management Climate regulation Resilient plant communities Disease prevention

Swale network

Rooftop gardens

Parking lot water filtration

The field of ecosystem service measurements is one which requires more research to develop standard and reliable measurement techniques.

Cultural

Generative technologies monitoring program

Healthy ecosystem

Health Visual access to nature Thermal comfort Mental health Clean air Physical health

Educational Restorative Emotional Aesthetic Spiritual Recreational Communal Solitary

Therapeutic gardens

Institutional knowledge base

Improved quality of life

Reduced maintenance costs

Biodiversity

‘The concept of ecosystems services has become an important model for linking the functioning of ecosystems to human welfare.’

Good Social Relations User specific spaces Resistance zones

Reduced utility cost

Institution marketing potential

--Fisher et al

Decreased readmission

Improved air quality

BENEFITS * Red marks components considered to be most important

15

--Gómez-Baggethun et al

DIG 10: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECOSYSTEM SERVICES AND BENEFITS

As local effects of extreme weather intensity and as the City of Houston grows, pressures on biophysical processes and biota will also increase. Green infrastructure is a design and planning approach that aims to alleviate and mitigate some of these pressures by linking landscape performance to human health and well-being. These landscape performance measures are known as ecosystem benefits, where landscape changes are strategically made to support and improve people’s health. There are many benefits that are produced. We have prioritized those ecosystem service benefits that are highlighted in red based on MD Anderson’s vision and our vision for this project.


Table 5: USER GROUP BENEFITS

Table 6: INSTITUTIONAL BENEFITS

User Group Benefits

Institutional Benefits

Improved Campus Aesthetic

Advancing Research/Longitudinal Learning

Factors

Soundscape Quality

Diversity of Colors, Patterns and Textures

Improved Sightlines and Vistas

Factors

Increased Institutional Reputation

Measures

Quantity and diversity of bird song calls

Quality of green

Back of house masking

Seasonal bloom variation

Soothing sounds

Maximization of colors in every season

Windows with views of nature and trees in patient recovery rooms

Measures

Car/machine noise reduction

Increased production of scientific research Researchers and practitioners in the design allied fields, ecological restoration, public health, studies relating human healing and enviromental factors. urban ecology. 1. Quantity of studies appearing in peerreviewed journals of ecology, envionmental science, medicine, public health, and design over 10 year time horizon

Diversity of textures Methods

Purposive point count (seasonal specific)

Garden kiosks with electronic questionnairesBefore and after visual preference survey Instagram campaign

Number of Instagram posts

Factors

Air Quality

Physical Space Comfort

Biomass

Measures

CO2, SO2, NOx, and particulate levels

Quantity of shaded outdoor seats

Biomass Index Calculations (BIC)

New Administrative Management/ Institutional Learning Techniques GI integration affecting efficiency and efficacy of Facilities Management and Patient Care practices Spread of practices to other institutions

2. Number of citations to peer-reviewed journal studies (measuring impact of studies on disciplinary discourse

Methods

Improved Quality of Life

New Knowledge of Environmental Impacts on Human Health

Time series survey analysis

Literature reviews

Case study of campus leadership

Focus Groups

Meta-studies

Surveys of practices elsewhere

Reduced Costs Linear feet of paths Idling restrictions to prevent unnecessary Paths clear of obstructions car produced pollution Campus illumination Methods

Operational change at pick-up/drop-off

Square feet of green space

Factors

Reduced Utility Costs

Reduced Maintenance Costs

Reduced Flooding Recovery Costs

Accessibility of green spaces

Measures

Electricity Bill- Savings from reduced air condition

Labor, water, and fertilizer costs

Cost Avoidance of flood damage

Pre and Post cost analysis (Monthly/ yearly)

Pre and Post cost analysis (Monthly/ yearly)

Complex plant architecture for habitat

Site observation

SITES* methods for calculating BIC

Site plan analysis

On site analysis conducted by volunteers and/or students

uses due to strategically placed trees and shade structures.

Water Bill-Savings from stormwater captured on site and used for irrigation Methods

Pre and Post cost analysis (Monthly/ yearly)

* Sustainabl Site Initiative http://www.sustainablesites.org/

16


4.0 Green Infrastructure as the Construction of Trophic Communities

Table 7: ECOSYSTEM SERVICE S OFFERED BY GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE TYPOLOGIES

In addition to air purification, carbon sequestration, and reducing the urban heat island effect, the following green infrastructure typologies produce the ecosystem service listed below: Typology of Green Infrastructure Ecosystem Services

Green Wall

Shield adjacent gathering areas from automobile pollution, provide habitat, Reduce air temperature, buffer noise

Prairie Site

Provide habitat, water purification, increase water infiltration, reduce urban heat island effect

Extensive Rooftop

Intensive Rooftop

Reduce air temperature, provide habitat, improve mental health of patients

Bio Swale/Rain Garden

Retain water from runoff events, water purification,increase water infiltration, reduce air temperature, provide habitat

Walkway/Corridor/Buffer

17

Reduce air temperature, provide habitat

Provide habitat connectivity, reduce air temperature, buffer noise

4.1 Design Goals One of the primary design goals for the Green Infrastructure plan was to increase biodiversity, both within the MD Anderson site as well as within the greater Houston area. In order to do so it is essential to understand the existing biodiversity within both contexts. To increase biodiversity within an urban context, one must begin by building trophic communities. An increase in biodiversity of urban green spaces has been linked to an increase in well-being of green space visitors. The increase in psychological well-being is positively associated with an increase in species richness of plants and to a lesser extent birds. Wellness measures highlighted green space as a source of cognitive restoration, positive emotional bonds, and feeling unique or different while associating with a place (Fuller et al.). Increases in biodiversity also correlate with increases in ecosystem health. For these reason we believe biodiversity to be of importance of M.D. Anderson as an indicator of ecosystem health and relevant to human wellbeing. 4.2 Plant Selections and Target Species The trophic communities are separated by typology; each typology corresponds to an appropriate location on the M.D Anderson campus. The plant assemblages chosen for each garden typology are selected based on the plants ecosystem services, growth requirements, and attracted fauna and insects. We avoid plants that are listed as either allergens or deemed hazardous by having thorns or causing skin irritations. Additionally, the selected plants are either native species, meaning they are indigenous to the area, or naturalized, meaning although they are not native to the area they adapted well and are not considered invasive. Invasive species-those plants that are originally found in the greater Houston ecosystem but thrive and disrupt native and naturalized species, are not represented in our plant selection list.


DIG 11: PLANT ASSEMBLAGES PLANT ASSEMBLAGES

Native Plants: A plant that is a part of the balance of nature that has developed over hundreds or thousands of years in a particular region or ecosystem. Naturalized Plants: A non-native plant that does not need human help to reproduce and maintain itself over time in an area where it is not native. Adaptive Plants: A non-native plant that can be adapted to the environement of an area. Invasive Plants Removal: Getting Rid of those plants that areboth non-native and able to establish on many sites, grow quickly, and spread to the point of disrupting plant communities or ecosystems.

Buffer/Corridor/Parking Lot

Green Wall

Prairie Site

Rain Garden/Bioswale

Rooftop Extensive

Garden Intensive

18


DIG 12: LANDSCAPE TYPOLOGIES, LOCATIONS, AND RELATED TROPHIC COMMUNITIES

CONTEXT MAP - LANDSCAPE TYPOLOGY

PRAIRIE SITE

Lemon Bee Balm

Ashleaf Maple

Switchgrass

Yaupon Holly

Rosinweed

Butterflies Tawny Emperor Grey hairstrike

Luna Moth

Larval Host: Delaware Skipper Long tailed Skipper

Larval Host Henry’s Elfin Butterfly

Larval Host: Moth Grey Hairstreak

Honeybees

Magpie

Ruby Throated Hummingbird

Robins Morning doves

Gall Midge

Cedar Waxwing American Cardinal Purple Finch Blue Jay

House Sparrow American Crow

Sweat bee American Goldfinch

PARK

Red Maple Larval host: Cecropia Moth Inchworms Orange humped maple worm

Bur Oak Larval Host: Edwards Hairstreak Horaces Duskywing butterfly

Yellow bellied sapsucker Yellow throated warbler Blue-grey gnatcatcher Eastern wood peewee

Blue Jay Red-bellied woodpecker Downey Woodpecker

Ladybugs Dragonflies Chimney Swift Downey Woodpecker Pileated Woodpecker

Willow Oak Larval host: White M hairstreak Horaces Duskywing

Eastern Redbud Honeybees American Goldfinch Cedar Waxwing Northern Mockingbird Carolina Chickadee

Anaqua Anacua Tortoise Beetle

Preferred host leaf droppers (Eratoneura ellisi, Eratoneura immota, Eratoneura lenta, and Eratoneura phellos) Tufted Titmouse Red-bellied Woodpecker Red-headed Woodpecker Blue Jay

ORNAMENTAL TREES

Bald Cypress

Crape Myrtle

Texas Palm

Baldcypress sphinx Forest Tent Caterpillar Cypress Emerald

Monarch Butterfly

Cerulean Warbler Prairie Warbler Yellow-throated Warbler

Cardinal Pileated Woodpecker Yellow Throated Warbler

BAYOU Prairie Site

19

Park

Ornamental Trees

Bayou

Physical Barrier

Urban adapted, synanthropic species

Sycamore

Black Willow

Little Carpenter Bees Honeybees Willow-Leaf Beetle

Larval Host: American Goldfinch Morning Cloak Carolina Chickadee Viceroy Yellow Warbler Purple Finch Red-Spotted Purple White-throated sparrow Mallards Tiger Swallowtail Warbling Vireo

River Birch

Blackeyed Susan

Chinese Tallow

American Goldfinch Carolina Chickadee Purple Finch Mallards Ruby-throated Hummingbirds

Larval Host: Silvery Checkerspot American Snout

Pileated Woodpecker House Finch Morning Dove Orange-Crowned Warblers Myrtle Warblers

American Goldfinch Ruby-throated Hummingbirds

Ruby Throated Hummingbirds American Goldfinch House Sparrow Cardinal

Sweetbay Magnolia

Rose bush

Larval Host: Sweetbay Silk moth Tiger Swallowtail

Larval Host: Sweetbay Silk moth Tiger Swallowtail

Red eyed Vireos Pileated Woodpecker Crested Flycatcher Blue Jay Robin

Blue Jay Carolina Chickadee Cedar Waxwing Purple Finch Northern Cardinal


DIG 13: LANDSCAPE TYPOLOGIES

WALKWAY/CORRIDOR

GREEN WALL

EXTENSIVE GREEN ROOF Yellow Throated Warbler

Green Silk Moth

Ruby Throated Hummingbird

Purple Martin

Tiger Swallowtail

Henry’s Elfin

0-6‘’ Grwoing Medium Mourning Dove

Blue Elf Aloe American Goldfinch

Northern Cardinal

Crossvine

Muscadine Grape

Lesser Smoothcap Moss

Mexican Milkweed

Alamo vine

Grey Hairstreak

INTENSIVE GREEN ROOF

Mimosa Tree

Mexican Sunflower

Russian Sage

Acoma Crape Myrtle

Carolina Chickadee

Queen Butterfly

Horace’s Duskywing

>6‘’ Grwoing Medium

Orange Bulbine

RAIN GARDEN

PRAIRIE RESTORATION SITES

Butterfly Weed

Eastern Redbud

GARDEN SPACE

Cedar Waxwing

Blue Jay

Yellow Throated Warbler

Ruby Throated Hummingbird

American Goldfinch

American Goldfinch

Tawny Emperor

Honeybees

Monarch Butterfly

Pepper and Salt Skipper Morning Cloak

House Sparrow

Ruby Throated Hummingbird

Possom Haw

Southern Wax Switchgrass Myrtle Inland Sea Oats

Scarlet Sage

Yaupon Holly

Mexican Sunhat

Northern Cardinal

Little Bluestem Texas Lantana

Indian Grass

Hybrid Poplar Mexican Mountain Brush Sage Laurel

Tulip Tree

20


SUCCESSION/MAINTENANCE DIG 14: SUCCESSION /MAINTENANCE

HIGH Garden Garden Parking Garage

Parking Garage Extensive Rooftop Intensive Rooftop

IntensiveRooftop

Walking Buffer/Corridor

M A I N T E N A N C E

Rain Garden/Bioswale

Rain Garden/Bioswale

Walking Buffer/Corridor

Prairie Site

LOW

Rain Garden/Bioswale

NO MAINTENANCE YR 0

21

Prairie Site

YR 3

YR 6

YR 9

4.3 Maintenance For ease of maintenance we have identified common invasive species and described simple methods for control or removal. For the complete list as well as removal techniques please see the APPENDIX (Invasive List). Additionally we have provided an infographic which delineates Rain Garden/Bio Swale Prairie Site approximate levels of maintenance for each typology. Placement along the vertical Y axis of the chart delineates low to high maintenance while Garage movement across the X axis represents time. The length of each Parking colored bar depicts the approximate increase in density related to plant life, Extensive Roof Top some typologies should not be allowed to become too dense whileGarden others can become much more densely vegetated.

Walking Buffer/Corridor

Extensive Rooftop

Intensive Roof Top

YR 12


5.0 Modular Site Designs

5.1 Masterplan Green Infrastructure System Map This diagram represents one of many possible combinations of green infrastructure typologies that could be implemented on the M.D. Anderson campus. Combined with the spatial information of campus circulation, utility movements, and treatment rooms, this general layout can be modified to achieve the greatest impact across the campus.

DIG 15: GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEM MAP GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEM MAP This diagram represents one of many possible combinations of green infrastructure typologies that could be implemented on the M.D. Anderson campus. CHURCH Combined with the spatial informationMETHODIST of campus circulation, utility movements, and treatment rooms this general layout can be modified to present the greatest impact across the campus.

W

IL

KIN S

ST RE E

T

MO UR SU N

PARKING GARAGES

E

N RT BE

D

ST

RE E

T

VE RA

TMC PARKING GARAGE 6

BAYLOR RESEARCH BUILDING

5.1.1 Phasing

TIRR MEMORIAL HERMAN

SURFACE PARKING

TIRR MEMORIAL HERMAN

EXTENSIVE GREEN ROOF MO UR SU N

CLINIC RESEARCH BUILDING

D

ST

MD ANDERSON BLVD

GIMBEL

INTENSIVE GREEN ROOF RADIOTHERAPY

RE E

T

ZAYED RESEARCH BUILDING BATES FREEMAN

THERAPEUTIC GARDENS ALKEK HOPITAL

JONES RESEARCH BUILDING

ANDERSON CENTRAL

BIOSWALE NETWORK

ANDERSON EAST

ST. LUKE’S HOSPITAL

ANDERSON WEST ETV DOCK BUILDING

LUTHERAN HOSPITAL PAVILION

BATES STREET

CLARK CLINIC

CLARK CLINIC

LOVE CLINIC

LE MAISTRE CLINIC

MD ANDERSON BLVD

More disruptive implementations, those which require modification of behavior on the part of site visitors, such as the idling emissions policies, should be paired with or follow shortly after larger, more visible implementations such as the opening of a therapeutic garden or green roof. As most of these technologies exist to a certain extent as retrofits to the campus infrastructure, they will all require similar measures of cordoning off of parts of campus and rerouting traffic. It is therefore also recommended to work across the site geographically as much as possible, isolating active work zones in order to allow for the majority of the MD Anderson campus to continue operation as normal.

THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS DENTAL RESEARCH BUILDING

MITCHELL BUILDING

BERTNER AVE

With a site such as MD Anderson the phasing in of various parts of the GI plan should be well taken into consideration both for their impacts on existing systems and on public perception. For this reason, a highly visible while mostly non disruptive implementation is probably best to start with leading to the integration of the parking lot retention facilities and selected parts of the bioswale network. Daily exposure by recurring visitors to the campus will lead to a greater understanding and familiarity of GI paving the way for more difficult technologies.

PARKING GARAGE 10

ANNEX CHAPEL

BA TE SS

PARKING GARAGE 2

SS TE BA

TR EE T

T EE TR

PARKING GARAGE 5

HOLCOME BLVD

HOLCOME BLVD

HOLCOME BLVD

50 ft

100 ft

150 ft

22


DIG 16: PARKING TYPOLOGIES

5.2. Parking Surface Lots: Suitable for any surface parking lot, configuration will change depending on space available. Canopy cover can be tailored to suit views from surroundings or to provide maximum shading for ground level users. Campus Service Drives: Can also be used for interior service parking areas. Canopy cover will have to be sized appropriately to accommodate larger vehicles. Species selections should be pollution resistant. External Lots: External lots with additional space can be used as retention basins for additional catchment surface area. Underground storage facilities fed from captured water can be repurposed for irrigation. Medians: Similar layouts can be implemented in street conditions with medians, tying into the established network. Parking Garages: In dealing with the parking garages across the campus it is helpful to separate them into two categories: existing and future garages. Existing garages should be retrofitted as much as possible while respecting the limits that most parking garages can only have their construction offset to a certain degree. New parking garages can be constructed with green infrastructure principles in mind, taking advantage of as many ecosystem services as possible.

23


5.2.1 Parking Strategy The parking strategy for M.D. Anderson is two-fold: first reduce the overall amount of impervious surface across the campus providing a point of infiltration and capture before connecting to the outer swale network. Second is to soften the appearance of the campus, especially from patient rooms where exposure to views of plants and wildlife is tied to improved health outcomes. To this end, the parking strategy is centered around the retrofitting of both existing surface lots and parking garages. Surface Lots Capture: Each lot will replace traditional paving surfaces with permeable media such as pervious asphalt on driveways and a crushed aggregate and sand mix on parking bays. Together, these surface treatments will promote the capture and filtration of runoff which occurs on site, which can then be used for irrigation and other greywater uses. Convey: In larger storm events the collection network of the site will be moved off-site by way of the swale network around the campus core. In the water heavy environment of Houston there stands to be enough water at any given point of the year to justify connecting to an off-site source and redistributing the water captured on site. In addition, this strategy aims to tie in to the flood mitigation strategies of the campus. Canopy: Separate from the capture and conveyance of water, the swales and rain gardens on the proposed surface lots will be able to host a significant number of aquatic adapted street trees which will benefit those using the lots by providing much needed relief from the Houston summer sun as well as creating additional views of natural plantings which will contribute to views from patient rooms across the campus.

Parking Garages

DIG 17: PARKING DIAGRAMS

As the campus continues on its trajectory of building up there will continue to be new parking garages integrated into the campus fabric. While the capture potential for parking garages is not as great as that of surface lots parking garages do provide the opportunity to house large cisterns, especially when proposed at the time of construction. Store: While retrofitting cisterns may not be possible in all cases, where possible and in new garages there exists a great potential to store for use much of the water which enters into the site. Additionally the structure of the parking garage can be used to house the pump and energy (solar panels) necessary to move and make use of the captured water. Filter: Air quality has been identified as one of the major environmental issues concerning the M.D. Anderson campus which has very few points of direct intervention. Through the use of green facades over various faces of the parking garages there exists an opportunity to shape the direction of prevailing winds passing across the building as well as limiting the addition of fumes from the garages by attempting to capture and filter them at the point of origin. Learn: Parking garages present a opportunity for a teaching campus to both learn to use a building type which has historically housed a single purpose for the addition of new uses and incorporations into larger systems as well as the potential to educate all those who arrive on-site by personal vehicle. Cisterns, green facades, green roofs viewed directly on a daily basis present the opportunity to make green infrastructure a highly visible part of the lives of the staff and patients of M.D. Anderson.

24


5.2.2 Circulation

TABLE 8 AND DIG 18: VEHICULAR CIRCULATION STRATEGY

GOALS

Improving Air Quality by reducing idling of cars on site by reviewing, redesigning and regularizing circulation.

POLICY

PROGRAM

PHYSICAL DESIGN

Control movement of cars within campus.

Establish two checkpoints to manage car traffic.

Checkpoint 1 at entrance to site and Checkpoint 2 at drop-off lane.

Redirect car traffic through shaded and buffered waiting area.

Turning off stationary cars.

Establishing an idle free zone. Mounting signage at critical locations.

Incentivize alternate energy car usage.

Introducing an electric shuttle between the parking lot and hospital entrance.

One-way street for regular cars at main entrance.

Creating a green buffer between redirected traffic and entrance area. Shaded waiting areas for cars in line to reduce use of AC in Summer.

Two-way streets for electric shuttle and alternate energy cars outside main entrance.

IDLE FREE ZONE TWO-WAY STREET FOR ELECTRIC CARS ONE-WAY STREET FOR REGULAR CARS CHECKPOINTS FOR CARS

GREEN BUFFER SHADED WAITING AREAS

25

Vehicular Circulation Based on the information we received about the site, we identified idling outside the front entrance of the main building as a contributor to poor air quality and Urban Heat Island Effect. We propose a solution that ties policy, program and physical reconfiguration of the this area. 1. As part of the policy framework we propose that MD Anderson adopts strategies to control car traffic within the campus, prevent idling and incentive the use of alternate energy cars. 2. The programs developed as an implementation of the policies are establishment of checkpoints to control and manage car traffic, creation of an idle free zone and introduction of an electric shuttle between the parking garages and the main building. 3. The proposal for the physical design includes locating two checkpoints between re-directed traffic lanes that pass through shaded waiting areas to discourage the use of air conditioning in Summer, one-way only streets for regular cars and two-way streets for alternate energy cars/electric shuttle. The design also demarcates a buffered green zone between the main entrance and re-directed waiting lanes. The goal of this proposal is to improve air quality on the MD Anderson campus by reducing idling at the main entrance by reconfiguring the vehicular circulation on site.


5.3 Therapeutic Gardens

Control Spaces

5.3.1 Design Framework

Privacy Centric - Space which a single patient can occupy without interruption or visual intrusion

In order to develop the therapeutic gardens for the MD Anderson campus studies were consulted as to the benefits of organization, materials, and access from a variety of sources across a wide range of time periods. Ultimately, the designs were developed following the work of Roger Ulrich who placed emphasis on health outcomes of therapeutic gardens through the groupings of social support, sense of control, physical movement and exercise, and nature and distractions. From this a series of typologies were developed to be implemented across the campus.

Choice Centric - Spaces reserved for patients only in which possibilities for interaction with other patients or specific program is promoted Escape Centric - Spaces in which forms of rebellion are accepted (i.e. smoking garden)

Physical Spaces Exertion Centric - Spaces where patients can challenge themselves through physical movement (i.e. navigating curbs and stairs or courts for simple sports) Rehabilitation Centric - Spaces which promote an outdoor experience with minimal physical exertion (See control spaces)

5.3.2 Typologies of Therapeutic Gardens All spaces are constructed and united through the use of natural elements, maximizing exposure to the sights, sounds, and experiences of flora fauna and natural phenomena Social Spaces Patient Centric - Spaces only accessible to patients (See Control Spaces) Family Centric - Open spaces in which all user groups (patients, visitors, and Staff) have access in order to promote socialization And interaction Staff Centric - Spaces which are only accessible to staff in order to provide moments of respite throughout the work day

DIG 19: RESTORATIVE DESIGN FRAMEWORK

26


DIG 20: THERAPEUTIC GARDEN LOCATION PLAN

5.3.3 Therapeutic Garden Plan Main therapeutic garden: Located in a central courtyard in order to promote use between the various parts of the campus, the main garden should encompass a variety of different typologies which can be expanded by linking it with an intensive roof garden. Staff gardens: The staff gardens should be spread out throughout the whole of the campus, providing equal, easy access to the majority of staff members. This garden type does not require much space which will allow it to be repeated across the campus. Escape gardens: Similar to the staff gardens, the escape gardens should be small and spread throughout the campus with the possibility of being centered around long term stay patients. Escape gardens should be separated from other garden typologies. Rehabilitation gardens: Rehabilitation gardens can encompass other garden types and have the potential to be located towards the exterior of the campus to provide overlap between different user groups. Exertion gardens: Focusing on physical exercise this garden type can be expanded to limitedly include access to the greater public for a gentle exercise use. The walking paths of the prairie are a current example. Family centric gardens: The family centric gardens should be large enough to accommodate several family groups at once though not excessively large. They should also be located throughout the campus to facilitate visitation of the various patient types.

27


5.3.4 Common Garden Elements

Dig 21: COMMON ELEMENTS DESIGN GUIDES

Benches & seating: choice of control in seating is well documented in creating successful parks and research points to this phenomenon being relevant in the creation of healing landscapes. There should be a multitude of seating options presented in all therapeutic gardens ranging from fixed to flexible, shaded and sunny, as well as accommodating groups of various sizes. Planting types: stress relief through interactions with planted material provides room for distraction from treatment and healing. In hot climates such as Houston, gardens should be visually accessible if not physically due to complications arising from uncomfortable heat levels. Paths: should be wide enough to accommodate users with IV poles. Additionally, paths should composed with an emphasis on user choice while maintaining ease of navigation to avoid stress from getting lost. Edges Negotiating edge conditions will be critical when creating spaces for outdoor therapeutic spaces on the M.D. Anderson campus. The ultimate goal will be to create spaces which are at once removed from the utility movements of the campus yet visually accessible from a majority of indoor spaces. Green walls: green walls are to be used to soften the urban surroundings of the therapeutic gardens and provide habitat for wildlife to enhance the patient experience of the gardens. Walls without windows are excellent candidates for green walls, as are walls with lower windows to decrease the impression of being observed while in the gardens. Street edges: due to the limited amount of space on the campus it is likely that most gardens will be located within close proximity to a street or parking lot. In these cases it is important to dampen noise and visual intrusion using plantings. 28


Dig 22: PROPOSED BIOSWALE NETWORK

5.4 Bioswale Network The plan for the bioswale network is based on a hierarchical system for collection, filtration and transportation of the storm water run-off. The various levels of collection are represented in the plan based on the line-thickness. Their detailed description of the different types of the swales are mentioned in the summary table. The basic flow of stormwater run-off is from the buildings to the tertiary collectors, then to the secondary and the primary collectors and finally to the golf course located in the north-east of the site. The golf-course would act as a detention pond in the case of a flood event. Here are some basic calculations that guided the design of the bioswale network: A 2-Year storm event would result in 246.5 cubic feet of storm water on the M.D. Ander son campus. A 100-Year storm event would result in 5359.2 cubic feet The bioswale network thus ranges from 4 feet to 18 feet in width throughout the system. In addition, it filters out the water and makes it usable. This swale can also create micro habitats and can attract other animals to increase the biodiversity of the MD Anderson campus. Thus, the bioswale is a multi-functional asset in the Green Infrastructure Plan.

29


TABLE 11: BIOSWALE TYPOLOGIES

TYPE

PARKING

TERTIARY

SECONDARY

PRIMARY

15 TO 18 Feet This type is integrated in the surface parking lots and acts as both a swale network and detention pond. The function is to collect the water which falls on the building tops and move it from the center of the campus to the swale network routes to the primary channels. The parking swales collect and hold the water which falls on site; slowing the flow, moving the water to storage cisterns, and funneling excess water to the larger swale network.

4 Feet The tertiary channels are the initial source of collection of water from the buildings’ storm water system. They collect and transport it to a larger channel of secondary routes.

8 Feet The secondary channels collect the water from a number of tertiary sources. These are larger than the tertiary routes but perform the function of transporting to the much larger primary channels.

12 Feet The primary channels are the largest channels that are on the boundary of the entire site. These collect the storm water from the secondary and transport the excess to the golf course located in the north-east of the campus.

SECTION

WIDTH DESCRIPTION

PERFORMANCE

MAINTENANCE

Low: swales and detention areas will need to be kept clear of debris, though vegetation can be maintained at a larger size. Filtration aggregate will need cleaning in infrequent intervals to promote the collection of clean water.

Moves water from the immediate vicinity Consists of 2-3 larger channels running of buildings and the inner campus to the through the campus interior which colmajor thoroughfares of MD Anderson. lect water from the smaller swales and Can be integrated into ground level thermove in to the exterior. apeutic gardens.

Integrated into the streets ringing the campus, this part of the network protects against elevated flood levels and serves as the major connection to move water from campus to the collection point located off-site. Low: Small swales will be able to be Moderate: Vegetation will be present and Moderate: Vegetation to be kept at a non managed with hand tools. Vegetation will require maintenance in order to maxi- intrusive level for traffic circulation. Adbe minimal to assist with maintenance mize space in central campus corridors. ditionally, debris will need to be cleared schedule. in order to maximize water movement off site.

30


DIG 23: INTENSIVE AND EXTENSIVE GREEN ROOF ANATOMY

5.5 Green Roofs Based on evidence that views of natural materials lead to improved health outcomes a series of green roofs placed across the campus with specific sight-lines from patient rooms aims to increase the amount of green cover on the campus without infringing in the already limited space of the campus. Extensive Roofs: The M.D. Anderson campus has a strong vertical nature to it which stems from is dense, urban location. As such, the space for traditional gardens and green infrastructure is limited. In order to increase patient exposure to natural elements there is exists the potential to cover a significant portion of the campus buildings with an extensive (shallow) roof system. These roofs, while not directly inhabitable, will change the views from the surrounding buildings to include more natural elements as well as providing some reduction in the urban heat island effect of the traditional asphaltic roof cover types currently in place. Intensive Roofs: There also exists an opportunity to use some of the roof space for an inhabitable intensive roof. While this retrofit may be expensive to implement, the benefits of a large, therapeutic garden located at the intersection of several buildings would provide a central hub around which to orient patients and visitors while contributing to the healing process. Additionally, new buildings added to the campus can be planned to incorporate intensive roof systems to take advantage of otherwise unused space and use it for patient care, water capture, or energy generation.

31


5.5 Experimental Living Walls

TABLE 12: TYPOLOGIES OF LIVING WALLS

As part of our overall design for the M.D. Anderson campus, we propose the creation of an “Experimental Living Wall Pilot Project.” The purpose of this pilot project is to generate research and data on the integration of green infrastructure and healthcare, and what benefits may arise from that integration. Much research has been undertaken on green infrastructure, but there is missing data on green infrastructure specifically related to healthcare and associated facilities. This project will focus on generating quantifiable data and adaptive monitoring strategies. This type of project is important when considering the larger trends of climate change and the effects of climate change on the ecosystem. Houston will likely see increased temperatures and flooding within the next several decades, and incorporating green infrastructure methods onto M.D. Anderson’s campus may help to mitigate the costs associated with climate change, such as increased stormwater flow. This pilot project will start out with three different modular living wall typologies, all located on different walls of Parking Garage 10 on the M.D. Anderson Campus. We chose to locate all of the living walls on the same building for easier monitoring and data collection. The three living wall typologies are: Table 12: Typologies of Living Walls W

IL

METHODIST CHURCH

KIN S

ST

REE

R AV

Honey comb

Grids

Panels

Orientation

South

West

East

Plant Selection

a)Southern Wood Fern (Thelypteris normalis) - No flowers b)Chinese Brake Fern (Pteris vittata) - No flowers

a)Fig Vine (Ficus pumila) - No flowers b)Trumpet Vine (Campsis radicans) - Orange flowers c)Crossvine (Bigonia capreolata) Orange flowers

a)Yellow Stonecrop (Sedum nuttallianum Raf.) - Small Yellow Flowers b)Lesser Smoothcap Moss (Atrichum angustatum) - No flowers c)Potato Vine (Solanum jasminoides) - No flowers

Height

Section

Elevation

12-24 Feet (1st - 2nd Floor)

12-24 Feet (4th - 5th Floor)

48 Feet (1st - 4th Floor)

T

MO UR SU

NE RT BE

Type

ND

ST

RE

ET

E

TMC PARKING GARAGE 6

BAYLOR RESEARCH BUILDING

TIRR MEMORIAL HERMAN

THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS DENTAL RESEARCH BUILDING

MITCHELL BUILDING

TIRR MEMORIAL HERMAN

MO UR SU

CLINIC RESEARCH BUILDING

1 Panels

RE

ET

ZAYED RESEARCH BUILDING BATES FREEMAN

ALKEK HOPITAL

2 Honey Comb

ST

MD ANDERSON BLVD

GIMBEL

RADIOTHERAPY

BERTNER AVE

Greenwall Type

ND

JONES RESEARCH BUILDING

ANDERSON CENTRAL

ANDERSON EAST ST. LUKE’S HOSPITAL

ANDERSON WEST ETV

3 Grids LUTHERAN HOSPITAL PAVILION

BATES STREET

CLARK CLINIC

CLARK CLINIC

LOVE CLINIC

LE MAISTRE CLINIC

MD ANDERSON BLVD

DOCK BUILDING

3

PARKING GARAGE 10

CHAPEL

BA TE S ST

PARKING GARAGE 2

RE

1

2

ANNEX

S ST TE BA

RE

ET

ET

PARKING GARAGE 5

HOLCOME BLVD

HOLCOME BLVD

HOLCOME BLVD

50 ft

100 ft

150 ft

32


ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

DATA COLLECTED

MONITORING STRATEGIES

1. Improved Air Quality

EPA’s Air Quality Index based on criteria pollutants as defined by National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

Values of critical pollutants for Harris County, TX recorded over time.

Installing air quality sensors at each location, data collected by TCEQs Air Quality Monitoring station in Houston.

2. Controlled Air Temperature

Degrees Farenheit.

Values of ambient temperature recorded over time.

Installing temperature recording sensors at each location, data collected by National Weather Service Weather Forecast Office Houston/Galveston, TX.

3. Increased Biodiversity

Species Richness.

Number of species observed at each location.

Installing remotely monitored cameras, data collected by Natural Sciences students from Rice University.

4. Noise Buffering

Decibels.

5. Aesthetic/Visual Appeal

Surveys directed at patients & visitors.

CULTURAL

REGULATING

TABLE 13: PERFORMANCE MEASURES, DATA COLLECTED, AND MONITORING STRATEGIES FOR ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

33

staff,

Decibel level before installation, after installation and intermittently after maturation.

Readings taken by Department of Health representatives.

Self-reported feeling well-being / ease navigation.

Surveys undertaken by MD Anderson as part of improvement program of patient + caregiver + visitor experience.

of of

Honeycomb: A honeycomb living wall consists of honeycombshaped planters linked together to form a wall. This type of modular living wall is more visually interesting due to the honeycomb shapes. Grid: A grid living wall usually consists of a modular grid that is attached to exterior walls. Gridded living walls also have vertical columns, and the grid panels can be stacked or combined to create unique shapes. Vines are best suited for this type of living wall. These types of living walls can also be free-standing. Panel: Similar to a gridded living wall, a panel living wall consists of one long panel and are best for small plants, such as succulents or lichens. Panels require planters to be installed on the panels for the growing of plants, while grids do not. All three typologies are usually mounted onto exterior walls, rather than being directly attached. 5.5.1 Ecosystem Services and Monitoring The living wall pilot project will provide several ecosystem services, each with associated monitoring programs and performance measurements. There are three research questions that these monitoring programs and performance measurements will aim to provide answers for: 1. Are the living walls improving air quality? 2. What kind of effects do these living walls have on these ecosystem services? 3. How effective will these living walls be on improving these ecosystem services? Establishing performance measurements and monitoring strategies are important since, due to climate changes, current fixed criteria will no longer be applicable to performance measurements. These performance measurements and monitoring strategies will also tie into our overall monitoring program.


6.0 Adaptive Monitoring Program

6.1 Adaptive Monitoring: Purpose and Approach The M.D. Anderson Green Infrastructure Plan presents an unprecedented opportunity for a major hospital complex to conduct important research into the link between landscape performance and human health. Previous studies have identified positive heath impacts to patients deriving from their use of therapeutic gardens in mental health hospitals (Curtis et al 2007 ); during rehabilitation from crises or trauma (Ottosohn and Grahn 2008); while recovering from breast cancer (English et al 2008); and when using outdoor gardens as “spaces of resistance” (Wood et al 2013). These benefits are in addition to the general health benefits Ulrich identified as deriving from interactions with nature (Ulrich 1981, 1984, 1992). But few studies have investigated the capacity of networks of green infrastructure to improve health outcomes. None have been longitudinal studies investigating long-term health impacts stemming from personal proximity to Green Infrastructure. For this reason, we believe M.D. Anderson should regard its Green Infrastructure plan as a valuable research opportunity, one that may have far-reaching effects on patient care at M.D. Anderson and at cancer centers throughout the world. The adaptive monitoring plan is a framework for longitudinal research into Green Infrastructure’s impact on human health and hospital operations. It is centered around three key researchable questions. First, how do networks of Green Infrastructure contribute to the psychological and physiological health of network users in the context of a high stress, highly urbanized research hospital environment? Second, how can researchers better quantify and measure the stream of institutional benefits that flow from green infrastructural improvements to a major research hospital? Third, what administrative, logistical, and institutional factors are necessary for the successful implementation of green infrastructure on a conventional hospital campus? We pair each research question with a set of suggested methods of data collection and analysis. Our suggestions

are not intended to be exhaustive. Rather, they are a starting point for a deeper conversation about how we might measure the distinctive benefits that we hypothesize will derive from M.D. Anderson’s Green Infrastructure network. Green Infrastructure networks are highly interconnected, but that does not mean that all benefits to human, plant, and trophic communities stem from systemic interactions. As a result, for each research question we also break out specific infrastructural elements that exist with our proposed networks, identifying specific monitoring strategies for each, along with the anticipated outcomes we expect each element to produce. We conclude by identifying potential partnerships for monitoring that will ease the institutional burden for data collection. By establishing partnerships with interested groups, M.D. Anderson can engage in a systematic, sustained inquiry into the benefits of Green Infrastructure without incurring substantial extra costs. Our research framework is provided here in truncated form, but our complete research framework is included in as an appendix to this document.

6.2 Potential Partnerships for Adaptive Monitoring Our goal is to minimize the amount of time and money M.D. Anderson must spend on monitoring, while maximizing the amount of data M.D. Anderson can capture from the living landscape. Our chief strategy for achieving this goal is to enter into partnerships with local K12 schools, universities, and environmental non-profits. Through such partnerships, M.D. Anderson can outsource data collection to a responsible and well-trained corps of volunteers, reducing the burden placed on M.D. Anderson’s employees. M.D. Anderson’s principal commitment under a partnership strategy would be to fund a volunteer outreach and training coordinator, whose sole responsibility would be generating partnerships and training partners to collect the data necessary to efficiently manage M.D. Anderson’s living landscape. The outreach and training coordinator would be a full-time, salaried employee of the Facilities Management Department. Examples of potential partners might include science classes from local health magnet schools, such as Debakey High School or Baylor Academy at Ryan Middle School; environmental scientists and students from allied programs at the University of Houston, Texas Southern University, and Rice University; and local organizations like the Houston Air Alliance, the Houston Alliance for Water Quality, and the Citizens’ Environmental Coalition.

34


6.3 Research Framework

TABLE 14: RESEARCH FRAMEWORK

Research Topic: The M.D. Anderson Cancer Center Green Infrastructure Plan’s adaptive monitoring component investigates the critical linkages we hypothesize to exist between landscape performance, human health, and the health of urban ecosystems. Our areas of research interest extend to include the administrative and logistical supports necessary to maintain green infrastructure on a major hospital campus. Additionally, we are interested in monitoring the processes of institutional learning that play out on campus as facilities personnel, administrators, patients, and caregivers come to understand and use these infrastructural improvements. Research Goal: We hope the landscape performance data we generate during the course of our research will make a persuasive case for the adoption and implementation of green infrastructure at other large institutions throughout the country, resulting in a more sustainable and more environmentally just American urbanism.

35

Key Terms

Definition

Operationalization

Green Infrastructure

Green Infrastructure is a multifunctional, context-specific, safe-to-fail, and dynamic network of discrete design interventions intended to amplify the capacity of the living landscape to support a diversity of thriving human, plant, and trophic communities within a challenging urban environment.

In the context of the M.D. Anderson Green Infrastructure plan, Green Infrastructure is operationalized as the set specific design interventions implemented on the M.D. Anderson Campus.

Psychological Health

Psychological Health is a state of well-being in which every individual realizes his or her own potential, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can work productively and fruitfully, and is able to make a contribution to her or his community (Adapted from the World Health Organization).

Psychological health is operationalized by evaluating the life orientation of patients using the LOT-R diagnostic (which is a standardized measure of patient pessimism); patient compliance, as measured by staff surveys; patient distress, as measured by the American Cancer Society’s distress screening tool; and Health-Related Quality of Life, as measured by the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer’s multidimensional survey instrument.

Physiological Health

Physiological Health is the dynamic interaction between a person’s health condition and body functioning, their environment, and their personal habits and beliefs. (Adapted from the World Health Organization).

Institutional Benefit

Institutional benefit is any quantifiable reduction in hospital operating expenses or any measurable change in institutional reputation among health professionals, the pool of potential patients, and Houston residents.

Physiological health is operationalized by the patient’s performance on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). Developed by the World Health Organization as a standardized measure of human health functioning, the ICF evaluates a person’s body functions and structures, level of activity, participation in various aspects of life, and environmental factors influencing health. Institutional benefits are operationalized by quantifying both hospital operating expenses and institutional reputation. Hospital operating expenses are operationalized as the costs of maintaining a functional physical plant. Institutional reputation is operationalized as the positive regard for M.D. Anderson as a national leader in cancer research; as an environmentally responsible corporate citizen of Houston; and as a superior provider of patient care.


measurable change in institutional reputation among health professionals, the pool of potential patients, and Houston residents.

quantifying both hospital operating expenses and institutional reputation. Hospital operating expenses are operationalized as the costs of maintaining a functional physical plant. Institutional reputation is operationalized as the positive regard for M.D. Anderson as a national leader in cancer research; as an environmentally responsible corporate citizen of Houston; and as a superior provider of patient care.

TABLE 15: MEASURES OF PYSCHOLOGICAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL HEALTH IN PATIENTS WITH RESPECT TO GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE

Research Question

Working Hypothesis

1. How do networks of Green Infrastructure contribute to the psychological and physiological health of network users in the context of a high stress, highly urbanized research hospital environment?

For patients, we hypothesize that exposure to networks of Green Infrastructure will increase outlook optimism, reduce patient distress, increase patient compliance with health providers, reduce healing times following surgeries, and result in higher scores on health-related quality of life instruments. Our theory is that, per Ulrich, contact with green infrastructure will increase mental and emotional health of patients, which will result in corresponding improvements in physical health. We do not expect to find direct links between GI and patients’ physical health or healing. For staff members, we hypothesize that exposure to networks of Green Infrastructure will increase . We expect that these mental and emotional benefits will correlate to lower staff turn-over, higher job satisfaction, increases in the quality of applicants for skilled jobs, and improved campus climate survey results. For family members, we anticipate decreased anxiety and increased feelings of well-being.

2. How can researchers better quantify and measure the stream of institutional benefits that flow from green infrastructural improvements to a major research hospital?

Put differently, this line of research seeks to answer the question, “how does the landscape perform at M.D. Anderson, and how do we know?” Accordingly, we hypothesize that M.D. Anderson can develop scientifically rigorous, persuasive measures of the benefits of Green Infrastructure by embedding feedback loops in each landscape intervention; entering into partnerships with local K12 schools, universities, and environmental non-profits for the purpose of increasing the institution’s capacity to monitor the living landscape; and integrating the study of landscape performance and its associated benefits into other, existing research projects.

3. What administrative, logistical, and institutional factors are necessary for the successful implementation of green infrastructure on a conventional hospital campus?

We hypothesize that, for green infrastructure to be implemented successfully, campus leadership, facilities staff, and health providers must understand the philosophy and science of green infrastructure. All three groups must buy in to the project of campus greening in order for it to be successful. We expect that both knowledge and buy-in can be generated through an intentional process of institutional learning; that the learning process must be supported by key administrators; but that learning is best transmitted in a non-threatening, horizontal, peer-to-peer manner.

TABLE 16: MEASURES OF PYSCHOLOGICAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL HEALTH IN STAFF MEMBERS WITH RESPECT TO GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE

Research Question 1

Measures of Psychological and Physiological Health

How do networks of Green Infrastructure contribute to the psychological and physiological health of network users in the context of a high stress, highly urbanized research hospital environment?

For Patients • LOT-R Diagnostic. Numerous studies have discussed the health consequences of optimism, particularly in regards to human healing. The Life Orientation Test - Revised is a psychometric measure of optimism - pessimism. The test was developed to assess individual differences in life outlook, and is noteworthy for its brevity and its easy administration. The diagnostic could be integrated with other surveys; administered by a nurse while walking a patient down the hallway; or reported via a smartphone app. Life Orientation should be measured frequently, and should be carefully coordinated to capture patient attitudes pre- and post- contact with green infrastructure. Ideally we would measure not only whether a change in life orientation occurred post-contact, but also the duration of the change. • Staff reports of patient compliance. Patient compliance with health providers is often key to ensuring that treatment occurs in the most effective manner. Working with survey consultants, M.D. Anderson could develop a survey tool to test staff attitudes regarding patient compliance. Pre- and post-intervention measures of staff compliance could be compared. • Distress Diagnostic. The distress tool is a diagnostic developed by the American Cancer Society. The diagnostic measures the overall level of distress or negative stresses present in a patient’s life, and assigns the patient a numeric score on a standardized distress “thermometer.” • HRQOL Instrument. Health Related Quality of Life is a multi-dimensional concept that includes domains related to physical, mental, emotional, and social functioning. It focuses on the impact of health status on overall patient quality of life. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer has developed an HRQOL measure specifically intended for use in cancer patients. 36


TABLE 17: QUANTIFIATION AND MEASUREMENT OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS ON INSTITUTIONAL BENEFITS

Research Question 2

Measures of Institutional Benefits

How can researchers better quantify and measure the stream of institutional beneÞts that ßow from green infrastructural improvements to a major research hospital?

BeneÞt: Reduced Operating Expenses • Reduced utility costs, as indicated by the amount of energy utilized for heating and cooling; the amount of water spent on irrigation and campus cleaning; and the • Reduced costs associated with employee turnover. • Reduced costs associated with ßood mitigation. BeneÞt: Increased Institutional Reputation as a Research Leader • • • •

Increased number of collaborative research efforts, as indicated by the number of funded research proposals with a GI and public health focus. Increased production of scientiÞc research studies relating human healing and environmental factors. Quantity of studies appearing in peer-reviewed journals of ecology, environmental science, medicine, public health, and design over 10 year time horizon. Number of citations to peer reviewed journal studies (measuring impact of studies on disciplinary discourse).

BeneÞt: Increased Institutional Reputation among the Pool of Potential Patients • Healthgrades scores. • Number of appearances in America’s Best Hospitals. • Analysis of social media posts about hospital experience. TABLE 18: METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION

Research Question 3

Methods of Data Collection

3. What administrative, logistical, and institutional factors are necessary for the successful implementation of green infrastructure on a conventional hospital campus?

• • •

37

Case studies of campus leadership Case studies of facilities managers Ethnographic studies of nurses, aides, and doctors


7.0 Appendix

DIG 24: AIR QUALITY INDEX SCALE

TABLE 19: CRITICAL POLLUTANTS IN HOUSTON, TEXAS 2005-2014

Source: epa.gov

Source: Airnow.gov 38


TABLE 20: REGIONAL PLANS THAT PROVIDE SUPPORT AND FUNDING FOR WATER CONSERVATION, FLOOD MITIGATION AND IRRIGATION

Plan

Agency (& Type)

Agenda

Opportunities + Resources

2017 State Water Plan

Texas Water Development Board (State)

Coordination between 16 regional Water plan

Map Data SWIFT funding

2016 Regional Water Plan

Region H Water Planning Group (State Authority - TWDB)

Comprehensive Water planning to ensure adequate and healthy water supply for all sectors

Our Great Region 2040

H-GAC (Regional Council of local governments)

--Increase water storage and distribution capacity. --Watershed protection including waterway buffer areas

39

PPP (Houston Parks Board, Parks & Rec)

CWSRF funding TPWD funding

--Green Infrastructure Projects

EPA GI funding

--Awareness of economic benefits of environmental systems

Environmental Education Grants

--Promote efficient resources management

Bayou Greenways 2020

LID best practices guidelines

Recreation Health Flood reduction

Rainwater harvesting Rebates

Co-ordination, tie into recreational


Hydrology & Soils_100-year flood plain & soil erodibility group DIG 25: 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN AND SOIL ERODABILITY GROUP

URLX

Bg

Mu

As Bg BadA

W Bg

TeuB

URLX W

VauA BadA URLX Lu Bg

URLX

BadA

Lu Mu BadA URLX

Legend 100-Year Flood Plain

BadA URLX

URLX

Very High Erodibility High Erodibility Moderate Erodibility larger_boundary

±

Campus Boundary

0 5001,000

2,000

3,000

Feet 4,000 40


Hydrology & Soils_100-year flood plain & soil inflitration group DIG 26: 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN AND SOIL INFILTRATION GROUP

URLX

Bg

Mu

As Bg BadA

W Bg

TeuB

URLX W

VauA BadA URLX Lu Bg

URLX

BadA

Lu Mu BadA URLX BadA URLX

URLX

Legend 100-Year Flood Plain Very Slow Infiltration Slow Infiltration larger_boundary

± 41

Campus Boundary

0 5001,000

2,000

3,000

Feet 4,000


DIG 27: M.D. ANDERSON CAMPUS BUILDING USE MAP

42


DIG 28: COMMON INVASIVE SPECIES LIST AND HOW TO REMOVE THEM

Common Name

Malta Star Thistle

Bermuda Grass

Japanese Hollyfern

Water Hyacinth

Giant Reed

King Ranch Bluestem

Scientific Name

Centaurea melitensis

Cynodon dactlyon

Cyrtomium falcatum

Eichhornia crassipes

Arundo donax

Bothriochloa Macfadyena ischaemum unguis-cati

Annual Grass

Perennial Grass

Perennial Fern

Mowing effective during early stages. Certain insects eat plant seeds in early phases to help reduce regrowth

Persistant hand removal of rhizomes is necessary. Mowing at 5-8 cm helps to reduce rhizome reproduction

Plant Type How to remove

43

Perennial Herb

Plant Very hardy plant, harvesters or choppers removal from the for large plant start is best. Hand populations. removal of Hand full root and removal for plant small populations

Catclaw Vine

Heavenly Bamboo

Salt Cedar

Johnson Grass

Nandina domestica

Tamarix ramosissima

Sorghum halepense

Perennial Tree

Perennial Grass

Perennial Grass

Perennial Grass

Perennial Shrub

Perennial Shrub

Repeated mowing alongside prescribed burning

Timely mowing alongside prescribed burning

Continuous clipping or mowing. Root removal by hand

If cannot be removed from original sprout herbicide is recommended. Resprouts very rapidly.

Maintain at Till every few weeks in low levels summer. and prevent Crop reinfestation. Most effec- rotations in tive removal winter help to reduce method a combination regrowth. of chemical , mechanical and biological


Walking Buffer/Corridor

Native Plants

DIG 29: PLANT ASSEMBLAGE FOR WALKING BUFFER/CORRIDOR

Species

Common Name

Flower Max Sun/shade Water use Color/Bloom Height Period

Odor

Extra

Cornus florida

Dogwood tree

Shade Tolerant

Medium

15-25 ft

yes

Does not like clay birds

Part sun

Mild

~ 1ft

Liriope muscari Lily Turf Albizia julibrissin 'Rosea' Perovskia atriplicifolia Asclepias tuberosa L. Populus deltoides x Populus nigra Tithonia diversifolia

White, spring to summer Purple, summer

none

Pink, spring to yes summer

Mimosa Tree Full sun

Medium, until est

~30 ft

Russian Sage

Full sun

Drought Tolerant

3-5 ft

Butterfly Weed

Full Sun

Drought tolerant

1-3ft

Hybrid Poplar

Full sun

Medium

40–50 ft none

Mexican Sunflower

Full/part Sun

Average Water

6-15 ft

Orange/yellow none , summer

2-4 ft

Greenish white, rare

~8 ft

Red/orange, none summer to fall

8-15 ft

green/white, spring

Sansevieria trifasciata

Shade Snake Plant Tolerant

Low

Caesalpinia pulcherrima (dwarf)

Pride of Barbados

Drought tolerant

Diospyros texana

Texas Drought Part shade Persimmon tolerant

Full sun

none

none

C3

Loves heat and birds, hummidity, grows hummingbird, wide reduces UHI butterflies butterflies Monach, queen Wind screens, salt birds tolerant, wet soils

C3

C3

bees, birds, butterflies well drained soil

none

Increadibly heat hummingbirds, tolerant, best in butterflies raised bed Heat tolerant, native, grows well birds, butterflies in shade of other trees

Adaptive Plants

Photosynthesis Improvements in Improvements in Ecosystem Competitive with Soil pH Pathway Water/soil Quality Air Quality Diservices other plants

none

Purple, yes summer Orange/Yellow, Summer to None Fall none

Attracted Animals

Naturalize Plants

adds calcium and minerals to soil

average

none

~5.5-6.0 no

average

Tolerates urban pollution

none

any

no

average

Tolerates urban pollution

none

any

no

average

Tolerates urban pollution

none

any

no

average

Tolerates Urban Pollution

none

~8

No

phytoremediative (TCE, MTBE, hydrocarbons)

none

acidic or no alkaline

average

none

6.1-7.8

no

spreads by 7.5-8.5 rhizomes

no

phytoremediative (TCE, MTBE, hydrocarbons) phytoremediative, zinc & lead nitrates

CAM

average

good with air pollution (formaldehyde)

C3

average

average

thorns

any

no

average

average

thorns

>7.2

no

44


Green Wall

Native Plants

DIG 30: PLANT ASSEMBLAGE FOR GREEN WALL

Odor

6-30 ft

none

none

6-15 ft

Lavender, spring to

none

food for butterfly butterflies larva, possibly

none

Wind screens, salt tolerant, wet soils

Species

Max Sun/shade Water use height

Ficus pumila

Fig Vine

Part Sun

Drought tolerant

Passiflora incarnata

Passion Full/Part Flower Vine Sun

Medium

Populus deltoides Hybrid x Populus nigra Poplar Cocculus carolinus Merremia dissecta Solanum jasminoides Bigonia capreolata Thelypteris normalis Pteris vittata Campsis radicans Sedum nuttallianum Raf. Atrichum angustatum

45

Flower color/Bloom period

Common Name

Snailseed vine

Full sun

medium

40–50 ft none

Full/Part Sun

low

10-15 ft

Low to medium

White/Red, none spring to fall white, summer 10-25 ft none to autumn Orange, 6-30 ft none summer

Sun/part shade Full/Part Potato Vine Sun Alamo Vine

Crossvine

Medium

Sun/shade Low

red berries in none winter

12 ft

Extra

dies back each season, quick growth, berries blooms in afternoon drought resitant

Naturalize Plants

Adaptive Plants

Attracted Animals

Photosynthesis Improvements in Improvements in Ecosystem Competitive with Soil pH Pathway Water/soil Quality Air Quality Diservices other plants

none

C3

average

Removes urban pollution

none

5.6-6

No

C4

average

average

none

any

No

birds

C3

phytoremediative (TCE, MTBE, hydrocarbons)

phytoremediative (TCE, MTBE, none hydrocarbons)

song birds

C4

average

average

average

average

average

Removes urban pollution

none

any

No

average

average

none

6.8-7.2

No

average

average

none

~6.8

No

butterflies hummingbirds

C4

hummingbirds

acidic or alkaline, No wet soils ok

berries poisonous 6.8-7.2 No to humans seed alkaline, No poisonous poor

Southern Part Sun Wood Fern

Medium to 2 ft high

none

none

none

Chinese Brake Fern Trumpet Vine

full/part Sun

Medium to 1-2 ft high

none

none

none

phytoremediative for arsenic

average

none

Full sun

Low

25-35 ft

Red/orange, summer

none

hummingbirds, bees

average

average

none

6.8-7.2

No

Full sun

Drought tolerant

<1 ft

Yellow, springnone summer

none

average

average

none

any

No

3 cm

none

none

average

average

none

Yellow Stonecrop

Lesser Smoothcap Sun/shade Low Moss

none

C3

No

No


Prairie Site

Native Plants

DIG 31: PLANT ASSEMBLAGE FOR PRAIRIE SITE

Species

Common Name

Sun/shade Water use

Max height

Flower Color/Bloom Period

Odor

Andropogon gerardi

Big Bluestem

Full sun

4-6 ft

none

none

Schizachyrium Little scoparium Bluestem

Full sun

Chasmanthium latifolium

Inland SeaShade oats

Washingtonia robusta

Mexican Fan Full sun Palm Spanish full/part Dagger sun

Yucca gloriosa

low low

2-4 ft

none

none

medium, wet soil

2-5 ft

none

none

medium

40-50 ft none

none

low

6-8 ft

White, spring none to summer

Extra

Tolerates heat and humidity, good for rain

Naturalize Plants

Adaptive Plants

Attracted Animals

Carbon Sequestration

Improvements in Improvements in Ecosystem Competitive with Soil pH Water/soil Quality Air Quality Diservices other plants

butterflies

C4

average

tolerates air pollution

none

any

no

none

C4

average

tolerates air pollution

none

any

no

none

C4

average

average

none

any

no

average

average

none

any

no

CAM

average

average

none

any

no

C4

average

Loves CO2

none

any

no

Bat housing bats (southern yellow can cause skin none irritation

Panicum virgatum

full/part Switchgrass sun

medium, drought tolerant

3-6 ft

none

Salvia coccinea

Scarlet sage

full/part sun

medium

1-3 ft

Red, spring to yes fall

hummingbirds, butterflies

average

average

none

6.1-7.5

no

Sorghastrum nutans

Indian Grass

Full sun

Drought tolerant

3-5 ft

none

none

Pepper-and-Salt C4 Skipper butterfly

phytoremediative (atrazine, metalochlor, hydrocarbons)

removes air pollution

none

5-7.8

no

Saccharum giganteum

Sugarcane Plume Grass

Full/part Sun

Medium

4-10 ft

none

none

good for rain gardens

none

average

average

none

4.6-7.5

no

hummingbirds, butterflies, birds

average

average

none

6.1-7.8

no

bees, birds, butterflies

average

average

none

6.8-7.2

aggressive

none

Good in rain gardens

Lobelia cardinalis

Cardinal Flower

Full/part Sun

low

1-6 ft

Red, summer none to fall

poisonous if ingested, needs hummingbirds for propogation

Ratibida columnifera

Mexican Sun Hat

Full/part Sun

Medium

1-3 ft

Orange/yellow, none summer

repels deer

birds

C4

46


Rain Garden/Bio Swale

Native Plants

DIG 32: PLANT ASSEMBLAGE FOR BIOSWALE/RAIN GARDENS

Max height

Populus deltoides Hybrid x Populus nigra Poplar

Full sun

medium

40â&#x20AC;&#x201C;50 ft none

none

Schizachyrium Little scoparium Bluestem

Full sun

low

2-4 ft

none

none

Panicum virgatum

Switchgrass

full/part sun

3-6 ft

none

none

Pennisetum alopecuroides

Fountain Grass

1.5-2.5ft none

high

80 ft

none

Low, Drought tolerant

5-30 ft

light pink, spring yes to fall

High

20ft

none

25ft

white, late spring none

8 to 12 ft

yellowgreen,Spring

3 ft

Yellow/white, none spring to summer

Betula nigra

Common Name

Full/part Sun Full/part River Birch Sun

Sopora affinis

Eve's Necklace

Myrica cerifera

Southern Full/part Wax Myrtle Sun

Ilex vomitoria

Holly Yaupon

Ilex decidua Achillea millefolium

Part Sun

medium, drought tolerant Drought tolerant

Low, Full/part Drought Sun/Shade tolerant Sun/part Medium Possumhaw shade

Yarrow

Texas Lantana horrida lantana

47

Flower Color/Bloom Period

Sun/shade Water use

Species

Saccharum giganteum

Sugarcane Plume Grass

Sorghastrum nutans

Indian Grass

Sun/part shade

Medium

Photosynthesis Improvements in Improvements in Ecosystem Competitive with Soil pH Pathway Water/soil Quality Air Quality Diservices other plants

Birds

C3

phytoremediative (TCE, MTBE)

phytoremediative none (TCE, MTBE)

acidic or No alkaline

none

C4

average

Tolerates air pollution

none

any

no

birds

C4

average

Loves CO2

none

any

No

none

birds

C4

average, prevents soil erosion

tolerates Air Pollution

thorn

none

Moisture tolerant Birds

C3

average

Ozone tolerant

none

4.5-7.5

No

Bees

C3

average

average

Seed is poisonous 6.6-7.8 if ingested

No

average

average

none

No

average

tolerates urban pollution

Birds get "drunk" on ~7 berries

No

average

tolerates urban pollution

none

4.5-7

No

butterflies

average

average

none

any

No

Butterflies, Birds

average

Tolerates urban pollution

none

6.5-7.5

No

average

average

none

4.6-7.5

No

phytoremediative (atrazine, metalochlor, hydrocarbons)

Removes air pollution

none

5-7.8

no

Extra Wind screens, salt tolerant, wet soils Tolerates heta and humidity, good for rain gardens Good in rain gardens

none Red berries in winter

none

Full sun

Low

2-3ft

Full/part Sun

Medium

4-10 ft

none

Full sun

Drought tolerant

none

Adaptive Plants

Attracted Animals

Odor

red/orange/yellow , late spring to none summer

3-5 ft

Naturalize Plants

none

none

Birds,butterflies, fruite eaten by C3 birds Birds, butterfies, nesting place for C3 birds Birds

good for rain gardens

none

C3

C4

Pepper-and-Salt C4 Skipper butterfly

No

6-7.2


Rooftop (Extensive)

DIG 33: PLANT ASSEMBLAGE FOR GREEN ROOFS

Species

Common Name

Arachis glabrata

Ornamental Full Sun Peanut

Native Plants

Max Sun/shade Water use height Very low

Moderate water needs Moderate Muhlenbergia Gulf Muhly Full Sun water capillaris needs Texas Drought Phyla nodiflora Sun/shade Frogfruit Tolerant Rocky Point Full Sun Malephora lutea Ice Plant

Flower Color/Bloom Period

Odor

Extra

Attracted Animals

0.5-1ft

Yellow, June none July

none

~1ft

Yellow, May October

none

none

3-4ft

Beige, August none - October

none

0-1 ft

white, summer none to fall Blue, Purple, Late spring to none early fall

larval food source butterflies, bees

Ruellia brittoniana

Mexican Petunia

Sun/Part Shade

Low

~0.5ft

Sedum mexicanum

Mexican Stonecrop

Part Sun/Part Shade

Drought Tolerant

0-0.5ft

Late spring, none early summer

Cymbopogon citratus

Lemongrass Full sun

Medium

~2 ft

none

1-3 ft

purple, spring none to summer

none

~1ft

none

none

Opuntia basilaris Atrichum angustatum

Beavertail Cactus Full sun Low (Prickly Pear) Lesser Smoothcap Sun/shade Low Moss

Hesperaloe parvifolia

Red Yucca

Full Sun

Drought tolerant

3-5ft

Asclepias tuberosa L.

Butterfly Weed

Full Sun

Drought tolerant

1-3ft

Strong citrus

none

Red/Yellow, Late spring to None summer Orange/Yellow , Summer to None Fall

Repels mosquitos none

Adaptive Plants

Photosynthesis Improvements in Improvements in Ecosystem Competitive with Soil pH Pathway Water/soil Quality Air Quality Diservices other plants add nitrogen and reduce nutrient niche

average

none

acid

No

CAM

average

average

none

~7

No

C4

average

average

none

~7

No

C3

average

average

none

any

Ground cover, spreads

average

Tolerats Urban Pollution

Aggressive 6.1-9

Aggressive

CAM

average

average

none

6-7.5

No

C4

average

average

none

~6

No

CAM

average

average

none

6.1-8

Agressive

average

average

none

6-6.5

No

butterflies

butterflies

Naturalize Plants

hummingbirds

CAM

average

Tolerates Urban Pollution

none

~7

No

monach, queen

C3

average

Tolerates Urban Pollution

none

~8

No

48


Rooftop (Intensive)

Native Plants

DIG 34: PLANT ASSEMBLAGE FOR INTENSIVE GREEN ROOFS

Odor

~8ft

Red/orange, summer to fall

none

Full sun

Drought tolerant

~7ft

white, summer none to fall

Full/part Sun

Drought tolerant

1-2 ft

coral, winter to spring

1-2ft

Orange/ Yellow Spring, yes through late summer

Species

Max Sun/shade Water use height

Caesalpinia pulcherrima (dwarf)

Pride of Barbados

Full sun

Drought tolerant

Lagerstroemia indica x faueri 'Acoma'

Acoma Crepe Myrtle

Aloe X 'Blue Elf'

Blue Elf Aloe

Bulbine frutescens

49

Flower Color/Bloom Period

Common Name

Orange Bulbine

Full/part Sun

Drought tolerant

3-5ft

none

Red/Yellow, Late spring to None summer Orange/Yellow , Summer to None Fall

Extra Increadibly heat tolerant, best in raised bed Happy in ceramic pots or raised beds

Naturalize Plants

Adaptive Plants

Attracted Animals

Photosynthesis Improvements in Improvements in Ecosystem Competitive with Soil pH Pathway Water/soil Quality Air Quality Diservices other plants

hummingbirds, butterflies

C3

average

average

Thorns

any

No

none

5-7.5

No

Birds

C3

average

Good with Urban Pollution

hummingbirds, butterflies

CAM

average

Tolerates Urban Pollution

Thorns

any

No

hummingbirds,be CAM es,butterflies

average

Tolerates Urban Pollution

none

6-7.8

No

hummingbirds

CAM

average

Tolerates Urban Pollution

none

~7

No

monach, queen

C3

average

Tolerates Urban Pollution

none

~8

No

average

average

none

5-6.5

No

Hesperaloe parvifolia

Red Yucca

Full Sun

Drought tolerant

Asclepias tuberosa L.

Butterfly Weed

Full Sun

Drought tolerant

1-3ft

New Symphyotrichum England novae-angliae Aster

Full /part sun

Drought tolerant

3-6ft

purple

None

Full /part sun

Drought tolerant

3-6 ft.

Yellow, Summer to Fall

None

birds

average

average

none

average

average

none

5.6-7.5

No

C3

average

average

none

any

Ground cover, spreads

C3

average

average

none

any

Ground cover, spreads

C4

average

average

none

~6

No

Needs well draind butterflies,bees,bi soil rds

Oenothera biennis

Evening Primrose

Tulbaghia violacea

Society Garlic

Full sun

Medium

1-2 ft

sweet lilac, spring to flowers, Repels mosquitos none summer garlicy leaves

Phyla nodiflora

Texas Frogfruit

Sun/shade

Drought Tolerant

0-1 ft

white, summer none to fall

Calyptocarpus vialis

Straggler Daisy

Sun/shade

Drought tolerant

0-1 ft

yellow, yearround

none

Cymbopogon citratus

Lemongrass Full sun

Medium

~2 ft

none

Strong citrus odor

larval food source butterflies, bees butterflies Repels mosquitos none

No


Garden

Native Plants

DIG 35: PLANT ASSEMBLAGE FOR THERAPEUTIC GARDENS

Max height

Flower Color/Bloom Period

~8 ft

Red/orange, none summer to fall

8-15 ft

green/white, spring

Species

Common Name

Caesalpinia pulcherrima (dwarf)

Pride of Barbados

Diospyros texana

Texas Drought Part shade Persimmon tolerant

Aloe striata

Coral Aloe

Full/part sun

Drought tolerant

1-2 ft

Asclepias tuberosa L.

Butterfly Weed

Full Sun

Drought tolerant

1-3ft

Full sun

Drought tolerant in Yellow/orange, 70â&#x20AC;&#x201C;90ft None humid summer cond.

Shade

hummingbirds, finches, cardinals, C3 deer

Populus deltoides Hybrid x Populus nigra Poplar

Full sun

medium

40â&#x20AC;&#x201C;50 ft none

None

Wind screens, salt tolerant

birds

Genipa americana

Full/part sun

Can tolerate drought

~15 ft

white

None

none

Part sun

low, drought tolerant

3-4 ft

purple, summer

none

hummingbirds

Sophora secundiflora

Mountain Laurel

Full/part Sun

Drought tolerant

10-15 ft

heavy, purple, spring grape to summer smell

Tithonia diversifolia

Mexican Sunflower

Full/part Sun

average water

6-15 ft

orange, late summer

none

Sansevieria trifasciata

Snake Plant

Shade tolerant

Low

2-4 ft

greenish white, rare

none

Cymbopogon citratus

Lemongrass Full sun

Medium

~2 ft

Tulbaghia violacea

Society Garlic

Medium

1-2 ft

Liriodendron tulipifera

Tuliptree

Jagua

mexican Salvia leucantha brush sage

Sun/shade Water use

Full sun

Full sun

Drought tolerant

Odor

none

Coral, winter none to spring Orange/Yellow, Summer to None Fall

Extra

Attracted Animals

Foliage is aromatic

C3

C3

C3

average

average

Thorns

any

No

average

average

Thorns

>7.2

No

average

Tolerates urban pollution

none

any

No

average

Tolerates Urban Pollution

none

~8

No

phytoremediative (PCB, TCE)

average

none

acidic

No

phytoremediative (TCE, MTBE, hydrocarbons) phytoremediative (chromium, cadmium) heavy leaf fall average

phytoremediative (TCE, MTBE, none hydrocarbons)

acidic or No alkaline

phytoremediative (chromium, none cadmium)

5.1-8

No

average

none

~7

No

No

butterflies, birds, C3 hummingbirds

Legume (N)

average

Seeds are poinsonou >7.2 s if ingested

bees, birds, butterflies

phytoremediative (zinc & lead nitrates)

average

none

6.1-7.8

No

CAM

average

removes air pollution (formaldehyde)

spreads by 7.5-8.5 rhizomes

No

C4

average

average

none

~6

No

average

average

none

5.6-7.5

No

well drained soil none

Strong citrus Repels mosquitos none odor sweet lilac, spring to flowers, Repels mosquitos none garlicy summer leaves none

Adaptive Plants

Photosynthesis Improvements in Improvements in Ecosystem Competitive with Soil pH Pathway Water/soil Quality Air Quality Diservices other plants

Increadibly heat Hummingbirds, tolerant, best in C3 butterflies raised bed Heat tolerant, native, grows well Birds, butterflies in shade of other trees bees, birds, CAM butterflies Monach, queen

Naturalize Plants

50


8.0 Bibliography

Introduction Benedict, M. and McMahon, E. (2006). Green Infrastructure: Linking Landscapes and Communities. Washington, DC: Island Press. Section 1.0 The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. (2016). Retrieved May 15, 2016, from https://www.mdanderson.org Section 2.3.1 Daphne Scargrove. (2013). A Closer Look at Air Pollution in Houston: Identifying Priority Health Risks. AQI, 29, 45-48. Mat Renquist. (2006). A summary of the Report of the Mayor’s Task Force on the Health Effects of Air Pollution 2005. AQI, 11, 79-85. AQI Table. (n.d.).Retrieved May 15, 2016, from https://www. epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants/naaqs-table Critical Pollutants in Houston Chart. (n.d.). Retrieved May 15, 2016, from https://airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=airnow. local_city&cityid=236 Critical Months for Houston Chart. (n.d.). Retrieved May 15, 2016, from http://www.greenhoustontx.gov/airquality.html Parkland Per Square Mile. (n.d.). Retrieved May 15, 2016, from http://persquaremile.com/2011/01/27/parkland-perperson-in-the-united-states/ Facts and Figures Table. (n.d.). Retrieved May 15, 2016, from http://www.visithoustontexas.com/about-houston/factsand-figures/ Section 2.3.2 National resources conservation services. (n.d.). Retrieved May 15, 2016, from http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/site/national/home/ 51

Section 3.0 Erik Gómez-Baggethun and David N. Barton Brendan Fisher, R. Kerry Turner, Paul Morling. (n.d.). Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Journal of Healthcare, Volume 34, 67-93.

cancer survivors.”Social Science and Medicine, 67, 68-78. Ottosohn, J and Grahn, P. (2008). “The Role of Natural Settings in Crisis Rehabilitation: How Does the Level of Crisis Influence the Response to Experiences of Nature with Regard to Measures of Rehabilitation?”Landscape Research, 33, 1, 51-70.

Mark Throngill, Fastious Marbel, Kylve Ustechrin. (2015. Austin’s Urban Forest Plan: A Master Plan for Public Property USDA and Texas A&M Forest Service.

Strang, G. (1996). Infrastructure as landscape. In Theory in Landscape Architecture, A Reader, 220-26. Philadelphia, Pa: Penn.

Section 4.2 “Psychological benefits of greenspace increase with biodiversity” - Fuller, R., Irvine K., Devine-Wright, P., Warren P., & Gatson, K.

Tzoulas et al. (2007). “Promoting ecosystem and human health using Green Infrastructure: A literature review.”Landscape and Urban Planning, 81, 167-78.

Section 5 American Horticultural Therapy Association (1995). Therapeutic Gardens Characteristics. Retrieved May 15, 2016, from http://ahta.org/sites/default/files/attached_ documents/TherapeuticGardenChracteristic_0.pdf American Society of Landscape Architects (2012). Healthcare and Therapeutic Design. Retrieved May 15, 2016, from http://www.asla.org/ppn/Article. aspx?id=3308&terms=therapeutic%20garden%20design Section 6 Ahearn, J. (2011). “From fail-safe to safe-to-fail: Sustainability and resilience in the new urban world.”Landscape and Urban Planning, 100, 341-43. Curtis et al, (2007). “Therapeutic landscapes in hospital design: a qualitative assessment by staff and service users of the design of a new mental health inpatient unit.”Environment and Planning: Government and Policy, 25, 591-610. English et al, (2008). “Health, healing, and recovery: Therapeutic landscapes and the everyday lives of breast

Wood et al, (2013). “Spaces for smoking in a psychiatric hospital: Social capital, resistance to control, and significance for ‘therapeutic landscapes’”. Social Science and Medicine, 97, 104-111.

Profile for Jena A.

Green Infrastructure Plan for MD Anderson Campus, Houston  

A Green Infrastructure Plan to increase experience of well-being on the MD Anderson Cancer Center campus in Houston

Green Infrastructure Plan for MD Anderson Campus, Houston  

A Green Infrastructure Plan to increase experience of well-being on the MD Anderson Cancer Center campus in Houston

Advertisement