Issuu

What it means to be a stream

Jay Moorman

website

WHAT IT MEANS TO BE A STREAM: RESURRECTING CHANNELIZED STREAMS, COMMUNITY, AND RESILIENCY ON O’AHU A capstone design research project submitted in partial fulfillment of the Plan B requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

May 2021

By Jay E. Moorman

Capstone committee: Simon Bussiere, Chairperson Phoebe White Karla Sierralta

Keywords: stream restoration, community, resiliency, Hawai’i

INTRODUCTION I first considered stream channel management while conducting field research for an Ecological Urbanism Studio assignment related to the “Make the Ala Wai Awesome” Student Design Challenge. This challenge focused on the Ala Wai Canal, which is fed by Mānoa Stream and other sources. I walked the Mānoa Stream, from its source in the Ko’olau Mountains to the ocean (mauka to makai). When the stream entered the urban environment, the flow was channelized and the banks were retained. One section of the bank was under construction – stonefilled gabions were installed to prevent erosion of a residential plot. The upstream property had an engineered bank, which accelerated erosion downstream. Later, I observed a channelized stream outlet, which was blocked by a “sand plug” – beach sediment accretion fed by ocean longshore sediment transfer. Near the stream outlet, there was significant beach erosion, threatening a main highway.

After these encounters, I started to note how many streams on O’ahu have been modified and to question the viability of this management strategy, especially given the combined effects of climate change and sea level rise. On the surface this issue is related to watershed management – geomorphology, hydrology, biology, ecology. However, the root of the issue is related to cultural values placed on land/water use, and how these values have changed over time. I have considered watershed management from an urban design perspective at the regional scale. My studio efforts focused on largescale interventions, primarily the agency of federal/state/ county governments – top-down approaches. I began to think about smaller-scale efforts and bottomup approaches, and this led me to a research question: How do we optimize stream geomorphology, hydrology, and ecology to stimulate community and resiliency in the face of climate change and sea level rise?

CAPSTONE

My capstone project is a two-part consideration of a current/relevant challenge. The first part is research; the second part is design. The two parts are not independent, nor are they sequential. They are continuous, on-going (beyond the deadline), nested/overlapping, and mutually-supporting. My goal was to record my learning, experience, and thought (design) process graphically more than through written work. Both my written and graphic work tend to be more stream of consciousness than formal and structured, but there is a logical flow (puns intended). Research, outreach, and experiences begat thought and notes, which begat graphics. To generate written commentary, I asked myself what I wanted the viewer to conclude upon viewing the graphics – narrative generated graphically and reprocessed in written form.

RESEARCH

LITERATURE REVIEW I reviewed existing material in four main categories: stream assessment in Hawai’i, Native Hawaiian cultural values, green infrastructure, and stream restoration. I also conducted a map study and review of the history of Hau’ula. I viewed the material through a futurist lens related to sea level rise and climate change hazard mitigation. Stream assessment. I reviewed material describing the state of Hawai’i’s streams prepared by various government agencies with a number of foci including hydrology, storm water management, and ecology. The reports provided a brief history of stream modification and the impacts to aquatic, riparian, recreational, and cultural resources. Stream Channel Modification in Hawaii (1978) and Hawaii Stream Assessment (1990) were the best introductions to the current state of streams on O’ahu, but the more recent reports offer the most relevant commentary regarding sea level rise and climate change hazard mitigation. The reports which detailed local projects were particularly helpful for understanding the web of agencies involved in planning and implementation of watershed management initiatives including stream restoration. Native Hawaiian cultural values. I reviewed material describing Native Hawaiian land use and resource management to better understand the shift in collective cultural values from stewardship of land/ water and interconnected communities to consumerism and protection of private property. Native Hawaiians sustained large populations without outside resources; I sought to identify values, philosophies and practices that could be brought forward to resurrect community and inherent resiliency. Interestingly, this concept is embedded in many of the resource management plans I reviewed related to stream assessment and sea level rise and climate change hazard mitigation. E Ho’I Ka U’i: Perspectives on Placemaking in Hawai’i was of particular value; the text explores Native Hawaiian values and practices including a chapter about hydrology.

Green infrastructure. I sought to understand how to improve stream resource quality while managing stormwater through ecosystem services. The Sustainable Sites Handbook and Low Impact Development manuals explain the science and engineering behind employing ecosystem services in an urban environment. While it is impractical to restore urban terrain to an unaltered state, it is critical to resurrect and strategically place ecosystem service elements in the urban environment. These texts also present design guidance. Stream restoration. I reviewed stream restoration case studies around the world. I specifically sought bottom-up, grassroots, community-scale examples. Restoring Neighborhood Streams and material describing local examples (e.g., He’eia Stream Restoration Project) provided the most insight, particularly related to design decision making and implementation. Many of the case studies highlighted the importance of campaigns and interventions beyond stream channels such as outreach and education. Finally, I studied maps of Hau’ula available through the University of Hawai’i at Mānoa library Maps, Aerial Photographs, and GIS (MAGIS). I specifically sought early maps which provided commentary about the shift from stewardship to private property ownership, agribusiness/colonial exploitation, and land development. I studied historic U. S. Geologic Survey topographical maps to identify changes in the way Hau’ula was depicted 1913-2017. Sites of O’ahu and “talk story” sessions with Hau’ula residents supplemented my review of mapping, history, and place. I identified common themes and connections in this broad range of material to establish a research foundation and approach for design.

METHODOLOGY

I applied several methods to collect, analyze, and synthesize concepts and information. • Historical Research. Describe the evolution of land/water use and associated cultural values with emphasis on Native Hawaiian, colonial, and post-colonial periods. • Mapping. Analyze existing mapping to understand the urbanization of land/water features. • Analytical Research. Identify and describe the state of fresh water resources, specifically streams, in Hawai’i. • Field Experience/Outreach. Observe, record, seek to understand a stream-community relationship on O’ahu. • Case Study Research. Identify and analyze projects related to reversing stream channel modifications with emphasis on restoring the value of water courses, stimulating community and resiliency, and emphasizing community-scale efforts. • Applied Research. Design stream channel modifications for a specific site/community on O’ahu; speculate about implementation. • Qualitative Analysis. Through community outreach, identify preferred approaches to stream channel modification and stimulating community and resiliency. • Quantitative Analysis. Quantitatively compare existing conditions to proposed design solutions with emphasis on resiliency. • Drawing. Record and communicate project experience.

The core principles of my capstone project are: Streams, Community, and Resiliency. I derived my graphic color convention from topographic mapping – blue is used to denote water, and pink is used to denote dense urban areas. This is a study of the urban stream. I will present each principle and provide salient research conclusions to provide background and context for site identification and site analysis.

Streams – I frequently add the parenthetical qualifier “modified” to indicate that the streams of O’ahu have been altered. Streams are prominent on O’ahu. They convey the rain that falls on the land to the ocean and are an integral component of the water cycle. Once valued as life-sustaining resource, they conveyed fresh water from the mountains through the forests to irrigated agricultural terraces (lo’i) and from the lo’i, they carried nutrient-rich water to the aquacultural fish ponds (loko i’a) and the ocean (Board of Water Supply 2021). Today they are largely conscripted to stormwater management, and they have been mutilated to conform to their new purpose/ value.

STREAMS OF O’AHU

There are more than 500 streams in Hawai’i. At least 376 are perennial, and 20% have been modified including almost all streams on O’ahu (Timbol 1978). These streams have been lined, partially lined, and/or altered from their original course generally to increase land available for development or to protect property (Timbol 1978). They facilitate the rapid transport and disposal of stormwater from urbanized areas. This rapid conveyance disrupts natural infiltration and bioremediation decreasing aquifer recharge and water quality due to pollutants (University of Arkansas Community Design Center 2010). Additionally, during periods of heavy rainfall, the rapid conveyance frequently overwhelms the rate-capacity at which stormwater can be dispatched causing accumulation and flooding. This is especially critical given the increased frequency and severity of these shock events due to climate change.

MODIFIED (URBAN) Stream Channel Modification in Hawaii identifies six types of channel alterations: lined channel, realigned/ cleared, elevated culvert, revetment, blocked or filledin, and extended culvert (Timbol 1978). A lined channel has hardened banks and bed while a revetted channel has hardened banks and a natural bed. A realigned/ cleared channel has an altered course devoid of riparian plantings. Culverts are frequently located where roads cross over streams; the robust hardening protects the bridge/roadway. Some streams are forced underground, either in a buried pipe or beneath fill. Examples abound on the most populated Hawaiian island; these ubiquitous modifications even host human expression, recreation, and habitation. By resurrecting streams, we acknowledge that the land/ water ecological systems/services are more important than protecting personal property.

Community. Community is people, place, and scale. When I chose “community” as a core principle, I was thinking of the web of personal connections and interactions, a group of people with a shared, collective outlook, philosophy, system of values. In Native Hawaiian culture geography and genealogy are intertwined to the point of being a single concept. In this sense, people are place. So, community is a connectedness people to people as well as people to place. Communities took care of each other and the land/water (place).

COMMUNITY-SCALE

I was also thinking of community as a scale of urban design. I was drawn to this scale for a few reasons. It is a scale which requires a holistic approach because there are multiple stakeholders. Yet, it remains small enough that bottom-up, grassroots efforts could emerge. I wanted to explore how a single property owner could unite with like-minded adjacent property owners to intervene for the common good.

Native Hawaiian community resource management, typical of an ahupua’a, emphasized cooperation, stewardship, and promotion of community interests. Today’s global resource management emphasizes exclusion, consumption, and protection of individual interests. By resurrecting communities, we celebrate connections to people and places and share a renewed eagerness for cooperation and stewardship.

Community Resource Management • Cooperation • Stewardship

Global Resource Management • Competition • Consumption

Resiliency. Resiliency is the ability of a system to rebound from shocks and stresses. It implies learning from missteps or ill-preparedness to be better suited to face repeated challenges. I posit that those with a strong sense of community are inherently more resilient. Resiliency is a byproduct of the promotion of community interests, a holistic consideration of the common good before individual interests. It is rooted in stewardship and connectedness to the land and to each other. Arguably, by coupling insightful natural resource management with community cooperation and stewardship, Native Hawaiians were more resilient in the face of environmental shocks and stresses than modern Hawaiians. By resurrecting resiliency, we are better able to dampen sea level rise- and climate change-related shocks and stresses.

The principles, Streams, Community, and Resiliency, serve as a framework for analysis and design of sites throughout O’ahu and beyond. For my project, I chose to apply this framework to the community of Hau’ula and Waipuhi Stream, which is the second stream I described in my introduction – the one whose channelized mouth is obstructed by a sand plug. I opted for Hau’ula for several reasons. Sites of O’ahu indicated that Hau’ula was known in pre-colonial times for having five streams and an extensive terraced lo’i system for the wetland cultivation of taro (Sterling and Summers 1993). The streams flow through a relatively short, steep watershed; the mountains begin to rise a quarter mile from the shoreline, and they climb to nearly 3000’ over three miles. Hau’ula has a relatively small population of roughly 3,500 people and is less than 2 square miles (MAGIS 2021). The primary land uses are conservation (Hau’ula Forest Reserve) and residential. Finally, I observed that Hau’ula values community and resiliency. Before beginning to understand the actual site, I sought to understand Hau’ula as people and place.

MOKUPUNI TO COMMUNITY Hau’ula is a community on the windward side of the island (mokupuni) of O’ahu. It falls within the district (moku) of Ko’olauloa. The community today shares the name of the traditional self-sustaining socioeconomic land division (ahupua’a) which encompassed it (MAGIS 2021). The Waipuhi Watershed also encompasses much of Hau’ula; the watershed and ahupua’a boundaries overlap but are not coincident (MAGIS 2021).

Hau’ula’s traditionally recognized five streams are still prominent, although their original courses and names have been modified. Among them, Waipuhi Stream is the name on the bridge over a channelized stream that flows between Hau’ula Elementary School and residential plots inside a loose trapezoid formed by Hau’ula Homestead Road and the shoreline. The tributaries that feed Waipuhi Stream flow through Papali and Punaiki Gulches. Waipuhi Stream historically flowed into the ocean with enough force to carve a channel in the fringing reef. The point near its mouth is called Ka Lae o Kapalaoa, loosely translated as “whale point,” which is described in a Native Hawaiian legend (mo’olelo) about a great whale that washed ashore (Sterling and Summers 1993).

AHUPUA’A vs WATERSHED

“FIVE STREAMS”

TOPOGRAPHIC MAP STUDY

I studied historic U. S. Geologic Survey topographical maps to identify changes in the way Hau’ula was depicted 19132017 (MAGIS 2021). Here are a series of eight maps. I labelled common elements, identified significant changes to the landscape, and highlighted mapping trends. I noted how mapping efforts reflected changing values over time. From 1913 to 1943, the area between the edge of the Ko’olau Mountains and the shoreline is stippled with wetlands, and there are indications of intermittent streams and agriculture. Also prominent are the school, courthouse, and Ko’olau Railway, which connected sugar fields in Kahana to the sugar mill in Kahuku. The 1953 map shows significant change, the railway defunct, the wetland/intermittent stream not depicted, and increased development.

TOPOGRAPHIC MAP STUDY

The 1969 map shows a channelized stream and even more development in the former wetland, and the former railway became Ko’olau Road. Finally, the 2017 map provides much less information; lost are the moku and ahupua’a boundaries, Hau’ula Homesteads, bathymetry, and building footprints – “Hauula” even lost its ‘okina and became just bold text along state highway 83!

CHRONOLOGY

From my topographical map study, I drew conclusions and compiled a chronological timeline representing four periods: 1800 wetlands, 1900 food production, 1943 development, and 2017 risk. I populated the chronology with symbols and images reflecting events and values of each period. The rain (kaniko’o), wind (lanakila), and whale (kapalaoa) represent the Native Hawaiian mo’olelo of a time before the Western philosophy of personal property was applied to the wetlands (Sterling and Summers 1993). The crown symbolizes Hau’ula’s classification as “Crown Land” in the Māhele, the land redistribution instituted by King Kamehameha III.

The taro represents traditional food production and land stewardship which faded as the sugar industry, represented by the Ko’olau Railway train, and land development, represented by the bulldozer, channelized stream cross-section, and tax plat images, became favored pursuits. Finally, the risks associated with climate change and sea level rise are represented by rising flood waters, a stretched spring, and the logo of the Hau’ula Community Association, which strives to mitigate these risks. Broadly, this represents a change in collective cultural values from community and stewardship of land/water toward personal property and consumption; resiliency faded with community, but both are being revisited to mitigate increasing environmental risk.

CHANGES IN COLLECTIVE CULTURAL VALUES

I decided to study this change in more detail, and I began by illustrating the change in Waipuhi Stream identity. Next, I considered why it changed, how it changed, and who was affected. • • • •

Waipuhi Stream Identity Development Waipuhi Stream (modified) Scars, Ghosts, and Homeless

WAIPUHI STREAM IDENTITY

Initially, the coastal plain was wetland. The wetland swelled and withered with seasonal variations in rainfall and tidal influence. The wetland was altered to make the seasonal variation more predictable and to protect infrastructure and buildings. These alterations appeared on maps as an intermittent stream with a realigned stream channel, a new identity. Eventually, the realigned channel was even more constrained and straightened by a concrete and stone corset. Squeezing and containing the water yielded more developable land and quickly ushered stormwater to the ocean. It also defined a third, and current identity. Perhaps a fourth, future identity could incorporate the best aspects of former identities?

DEVELOPMENT

Hau’ula 1900

Why did the stream identity change? I analyzed three maps from 1900, 1929, and 1955 to better understand this transition and its cultural drivers (MAGIS 2021). As in the topographical map study, I labelled common elements, identified significant changes to the landscape, and highlighted mapping trends. In all three maps, the school, courthouse, and coastal road (labelled “Government Road” initially, and “Kamehameha Highway” eventually) feature prominently.

DEVELOPMENT Hau’ula Beach Lots 1929

Hau’ula House Lots 1955

The wetlands, land tenure plots (kuleana), and croplands of 1900 disappear in 1929. The stream references also disappear, and the wetlands bear the derogatory label “swamp.” Fresh water, formerly a resource, became more of a nuisance. In fact, by 1955, the “swamp” became a “drainage ditch,” and the number of “house lots” increased significantly. Incidentally, the Ko’olau Railway becoming Ko’olau Road is also visible in this map.

DEVELOPMENT

Wetlands and stream courses were bulldozed to make way for homes. A longtime Hau’ula resident described to me how she heard running water under her lanai one day only to realize that a former stream was attempting to rise from the dead. A comparison of kuleana plats derived from the 1900 Hau’ula map with 2017 tax plats available through the City and County of Honolulu illustrated the evolution of land use from sparse agricultural-residential use to denser residential use – wetlands were “reclaimed” because their value was dismissed!

WAIPUHI STREAM (MODIFIED)

How did the stream identity change? Much like other urban streams on O’ahu and throughout the developed world, Waipuhi Stream was conscripted for the role of storm water management. Hardened, engineered, structures replaced rocks, soil, sand, and vegetation to drain the land and quickly direct the water away from property. Using the 1978 Stream Channel Modification in Hawaii example, I walked Waipuhi Stream from Ko’olau Road to the ocean and documented the stream edge conditions on a sunny January day (Timbol).

Within 100’ above Ko’olau Road the stream channel was dry, the banks were revetted, and the bed was either concretelined, lined with rocks, or was unlined. Between Ko’olau Road and the beach, the stream channel was fully lined. At the Ko’olau Road and Kamehameha Highway intersections, there were culverts. The stream channel did not connect to the ocean, and the water in the stream below Ko’olau Road was stagnant. A gauge attached to the Kamehameha Highway culvert indicated that the channel was six feet deep, and the water depth was 3.70 feet. I also noticed that stream access was discouraged by chain link fence along nearly its entire length. Locals recalled a time when swimming and fishing were frequent uses, but water quality has declined, and risk of infection has increased.

SCARS, GHOSTS, + HOMELESS

Who was affected? Hawaii Stream Assessment, now more than 30 years old, identified and assessed the aquatic, riparian, recreational, and cultural resources of Hawai’i’s perennial streams (Department of Land and Natural Resources 1990). While Waipuhi Stream was not assessed, the findings from other nearby streams were telling. Indicator and invasive species inventories paint a gloomy picture of stream health. Human-stream interaction also declined and with it, recreational opportunities and cultural connections deteriorated. I use the terms “scars,” “ghosts,” and “homeless” to describe the current conditions. Among the casualties are taro land, food production, and ecosystem services – social and cultural connection to land and stream, and the community and resiliency so needed today. These ghosts scream for resurrection!

UNDERSTANDING SITE With an understanding of people and place, I aimed to understand the physical site, to define the site and its boundaries as a precursor to design. I undertook site analysis through the lenses Streams, Community, and Resiliency. I also hoped to identify and locate stakeholders, agents, and connections which could catalyze and implement a resurrection.

SITE ANALYSIS: STREAMS

Considering the site from the perspective of water, both fresh and salt, reinforced previous observations and conclusions. The Waipuhi Watershed is short and steep. The shoreline is exposed to both direct Tradewinds wave energy (all-year) and refracted north swell energy (seasonal – winter) (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2010). There are stormwater management challenges as heavy rainfall from climate change-related shock events “piles up” at the base of the Ko’olau Mountains and enters the Waipuhi Stream channel with high pressure and velocity. Debris upstream and in the channel poses particular risk as it could collect in the narrow tributaries and culverts increasing flood likelihood (Sea Grant 2021). Because the stream mouth is blocked by sand, pressure relief is problematic – the flood waters spread beyond the stream channel until the sand is breached. Natural stream edges and riparian plantings that once slowed and absorbed the pressure are among the ghosts, as are the stream fauna, especially the amphidromous species that depend on the connection to the ocean (Sea Grant 2021). Fortunately, there are agencies and initiatives in place that are mitigating these challenges. For example, the Ko’olauloa Water Management Plan prepared for the Honolulu Board of Water Supply recognizes the impacts to aquatic, riparian, recreational, and cultural resources and provides a framework for improving conditions (Group 70 2008). Likewise, the Pacific American Foundation’s Aloha ‘Aina Program and Hawai’i Department of Transportation’s Mālama I Ka Wai Program provide education to promote preservation and stewardship of fresh water resources. These agents and initiatives can be leveraged to advance Waipuhi Stream resurrection.

SITE ANALYSIS: COMMUNITY

Site Analysis: Community. Considering the site from the perspective of community underscored the importance and influence of Hau’ula Community Association (HCA). Hau’ula is primarily residential; the few commercial activities are anchored to Kamehameha Highway, the only connection the community has to the rest of the island – remote and isolated. The residents are multi-generational with ties to both kuleana lands and plantation times. The Hau’ula Civic Center, the physical home of HCA, serves as a hub for social connections. The HCA vision is “to perpetuate ‘Ohana (Family), Kuleana (Responsibility), and Aloha in Hau’ula.” Among their key initiatives are HELP (Hau’ula Emergency Leadership Preparedness), Hau’ula Neighborhood Security Watch, Education, Maunawila Heiau, Ko’olauloa Kūpuna Club, and Community Resilience (2021). There is a sense of vulnerability in the community; members are aware of their remoteness, isolation, and feeble socioeconomic/political influence. The government response to recent environmental and infrastructure-related challenges has left residents disenfranchised; they recognize that helping each other is the best way forward.

SITE ANALYSIS: RESILIENCY

Site Analysis: Resiliency. Considering site from the perspective of resiliency accentuated the risk. Again, the Waipuhi Watershed is short and steep. The shore is exposed. The community is remote and isolated, Kamehameha Highway being a fragile, singular connection to external support. Hau’ula does not have an emergency shelter, and HCA emergency planning research suggest that 85% of homes in Hau’ula would not withstand a category 1 hurricane (2021). In addition to the HCA initiatives associated with emergency preparedness and resiliency, the City and County of Honolulu Office of Climate Change, Sustainability, and Resiliency has published Ola, the O’ahu Resiliency Strategy. One of the actions detailed in this strategy calls for community resilience hubs; Hau’ula’s Ko’olauloa Community Resilience Hub will be the pilot program.

SITE DEFINITION + BOUNDARIES

Having conducted site analysis, I chose to focus on a site bounded by Hau’ula Homestead Road, Ko’olau Road, Hau’ula Elementary School, and Kamehameha Highway. The Waipuhi Stream channel bisects this plot; the northwestern side is the school campus, and the southeastern side is a residential neighborhood. Before continuing to the design phase, I decided to rotate site orientation. By orienting the site to align with the flow of water from the mountains (mauka) to the ocean (makai) I am acknowledging its importance and attempting to restore its value.

ZOOM + ROTATE

RESEARCH DESIGN

SITE + CONTEXT

DESIGN LOGIC

Mini-sites + Stakeholders

Decision Process

Simply put, I envisioned a stream-centric community common to replace the concrete-lined scar disconnected from people and place. This common would resurrect stream, community, and resiliency. However, it was important to me for the design to be practical and to explore how stakeholders would decide which interventions would be best at which location along the stream bank to optimize the community-stream relationship – right intervention, right place!

To achieve this end, I identified the stakeholders and analyzed their properties, which I refer to as “mini-sites.” I developed a decision process, which considers not only individual stakeholder goals but also intervention effects on adjacent properties. Finally, I considered implementation; how would individuals, collectives, and community implement interventions and who would assist? To illustrate this design logic, I will present three examples, one at each scale (individual, collective, and community). I will conclude the design phase by stitching the mini-sites together as a resurrected stream.

Implementation

Resurrection

MINI-SITE ANALYSIS

Combined Site

Mini-sites + Stakeholders

In an earlier depiction, I compared urban-scale to community-scale and introduced the concept of individual, collective, and community “stakeholders.” To identify hypothetical stakeholders and mini-sites, I used the building footprints and tax plats to analyze lineal stream frontage, the distance between buildings and the stream bank (buffer), and the area of the plat defined by the frontage and buffer. To visualize protecting the built environment, I separated the built space from the open space along the stream channel. Finally, to identify opportunities and challenges, I considered the flood risk and topography; the terrain most at risk is in the residential neighborhood, which incidentally also has the least buffer.

Protect Built

Flood Risk

INTERVENTION STRATEGIES

From this analysis, I derived intervention strategies: Sponge, Buffer, Connect, and Activate. “Sponge” refers to seizing open space opportunities on the extreme mauka and makai sides of the plot. These spaces could be retention areas designed to absorb climate change-related shock events mauka and sea level rise chronic stress makai. “Buffer” refers to creating space between the built environment and the stream banks. Restoring riparian plantings would enhance the space’s ability to slow and absorb stormwater. Stakeholders could also consider retaining some of the existing hardened stream edges for added protection. “Connect” refers to re-connecting the stream mouth to the ocean to relieve upstream pressure and to maintain flow. Finally, “activate” refers to re-establishing human access and connection to the stream.

CATALOG OF PHYSICAL INTERVENTIONS Hard Edge Hybrid Edge Soft Edge Meandering Streambed Riparian Edge

Classroom Access Crossing Retention Lo’i

To achieve these strategies, I reviewed stream precedents from around the world. I developed a catalog of physical interventions ranging from the current, hardened edge condition, to restored, natural edges, to activated, outdoor spaces for human-stream interaction.

OTHER INTERVENTIONS

Realizing that not all interventions are compositions of grading, hardscape, and planting, I also listed other types of interventions. This was a major learning point that was reinforced through community outreach and personal experience. When I met with community leaders, they speculated that education campaigns would draw community members’ attention to the importance of stream stewardship and the potential to reactivate the stream banks. Unfortunately, during March 2021, heavy rain and resultant flooding affected more than 100 homes in Ko’olauloa. HCA invited me to attend a community meeting to discuss the flooding problem and potential solutions. Homeowners and community members did not have a consistent view of agency, responsibility, and relationships for stream maintenance and modification. There was also a general consensus that engineering solutions were the preferred (and only) course

of action. The meeting confirmed that an education campaign was appropriate. The campaign could be two-pronged: reaching adults through programs for kids at the school and reaching community members through flyers, meetings, and outreach. I also considered a passive approach – a mural depicting the value of fresh water resources would be visible beyond the community audience. Finally, the Ko’olauloa Flood Follow-up Meeting cemented the concept of “stream teams,” community teams who work together with specific expertise/purposes such as to research, plan, and implement interventions, or to maintain stream channels (e.g., clear debris), or to provide emergency response during shock events (e.g., clear the sand plug blocking the stream mouth).

DECISION PROCESS

While I initially set out to design an intervention decision process and stepwise implementation, I found it difficult to derive a standardized, fits-all approach. Instead, I created graphics depicting general approaches to decision-making and implementation. I did, however, come to two important conclusions: jurisdiction and mediation are central concepts. I knew it was unreasonable to expect that a property owner could modify the stream bank without coordinating with a regulatory agency. I contacted the State of Hawai’i, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Commission on Water Resource Management’s Stream Protection and Management Branch to clarify the proper procedures (2021). I found that there is not a single process; each project is unique. Stakeholders begin by applying for a Stream Channel Alteration Permit (Commission on Water Resource Management 2021). This process could take a number of different turns based on the jurisdictions involved. For example, Hau’ula Elementary School is managed by the State of Hawai’i Department of Education, which has its own facilities and operations office. I realized that for a single project, there could be City and County of Honolulu, State of Hawai’i, and federal (Clean Water Act) jurisdiction.

IMPLEMENTATION

It is not enough to understand stream channel restoration and ecosystem services; there is a requirement to navigate an amorphous, complex bureaucratic process. I envision a community entity that advises stakeholders, holistically considers how individual interventions affect adjacent properties and the stream common as a whole, and guides stakeholders through the bureaucratic process as a go-between. Albeit in much simpler times, I liken this role to the Native Hawaiian community water superintendent (luna wai) who ensured that each irrigated terrace only received its share of fresh water resources as a stream flowed through a cultivated area (Jorgensen 2019). Upstream and downstream plots were granted equal opportunity. The HCA and/or dedicated stream teams could be mediation mechanisms. Additionally, mediation experts could connect stakeholders to outside expertise and resources to optimize intervention performance and reduce cost. For example, the mediator could connect stakeholders to the Kaulanani Urban and Community Forestry Program, which may provide a grant or donation of trees for riparian planting (2021). While I didn’t hone the decision process and implementation to a series of distinct steps, I did apply the general approach to hypothetical examples to select a collection of well-considered interventions. For each example, I will describe the stakeholder and mini-site followed by decision process and implementation considerations. Each example has resurrected mini-site isometric and section view diagrams which callout hardscape and planting, human activation, and landscape performance.

EXAMPLE 1: INDIVIDUAL

Example 1 is an individual stakeholder with a mini-site that has a stream frontage of 174’, a buffer of 36’ between the house and the stream bank, and an area of 5,320 square feet. The mini-site is on the makai side of the broader site bordered downstream by Kamehameha Highway and opposite Hau’ula Elementary School.

Riparian Edge

Access

The property owner has limited resources and would like to self-manage the project to create a stream access. Physical interventions include removing the hard stream edge, establishing a soft stream edge with riparian planting, and installing a path to a platform in the shallow water.

RESURRECTED

The design calls for readily-available, do-it-yourself components: puka lava stone pavers and basalt curbs. The access platform consists of six 4’ x 8’ slabs, reused portions of the stream channel. The access platform is situated at the edge of the baseflow stream condition; it will remain above water in a bankfull condition and is flood adaptable. The obvious jurisdiction would be City and County of Honolulu, Department of Facility Maintenance, but the stream channel alteration permit application could draw interest from State of Hawai’i Department of Transportation (DOT) due to the adjacency of Kamehameha Highway and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers for water quality impacts. Hala, loulu, and aka’akai are the primary plants on the planting list. HCA mediators would coordinate with adjacent stakeholders, jurisdictional agencies, and outside advisors/ enablers.

EXAMPLE 2: COLLECTIVE

Example 2 is a collective stakeholder with a mini-site that has a stream frontage of 278’, a buffer of 22’ between the closest house and the stream bank, and an area of 21,469 square feet. The mini-site is on the mauka side of the broader site bordered by residences and opposite Hau’ula Elementary School.

Lo’i

Retention

Adjacent property owners are pooling resources to recreate a lo’i to serve as a social and cultural reconnection. Physical interventions include removing the hard stream edge, establishing an irrigation channel (‘auwai) and wetfield, and connecting the food production plot to a neighborhood market along Ko’olau Road.

RESURRECTED

The design calls for significant re-grading and would require earth-moving equipment. Again, the obvious jurisdiction is City and County of Honolulu, Department of Facility Maintenance. Kalo would be the primary crop, but fruit trees including ‘ulu, mai’a, niu, etc. would supplement the harvest, provide a windbreak, and offer shade. Again, HCA mediators would coordinate with adjacent stakeholders, jurisdictional agencies, and outside advisors/enablers.

EXAMPLE 3: COMMUNITY

Example 3 is a community stakeholder (Hau’ula Elementary School) with a mini-site that has a stream frontage of 126’, a buffer of 41’ between existing classrooms and the stream bank, and an area of 26,335 square feet. The mini-site is central to the school campus opposite the residential neighborhood.

Hybrid Edge

Classroom

The school would like to connect students and teachers alike to the stream by creating an outdoor classroom. Additionally, the school would like to activate the courtyard as a presentation/performance space with a dual-purpose, earthen amphitheater: seating for spectators is a berm for flood mitigation. Stream edge interventions include retaining the hard stream edge on the residential neighborhood-side of the stream, removing the hard stream edge on the school-side of the stream, establishing a soft stream edge with riparian planting, and installing a path to a platform in the shallow water.

RESURRECTED

The design calls for a classroom platform at the stream edge with built-in seating that leverages existing sidewalks for accessibility. A modular, removable stage will support gathering and performance without adding an impermeable surface. The State of Hawai’i Department of Education (DOE) Facilities and Operations Office would initiate and manage the project; additional jurisdiction includes City and County of Honolulu, Department of Facility Maintenance. Hala, loulu, and aka’akai are the primary riparian plantings while niu, tī, and milo are the primary campus plantings. HCA mediators would connect DOE representatives with community stakeholders and assist with jurisdictional agencies and other outside expertise.

CURRICULUM/LESSON

In addition to the physical interventions, I developed an example lesson, which could be taught in the outdoor classroom as a part of broader environmental studies curriculum. This lesson teaches students about amphidromous stream fauna, animals that hatch in the stream, spend their juvenile months in the nearshore ocean waters as zooplankton, and return to the stream as adults. Teachers could draw attention to how stream modifications have interrupted this cycle.

SCARS, GHOSTS, + HOMELESS

RESURRECTED STREAM, COMMUNITY, RESILIENCY Stitching the three example sites together and revisiting the intervention strategies reveals a resurrected stream with activated edges encouraging human-stream interaction and reviving community and resiliency.

PRINCIPLES + PROCESS

CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS + BROADER APPLICABILITY My capstone project revolved around Streams, Community, and Resiliency. I speculated that restoring modified urban streams to more natural conditions could enhance community and resiliency. Through research, field observation, outreach, and drawing, I arrived at several conclusions. Development/ urbanization pushed freshwater resources to the periphery; once celebrated as life-sustaining, streams are now seen as threats to private property whose sole purpose is to convey stormwater quickly to the ocean. Climate change and sea level rise hazards are real and are increasing in frequency and severity. Cultural reliance on government has replaced cultural reliance on community. By reinvigorating social and cultural connections, we can resurrect community and resiliency. A stream-centric community common could provide these connections while simultaneously enhancing the landscape. Perhaps the best way to introduce this topic and catalyze stream restoration is to organize community stream stewardship similar to beach cleanup efforts. There are significant obstacles to overcome. To resurrect an urban stream requires stakeholder buy-in, understanding jurisdiction, and establishing trusted community mediation and advocacy. To achieve buyin, planners, designers, and community leaders must engage in outreach to educate and increase awareness of stream-related challenges and opportunities. These concepts are broadly applicable, not just on O’ahu, but anywhere streams become urban streams.

100

TO EXPLORE FURTHER

There are unresolved aspects of this project that bear further exploration. More challenging urban stream sites likely require managed retreat. My intervention decision process and implementation require more research and refinement. I see the mixed jurisdiction and bureaucratic permitting process as a complex obstacle, which can only be addressed through communication and cooperation. Finally, while I identified the need to educate the public on the advantages of restoring streams, I wonder how strong the resistance will be.

To be a stream has a variety of meanings that continue to evolve over time to reflect current cultural values. I hope that this project will encourage others to invest in streams, community, and resiliency for common benefit.

101

REFERENCES

Calkins, Meg, and Michael Van Valkenburgh. The Sustainable Sites Handbook. Hoboken: Wiley, 2012. Commission on Water Resource Management. Accessed May 11, 2021. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/cwrm/. Corner, James, and Alison Bick Hirsch. The Landscape Imagination: Collected Essays of James Corner, 1990-2010. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2014. Culture, Arts, DesignLiving Well, Culinary, CultureStyle, and Anna Harmon. “The Lost Waterways of Hawai’i “ FLUX.” FLUX, September 16, 2014. https://fluxhawaii.com/the-lost-waterways-of-hawaii/. “Environmental Studies Center / Landing Page.” / Landing Page. Accessed May 11, 2021. https://www.martinschools.org/esc. Green infrastructure recommended practices for streamside homes. (n.d.). Retrieved May 12, 2021, from https://seagrant. soest.hawaii.edu/green-infrastructure-streamside-guide/ Hawai’i Futures. Accessed May 11, 2021. https://www.hawaii-futures.com/. Hawaii Stream Assessment: a Preliminary Appraisal of Hawaii’s Stream Resources. Honolulu: Dept. of Land and Natural Resources, 1990. “Hawaii’s Water Cycle.” Hawaii’s Water Cycle - Board of Water Supply. Accessed May 11, 2021. https://www. boardofwatersupply.com/water-resources/the-water-cycle. “He’eia Stream Restoration.” Hui o Ko’olaupoko. Accessed May 11, 2021. https://www.huihawaii.org/heeia-streamrestoration.html. Home. (n.d.). Retrieved May 12, 2021, from https://www.hauulacommunityassociation.com/ Jorgensen, Kelsy M.Y. E Ho’i Ka U’i: Perspectives on Placemaking in Hawai’i. Honolulu, HI: School of Architecture, University of Hawai’i at Mānoa, 2019. “Kaulunani Grant Program.” Forestry Programs, April 22, 2021. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/forestry/lap/kaulunani/grants/. Ko’olau Loa Watershed Management Plan. Honolulu, Hawai’i: Group 70 International, Inc., 2008. LID: Low Impact Development: a Design Manual for Urban Areas. Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Community Design Center, 2010. “Maps, Aerial Photographs, and GIS (MAGIS): Home.” Research Guides. Accessed May 11, 2021. https://guides.library. manoa.hawaii.edu/magis. “Native Animals.” Division of Aquatic Resources, August 12, 2019. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/dar/habitat/about-streams/ native-animals/. Orff, Kate. Toward an Urban Ecology. New York, NY: The Monacelli Press, 2016. “Parts of the Lo’i.” Welina Mānoa, November 20, 2012. https://welinamanoa.org/ka-papa-loi-o-kanewai-2/parts-of-the-loi/. Resilience strategy. (n.d.). Retrieved May 12, 2021, from https://resilientoahu.org/resilience-strategy Riley, Ann L. Restoring Neighborhood Streams: Planning, Design, and Construction. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2016. Sea Level Rise Viewer. Accessed May 11, 2021. https://coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/tools/slr.html. Sterling, Elspeth P., and Catherine C. Summers. Sites of Oahu [Rev. ed.]. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press, 1993. Timbol, Amadeo S., and John A. Maciolek. Stream Channel Modification in Hawaii. Columbia, MO: Dept. of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Stream Alteration Project, Natl. Stream Alteration Team, 1978. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. (2010, January). Oahu Coastal Stream Mouth Map Book. Retrieved May 11, 2021, from https://www.poh.usace.army.mil/Portals/10/2017-00198%20Public%20Notice.pdf?ver=2019-02-13-175545-140

102

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

As with anything in life, the most enjoyable and rewarding aspect of this journey was the time spent sharing ideas with the people I met along the way. My family members (especially my wife) tirelessly supported continued foray into a new field, and I will forever appreciate their love and selflessness! Simon Bussiere, Phoebe White, and Karla Sierralta challenged me throughout my project always pushing me to design with depth and to communicate design boldly and effectively. I learned how and when to be provocative, cohesive, and playful. They supported my whims and personal learning objectives fueling my passion with their enthusiasm. Friends, community, and faculty offered aloha and mentorship. I especially benefited from visits to/with Hau’ula/Dotty Kelly-Paddock and State of Hawai’i, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Commission on Water Resource Management’s Stream Protection and Management Branch/Dean Uyeno. These visits broadened and refined my vision, and I am still humbled by everybody’s passion and willingness to assist! It was especially rewarding to be invited to the Hau’ula Community Association’s Ko’olauloa Flood Follow-up Meeting.

103