Remediate and Renew

A campus resource for water, food, and engagement

Team Registration D30

Student Members

Kobee Wade - Bachelor of Landscape Architecture

Winnie VanLandingham - Bachelor of Landscape Architecture

John Ivy - Bachelor of Landscape Architecture

Aaron Schlosser - Bachelor of Landscape Architecture

Landyn Green - Bachelor of Landscape Architecture

Hagen Rushing - Bachelor of Landscape Architecture

Emily Booth - Bachelor of Landscape Architecture

Jessica Shearman - Bachelor of Landscape Architecture

Cada Fischer - Bachelor of Landscape Architecture

Brett Paris - Bachelor of Landscape Architecture

Charles Goodgame - Bachelor of Landscape Architecture

Hunter Waters - Bachelor of Landscape Architecture

Dawson Oakley - Bachelor of Science in Biological Engineering

Noah Geels - Bachelor of Science in Biological Engineering

Celestene Sebag - Bachelor of Science in Biological Engineering

Advisors

Dr. Ahmed Mahmoud - Teaching Assistant Professor, Biological Engineering
Lee Porter - Ozark Greenroofs, Inc.

Becky Roark - Executive Director, Beaver Watershed Alliance

Angela Oxford - Executive Director, Center for Community Engagement

Claire Allison - Assistant Executive Director, Center for Community Engagement

John Scott - Urban Forester, City of Fayetteville

Jay Hunnicutt - Director, University of Arkansas Facilities

Mary Purvis - Fayjones School Development Director

Scott Biehle - Teaching Assistant Professor, Landscape Architecture

UNIVERSITY OF

ARKANSAS

FayJonesSchool
of Architecture + Design


-------
Abstract

Stephen L. Anderson Design Center and Vol Walker Hall house the Fayjones School
of Architecture and Design at the University of Arkansas. While an AIA award-winning
building, it is clear that the site lacks measurable environmental benefits. With multiple
underutilized areas on the green roof, as well as an undeveloped surrounding landscape,
two solutions naturally arise: stormwater mitigation systems and food production
and distribution opportunities. Team Renew proposes a design project that reduces
stormwater runoff and provides ways to feed the community, campus, and city. Team
Renew focuses on three localized projects within the site at-large: the west green roof, the
east green roof, and the south lawn. The plan includes permeable pavers, native plantings,
catchment areas, occupiable planters, and a food forest. Educational opportunities through
signage and site activities are provided so that the user can become more empathetic
to the everyday systems that go on around them. In order to ensure that this project is
designed correctly as well as implemented in the future, Team Renew worked not only with
other colleges on campus, but also with the City of Fayetteville, the campus food bank, and
multiple professionals and experts within the Northwest Arkansas area. In order to create a
more sustainable site that mitigates stormwater runoff and feeds the public, the university
and the community must work together.

Introduction

Team Renew engages two opportunities that arise on this site: stormwater mitigation
and food insecurity. On average, the University of Arkansas receives close to 49 inches of
rainfall every year, with very few places on our site able to intercept any of that water. All of
the surrounding paving is impervious and the plants that currently reside on the green roof
are not maintained and are either dead or in a very bad condition. Additionally, the south
lawn is all turf, providing virtually no opportunities for stormwater infiltration. The majority
of this runoff is directed into out-of-site drainage systems, with its eventual destination
being Beaver Lake north of here.

In Northwest Arkansas alone, there are an estimated 2,951 homeless persons, with 56%
of those people being under the age of 18. To further expound upon this, Arkansas ranks
50th in the country in terms of food insecurity, with 14% of Washington County being food
insecure. College students as well are even more at risk due to generally small budgets and
high expenses.

Our design's three primary objectives are to (1) reduce stormwater runoff through
mitigation efforts such as green roofs, rainwater collection, and infiltration, (2) provide
opportunities for food production and distribution by designing a food forest on the south
lawn and raised beds within the new green roof, and (3) alleviate urban heat island effect by
introducing more extensive vegetation on the roof. Additionally, this green infrastructure
will serve to educate and inform the public about environmental and social issues through
both signage and interaction as well as provide opportunity for community outreach. The
implementation of this project on campus is expected to both reduce food insecurity in the
surrounding community and minimize stormwater runoff on the two buildings that house
the Fayjones School of Architecture and Design.

P a g e 2


-------
Local and Regional Context

The University of Arkansas, and Fayetteville as a whole, reside in a level II ecoregion known
as the "Ozark, Ouachita-Appalachian forests". A unique region in central North America, it
is a place that is not only highly diverse in regards to wildlife, but also home to many old-
growth forests. With peaks as high as 2,500 feet, this mountainous region is especially
vulnerable to erosion. Excessive stormwater runoff, amplified by above average rainfall
and the rapid metropolitan growth, with the usual impervious cover as a result, serves to
exasperate this issue.

As the metropolitan area grows, so wili impervious surfaces. Between 2010 and 2017, the
US Census reported that the Northwest Arkansas region grew at a rate of 16%, ranking as
15th fastest in the United States. With projections showing a 2045 population of almost
1,00,000 residents — double the current population — stormwater remediation efforts
are essential now. Runoff will only increase as growth and development continues, further
eroding hillsides and polluting sources of water

Furthermore, Northwest Arkansas gets all of
their drinking water from Beaver Lake, which
supplies over 20 municipalities and more than
350,000 residents in the outlying area. Erosion
of the surrounding hillsides from stormwater
runoff increases sedimentation in this reservoir
leading to potentially costly fixes down the
road. The university itself resides on one of the
highest points in Fayetteville, which is bisected
by two watersheds: the Beaver Lake Watershed
and the Illinois River Watershed. In even minor
stormwater events, this can lead to flooded
areas and high velocity surface flows, which
contribute to the above issues.

However, there are also social issues at play within the local context. Washington County,
where Fayetteville is located, has approximately 15% of its population in poverty, compared
to the national average of 11%. A 2016 report conducted by the University of Arkansas
found that as many as 42% of students experience either low or very low food security. In
addition, minorities such as African Americans, Hispanics, and Asians are 6% more likely to
be food insecure than white students. 21% of students surveyed reported that they do not
have enough money to buy everyday necessities such as food.

While there is a food pantry that resides on campus, only half of students know it exists,
and only 2% reported having used it, perhaps due to its obscure and hard-to-find location.

Figure 1: an image of Fayetteville during an
intense storm event. Flooding is common.

P a g e 3


-------
Site Analysis

The site at-large, which is encompassed within the red dashing in figure 2, is approximately
three acres. The Fayjones School of Architecture and Design, a largely impervious site,
takes up about 0.6 acres or 25,557 square feet of the total area. As further explained
under the "Design Proposal" section, we propose re-designing three areas in particular
within those three acres. A critical part, and arguably the main part, of our site analysis is
the examination of water runoff. To define this data, we found it best to collaborate with
biological engineering students at the University of Arkansas, who provided us with critical
information.

Figure 2: an image of the site
with corresponding area. The
site at-large is delineated by the
red dashed line, while the site
specifically is represented by the
white overlay.

Our first step was to find the runoff with current site conditions. After delineating the
watershed using contour data from the City of Fayetteville, our outlet point was identified.
We then created a hyetograph for the 2-year 24 hr storm event in Fayetteville, AR using
the SCS curve number method to use as the design storm in our models. CN values were
obtained and matched to corresponding areas within the drainage area surrounding the
architecture building.

Figure 3: an image of the site
with the roof subcatchment, and
outlet point are defined. The site's
watershed is delineated by the
black hatching overlay.

iuscatroenti

P a g e 4


-------
The next step was to model the drainage area in SWMM. This was done first for the existing
conditions using data from the City of Fayetteville collected previously. Any existing green
infrastructure features were also modeled, which includes the green roof on the west end
of the building at present. In order to model this green roof, a soil sample was taken from
the roof and was tested in the lab to obtain valuable information such as porosity and field
capacity. This data was used in the SWMM model, and the final runoff values for existing
conditions were obtained as shown below:



Total

Total

Total

Total

Imperv

Perv

Total

Total

Peak





Precip

Runon

Evap

Infil

Runoff

Runoff

Runoff

Runoff

Runoff

Runoff

Subcatchment

in

in

in

in

in

in

in

10A6 gal

CFS

Coeff

Subcatment

3.89

0.00

0.00

0.94

0.50

2.36

2.87

0.19

2.19

0.738

Roof

3.88

0.00

0.00

0.00

3.73

0.07

3.85

0.06

0.57

0.991

Figure 4: a table showing
existing conditions.

Figure 5: a graph
showing existing
conditions.

Based on current conditions given a 2-year 24 hr storm event, current total runoff equates
to approximately 6.72 inches. Regarding the subcatchment, peak runoff was 2.19 cubic
feet per second (cfs). Lastly, on the roof, peak runoff was approximately 0.57 cubic feet per
second (cfs). This data, in relation to our proposed design and the overall co-benefits, will
be expounded upon in the "Design Benefits" section.

Design Proposal

The design proposal is split into three different areas: the east green roof, the west green
roof, and the south lawn. Each of these designs contribute to the proposal as a whole, and
work towards accomplishing our earlier-stated goals: (1) to reduce stormwater runoff
through mitigation efforts such as green roofs, rainwater collection, and infiltration, and
(2) to provide opportunities for food production and distribution by designing a food forest
on the south lawn and raised beds within the new green roofs.

The east green roof itself is technically subdivided into two roofs: north and south. New
green spaces and stormwater catchment basins will help to reduce runoff and increase
infiltration. This captured stormwater will then be used to irrigate the new plantings as
well as the raised beds that will be installed. These raised beds will serve to produce and
distribute food in conjunction with the proposed design for the south lawn. Study and
social spaces are provided as well, along with an enhanced visual connection between
the Oculus Room and the surrounding exterior. This will help to foster investigation and,
eventually, education.



P a g e 5


-------
Figure 6: a diagram showing site programming.

The design for the west green roof is a further development and refinement of a proposal
from 2019. New areas for seating are provided, along with enhanced lighting and a new
planting scheme altogether. Small trees will be planted not only to provide shade for the
inhabitants, but also to allow for stormwater infiltration along with the newly planted
sedums. Opportunities for rainwater catchment will be installed as well, with the collected
water maintaining a constant feedback loop of "capture, irrigate, infiltrate".

Lastly the south lawn will be re-designed into a functional, garden-esque landscape that
serves a variety of purposes. A proposed plaza outfitted with permeable pavers and native
trees will serve the many malleable needs of a design school: a study space, a classroom,
an opportunity for relaxation or fabrication, or an exhibition space. A food forest on site
will aide in the production and distribution of food to food insecure students on campus,
and on a much larger scale than the east green roof. Stormwater collection containers are
designed elements that will capture any water that falls on the Vol Walker Hall roof. This
water will then be used to irrigate the accompanying food forest and newly-planted trees
and vegetation.

catchment area

Phase I: design intent: occupia-
ble; planters; trees; augment
remediation	

	catchment area

Phase I: design intent: re-design
ex. green roof; new planters with
trees; planting re-design;
augment remediation, storage

Phase I: design intent: occupia-
ble; planters; food; augment
remediation, storage

new landscape; plaza; remedia-
tion/infiltration area; natives +
trees + food forest inspiration;
remediation, infiltration, &
~ storage

Within the entire proposal are countless ways to engage the community. Signage will
be provided where educational opportunities arise, and seating will be strategically
placed close to ecological processes in order to foster investigation. Food production and
distribution will connect the site to the larger campus community, and communal space on
the south lawn will aide in interaction and relationships.

P a g e 6


-------
Design Benefits

Implementation of the design proposals have considerable impacts on the site. Given that
few elements to remediate stormwater on the site exist currently, the following tables
describe the increase in both runoff mitigation and storage capacity for use across the site.

Fay Jones "West" Green Roof



Area

Green Roof

Impervious
Cover

Storage
Capacity





Existinq

6950 sf

1000 sf

5950 sf

Ocf





Proposed

6950 sf

3800 sf

3150 sf

2400 cf









Fay Jones "East" Green Roof



Area

Current
Plantinqs

Impervious
Cover

Storage
Capacity





Existinq

3900 sf

0 sf

3900 sf

Ocf





Proposed

3900 sf

2350 sf

1550 sf

870 cf









Fay Jones South Lawn



Area

Current

Pervious Cover
(turf)

Impervious

Storage
Capacity





Existing

28850 sf

15900 sf

12950

Ocf





Proposed

28850 sf

26750

2100

1900 CF



















Figures 7 and 8: data courtesy oftPA National Stormwater Calculator.

Seen above in figures 7 and 8, there is a drastic increase in storage capacity and a drastic
decrease in impervious cover. In the baseline scenario, close to half of all stormwater on
site is classified as "runoff". With our design proposal, that will reduce to less than an fifth,
with the majority of stormwater being infiltrated.

Next, the biological engineering students modeled the design conditions using the
information provided by the landscape architecture department. This included the new and
improved green roof, rain garden, bioswale, storage, and permeable pavement features.
Values that were not specified in the design were assumed based on EPA SWMM standards
for each LID. The design results are shown below:



Total

Total

Total

Total

Imperv

Perv

Total

Total

Peak







Precip

Runon

Evap

Infil

Runoff

Runoff

Runoff

Runoff

Runoff

Runoff



Subcatchment

in

in

in

in

in

in

in

10A6 gal

CFS

Coeff



Subcatment

3.89

0.00

0.00

0.88

2.67

2.20

2.08

0.14

1.54

0.535



Roof

3.88

0.00

0.00

0.00

3.18

0.06

3.06

0.05

0.48

0.787

Figure 9: a table showing
proposed conditions.

Figure 10: a graph
showing proposed
conditions.

P a g e 7


-------
Based on the values shown in each graph from SWMM, the total runoff from a 2-yr 24 hour
storm was reduced from 6.72 inches to 5.14 inches (~ 23.5% decrease). The peak runoff on
the ground sub catchment was reduced from 2.19 cfs to 1.54 cfs (~ 29.7% decrease) and
the peak runoff on the roof was reduced from 0.57 cfs to 0.48 cfs (~ 15.8% decrease).

¦ Stormwater ¦ Air Quality
~ C02	¦ Total



Breakdown of tree benefits

Figure 11: overall cost benefits of planted
trees, provided by iTree.

"Rem" stands for removal, which is your tree absorbing or
intercepting pollutants. "Avd" stands for avoided, which is your
tree lessening the need for creation of these pollutants in the
first place by reducing energy production needs.

Figure 12: overall air quality benefits of
planted trees, provided by iTree.

In figure 12, "Rem" stands for
removal, which is the tree absorbing
or intercepting pollutants. "Avd"
stands for avoided, which is the tree
lessening the need for creation of these
pollutants in the first place by reducing
energy production needs.

Figure 13: overall C02 benefits of
planted trees, provided by iTree.

The three graphs provided above, meant to be considered collectively with the data
previously listed, describe the different benefits of the proposed tree plantings. This can be
broken down into three categories: cost, air quality, and CC>2. Those are listed below.

1.	Figure 8: over the course of the next 50 years, the proposed trees will provide a
total of $11,416 worth of overall benefits.

2.	Figure 9: over the course of the next 50 years, the proposed trees will remove
(Rem) an estimated 1,213 pounds of pollutants.

3.	Figure 10: over the course of the next 50 years, the proposed trees will reudce
atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) by a total amount of 306,649 pounds.

Not expounded upon in a graph, but also provided by iTree, is the data that suggests that
over the course of the next 50 years, the proposed trees will intercept a total of 2,214,946
gallons of rainfall and help avoid 181,765 gallons of stormwater runoff.

P a g e 8


-------
Partnerships

Recognizing that this is a collaborative process that requires input from multiple disciplines
across the university and Northwest Arkansas, we identified strategic organizations to aide
the team during the design process.

The Beaver Watershed Alliance

works to proactively protect, enhance, and sustain the high water quality of
Beaver Lake and its tributaries through voluntary best management practice
implementation, outreach and education, and scientific evaluation. Tributaries of
Beaver Lake such as the West, Middle, and East Forks of the White River, Richland
Creek, and War Eagle Creek offer a diverse and stunning variety of aesthetic
beauty, wildlife, and cultural heritage as they flow along their course to Beaver
Lake. From Harrison, Arkansas to Westville, Oklahoma, over 420,000 people
rely on Beaver Lake for drinking water, industry, and recreational activities such
as boating, skiing, birding, and swimming. BWA provides strategic, valued, and
meaningful programing to provide watershed landowners and environmental
stewards with the resources they need to help protect the water quality of Beaver
Lake and its tributaries. Planting native trees, shrubs, grasses, and wildflowers
at stream restoration sites and upland areas of the watershed helps teach
participants about the issues affecting Beaver Lake and gets them involved in
actively stewarding the precious resource.

The Center for Community Engagement is a crucial collaborator on the Rainworks 2021
design proposal. Due to the fact that a large proponent of our proposed design is the
alleviation of food insecurity at the University, it is of the utmost importance that we obtain
direction from those most familiar with this issue. Not only does the CCE run the Jane B.
Gearhart Full Circle Food Pantry on campus, they also provide students with opportunities
for community service
and public outreach. They
were critical in helping us
determine exactly how
to get food distributed to
those who need it most.

The University's
Cooperative Extension
Service and Campus
Planning department were
also very important in the

design process. The CES helped the design team to determine which best management
practices were the most beneficial to implement regarding agriculture, and the Campus
Planning department provided important contextual information that helped determine
specific design moves.

COMMUNITY
RECOURSES

INPUT

OUTPUT

FOOD PANTRY

INPUT

UNIVERSITY

OUTPUT

CAMPUS	CAMPUS

SATELLITE PANTRY SATELLITE PANTRY

I	I	

CAMPUS	CAMPUS

SATELLITE PANTRY SATELLITE PANTRY

	I	I

P a g e 9


-------
Professionals within the Northwest Arkansas area provided assistance as well. Lee Porter,
owner of Ozark Greenroofs assisted in determining a plant palette and appropriate
substrate for the west greenroof and John Scott, Fayetteville's urban forester, aided in
providing a list of appropriate Arkansas native trees for the site.

Public Outreach and Education

A critical part of our design proposal is the involvement and education of the surrounding
community. A pressing issue plaguing the general public is a lack of education regarding
water processes. Most individuals simply do not know what stormwater runoff is or the
strategies that can be implemented to help solve it. Our design will help to alleviate that
issue. By implementing design features that combat stormwater runoff on a critical,
critical, and highly visible site on campus, the mere proximity of the public will help to instill
curiosity and intrigue. However, by also providing necessary literature that educates the
community as to what exactly
is taking place, they will begin
to not only learn, but also be
more empathetic and involved in
the environment's future. Both
the Beaver Watershed Alliance
and the University's Center for
Community Engagement will
be important partners in these
endeavors.

Borrowing from the
permacultural construct of food
forests, the design implemented
on the south lawn will also be a

crux of public outreach. The outcome here tends to speak for itself, but the distribution of
locally grown food will first and foremost foster intimate community outreach and crucial
opportunities for relationship. Not only will this provide nutrition for those who are food
insecure on campus, but it will also allow interaction between individuals of different races,
ethnicities, and socioeconomic status. Secondly, this food forest will provide instruction to
those who desire to learn how to grow their own food through classes held on site.

Project Phasing

The project lends itself easily to considering either two or three phases. The first option —
two phases—simply splits the project with a first phase completing the rooftop work
and the second phase completing the at grade work. Given that the rooftop project is, in
essence, two discreet areas of the School roof, each section of the roof could be phased in
individually, with the at-grade work in a third phase.

Provided that the Fay Jones School of Architecture and Design is fully functioning nine
months of the year, and partially occupied the other three months, preference and priority


-------
are given to the phasing scheme the causes the least disruption to the life of the School.
A two-phase scheme has been selected, with large portions of the installation occurring
during the warmer months, disrupting the academic semester schedule the least.



January-May

June-August

September-December

CM

CM

f—•»



Identify and assemble project

Design phase

CM



team/stakeholders
Site assessments conducted
Funding partners and models
identified (installation & mainte-
nance)

Team/stakeholder meet-
ings ongoing
Commence development
of School support teams
(student-oriented)
Refined cost estimation
Funding in progress (in-
stallation & maintenance)



Design/documentation

Phase I installation (green roofs)

Phase II preparation con-



phase

commences

tinues

2023

Team/stakeholder meet-

Site preparation, demolition

Planting continued for

ings ongoing

mid-May

later fall harvests ongoing,

Commence development

Fabrication of site elements

with studentsupport and



of School support teams

completed

connections to campus



(student-oriented)

Installation June-August

food pantry established



Plant and other materials

Maintenance schedule begins

Additional market days



acquisition started

Planting for first fall harvest

held



Final cost estimate

completed, with student support

Preparations for winter



Commitments to funding

and connections to campus food

production in place



in place (installation &

pantry established





maintenance)

Potential first market days held
Phase II preparation commences





Phase II installation

Phase II installation (south lawn)

Phase II installation (south

CN
o

(south lawn) commences

ongoing

lawn) completed

CM

(spring)

Maintenance protocols and re-

Maintenance regime for



Maintenance protocols

sources developed and in place

Phase II South Lawn imple-



and resources developed

Rooftop food production enters

mented



and in place

its third season

Events in plaza commence



Rooftop food production

Event planning for new south

Rooftop food production



enters its second season

lawn plaza continues and final-

enters its fourth season



Event planning for new

ized for Academic Year 24-25





south lawn plaza com-







mences





Construction Estimate and Projected Maintenance Costs

Cost estimations are provided by discreet site locations, as well as phase, and are based
upon design development drawings, and reflect the precision allowed by estimating at this
point of documentation. Standard industry conventions are used in calculating material
quantities and estimating value-added costs such as fabrication or manufactured custom
design elements.

Page 10


-------
Phase I: West Green Roof

Item/Description

Unit Quantity

Unit Cost/Multiplier

Total

Growing medium

21 yds

$75.00

$1,575.00

Material: steel; benches
and planters

2600 sf

$3.00 sf

$7800.00

Fabrication: steel; bench-
es and planters

2600 sf

3

$23,400.00

Plumbing reconfigura-
tion and install



time/material
allow

$5,000.00

Moss Green Wall

[need sf]

time/material
allow

$10,000.00

Vegetated Green Wall

[need sf]

time/material
allow

$5,000.00

Green Wall; neon logo

1

allow

$2,500.00

12' specimen trees,
boxed or b&b

7

$350.00

$2,450.00

Herbaceous planting

1,650 sf

$2.50

$4,125.00

Supplemental irrigation
system (drip)

1,650 sf

$1.75

$2,887.50

Mulch, if needed

1,650 sf

$.50

$825.00

Lighting design, materi-
als, installation

1

allow

$5,000.00

10% contingency





$7,191.25

Total:





$79,103.75

Phase I: East Green Roof

Item/Description

Unit Quantity

Unit Cost/Multiplier

Total

Growing medium

9 yds

$75.00

$675.00

Material: steel; benches
and planters

2640 sf

$3.00 sf

$7,920.00

Fabrication: steel; bench-
es and planters

2640 sf

3

$23,760.00

Plumbing reconfigura-
tion and install

1

time/material
allow

$5,000.00

Pervious paving system

1449 sf

$20.00 sf

$28,980.00

12' specimen trees,
boxed or b&b

7

$350.00

$2,450.00

Herbaceous planting

657 sf

$2.50

$1,642.50

Supplemental irrigation
system (drip)

657 sf

$1.75

$1,149.75

Mulch, if needed

657 sf

$.50

$328.00

Lighting design, materi-
als, installation

1

allow

$5,000.00

Page 11


-------
Item/Description

Unit Quantity

Unit Cost/Multiplier

Total

10% contingency





$7,825.58

Total:





$86,081.33



Phase I Total:



$165,185.08

Phase II: South Lawn Plaza

Item/Description

Unit Quantity

Unit Cost/Multiplier

Total

Demolition
and reqradinq

15,500 sf

$.50

$7,750.00

Pervious paving system

4700 sf

$20,00

$90,000.00

Material: steel; cisterns

3000 sf

$3.00

$9,000.00

Fabrication: steel; cisterns

3000 sf

3

$27,000.00

Material: steel; benches,
planters

2700sf

$3.00

$8,100.00

Fabrication: steel; bench-
es, planters

2700sf

3

$24,300

Rain garden boardwalk

1

allow

$10,000.00

Plumbing reconfiguration
and installation

1

allow

$5,000.00

12' specimen trees, boxed
or b&b

20

$350.00

$7,000.00

Herbaceous planting

11,300 sf

$2.50

$29,250.00

Replacement sod

900 sf

$.60

$540.00

Mulch

12,800 sf

$.50

$6,400.00

Lighting design, material,
installation

1

allow

$5,000.00

10% contingency





$23,564.00

Total:





$259,204.00



Phase I Total:



$165,185.08



Phase II Total:



$259,204.00



Project Total:



$424,389.08

Page 12


-------
Funding

Funding opportunities are identified and are closely related to and frequently flow through
our projects partners (see "Partners" above). In addition, two opportunities exist within
the Fayjones School of Architecture and Design itself: potential philanthropic funding
to the school, dedicated to the project or portions thereof, and student-funded gifts or
memorials, designating particular design elements as "class gifts." Major opportunities,
however, exist with our primary partners, The Beaver Lake Watershed Alliance and the
University of Arkansas's Center for Community Engagement.

As a collaborative partner with the Beaver Watershed Alliance (BWA), avenues are opened
to tap into federal Section 319 funding of the federal Water Pollution Control Act. This
funding would not only provide means to construct low impact development elements of
the design, but also meaningful work with the BWA in areas of stormwater education. BWA
frequently works with the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality, Water Quality
Division, allowing access to resources at the state level. Conversation with the Executive
Director of the BWA have suggested that the BWA and the Team could investigate
opportunities under the American Recovery Act as well.

The partnership with the Center for Community Engagement is equally as engaging.
The Center, which is completely grant-funded supporting a robust set of programming
(including the Jean B. Gearhart Full Circle Food Pantry), has an extensive donor base from
which to draw. In addition, the Center works extensively with The Wal-Mart Foundation's
NWA Gives program and Tyson Food foundations and corporate giving. While not a specific
funding source, the Center also works with Americorps/Vista project.

The project also provides opportunities for educational and living expense funding for
students. Specific funds for student assistantships to provide care and upkeep for the
project can be established. Through the School's network of alumni and identification of
landscape professionals, practitioners, and suppliers, sponsored funding can be created to
support a number of students.

Page 13


-------
References

Arkansas Community Foundation, (n.d.). Food Insecurity. Aspire Arkansas. Retrieved
December 10, 2021, from https://www.aspirearkansas.org/families/food-
insecurity.

Beaver Watershed Alliance. (2021, November 12). Regulatory compliance. Beaver Water
District. Retrieved December 10, 2021, from https://www.bwdh2o.org/regulatory-
compliance/.

City of Fayetteville. (2014). Drainage Criteria Manual. Fayetteville.

Community and Family Institute, (n.d.). Fulbright College of Arts & Sciences.

University of Arkansas. Retrieved December 10, 2021, from https://fulbright.uark.
edu/departments/sociology/research-centers/community-family-institute/index.
php.

Division of Student Affairs Center for Community engagement, (n.d.). Retrieved
December 10, 2021, from https://service.uark.edu/.

Environmental Protection Agency, (n.d.). National Stormwater Calculator. EPA. Retrieved
December 10, 2021, from https://www.epa.gov/water-research/national-
stormwater-calculator.

Ethridge, M. (2009). PDF. Columbia, MO; United States Geological Survey.

i-Tree. (n.d.). Learn about l-tree. i-Tree. Retrieved December 10, 2021, from https://www.
itreetools.org/.

Lisnic, R. (2016). (rep.). Student Food Insecurity Survey Report (pp. 6-8). Fayetteville,
AR: University of Arkansas.

NOAA's National Weather Service. (2021, March 23). Washington County AR climate.
National Weather Service. Retrieved December 10, 2021, from https://www.
weather.gov/tsa/climo_washington.

Page 14


-------