Procedures for developing a model forplanning water-based linear parks along

stream channels in semiarid urban regions.

Item Type Thesis-Reproduction (electronic); text

Authors Johnson, Robert Chester, 1944-

Publisher The University of Arizona.

Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this materialis made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona.Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such aspublic display or performance) of protected items is prohibitedexcept with permission of the author.

Download date 08/05/2021 11:57:12

Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/191584

PROCEDURES FOR DEVELOPING A MODEL FOR PLANNING

WATER-BASED LINEAR PARKS ALONG STREAM

CHANNELS IN SEMIARID URBAN REGIONS

by

Robert Chester Johnson

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the

DEPARTMENT OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT

In Partial Fulfillment of the RequirementsFor the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

In the Graduate College

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

1973

STATEMENT BY AUTHOR

This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of re-

quirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is

deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers

under rules of the Library.

Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special

permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made.

Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of

this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the

major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his judg-

ment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholar-

ship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained

from the author.

APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR

This thesis has been approved on the date shown below:

Associate P ofessor of Watershed Management

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Gratitude is expressed to the following: Drs. Stanley K.

Brickler, Kenneth J. DeCook, Henry C. Hightower, and Prof. Sol D.

Resnick for constructive counseling; Mr. Douglas K. Larson and

Alison Hable for mapping assistance; and my wife Cindy for personal

encouragement.

This research was supported by The University of Arizona

Water Resources Research Center under the United States Department

of Interior, Office of Water Resources Research, Project No. B-023-

ARIZ pursuant to the Water Resources Research Act of 1964, P.L. 88-

379.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS viii

LIST OF TABLES ix

ABSTRACT

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION

Purpose of the Study 2

Description of the Study Area 3

Modeling Considerations 3

Sources of Data 7

2 STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 8

Goals and Objectives for a Linear Park Model . . 8

Anklam Linear Park System 9

3 NATURAL RESOURCE SETTING 11

Climate 11Precipitation Patterns 11Temperature Patterns 12

Geology 12

Geologic Base 13Structural Criteria 13

Slope 13Physiography 16Classification of Slopes 16

Soils 18Identification of Soils 18Compressive Strength and Stability 18Soil Erosion Susceptibility 20

Hydrology 23Precipitation 23Storm Runoff Characteristics 24Identification of Recharge Aquifers 28Flood Risk Zones 29

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS--Continued

Page

Vegetation 30Vegetative Inventory 30Vegetative Carrying Capacity 31

Wildlife 31Wildlife Inventory 32Wildlife Habitat 32Impact of Park System on Wildlife 32

Summary 33

4 URBAN SETTING 34

Population 34Current Population Patterns 34Projected Population Patterns 34

Zoning 35Zoning Classifications 35

Ownership 37Public Lands 37Private Lands 39

Transportation 39Current Traffic Routes 39Projected Traffic Routes 41Analysis of Traffic Patterns 41

Urban Parks 42Inventory of Existing Parks 42Inventory of Projected Parks 44

Coordination of Recreation Plans 44Review of Plans for the Tucson Area 45Review of Regional Plans 46

Summary 46

5 LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE SETTING 47

Legal Constraints 47Appropriation of Storm Runoff 48Tort Liability 51

Administrative Constraints in Land Acquisition . 52The Police Power 52The Fee Simple 53Easements 53The Tax Approach 54Trades 54Donations 54Land Acquisition for Anklam Wash 54

Summary 55

v i

TABLE OF CONTENTS--Continued

6 ECONOMIC SETTING

Demand and Supply Factors of Demand Factors of Supply

Cost-Benefit Analysis Cost Factors

Page

56

5657585858

Benefits 60Source of Funds for Park Development 61

Local Funding 61State Funding 61Federal Funding 62

Summary 64

7 SITE DESIGN 66

Site Selection 66Design of the Flood Control System 67

Diversion Dams 67Diversion Channels 68Water Filtration and Cleansing Systems • • • 68Storage Basin 69

- Return Canal 71Design of a Recreation System 71

Linear Parks 71Intensive Use Parks 73Mountain Parks 73Regional Connector System 74

Summary 74

8 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 77

Federal Requirement 77Format of Analysis 78

Anklam Watershed 79

9 IMPLEMENTATION 80

Capital Improvement Budgeting 80Approval of Budget 81Site Acquisition and Development 81

Site Acquisition 81Site Development 81

Special Appropriations 82Summary 82

vi i

TABLE OF CONTENTS--Continued

Page

10 CONCLUSIONS 83

Summary 83Statement of Goals and Objectives 84Natural Resource Setting 84Urban Setting 85Legal and Administrative Setting 85Economic Setting 86Site Selection and Design 86Environmental Impact Analysis 87Implementation 87

Conclusions 88Recommendations 89

APPENDIX A: HYDROLOGICAL DATA SUMMARY FOR ANKLAM WASH, TUCSON,ARIZONA 1972 90

APPENDIX B: A SELECTED REVIEW OF RECREATION PLANS 94

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 96

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure

1. Map showing Anklam Watershed in relation to

Page

Tucson, Arizona 4

2. Topographic map of Anklam Watershed, Tucson,Mountains, Arizona 5

3. Diagram suggesting procedures for developinga water-based linear park planning model 6

4. Map of the proposed Anklam Linear Park System • • • • 10

5. Geologic map of Anklam Watershed 14

6. Percent slope of land forms within Anklam Watershed . 17

7. Map of assumed soil patterns within Anklam Watershed . 19

8. Schematic diagram showing reduction of peak flowsvia a reservoir routing system 27

9. Zoning map of Anklam Watershed 36

10. Land ownership map for Anklam Watershed 38

11. Map of existing and projected transportationroutes within Anklam Watershed 40

12. Map of proposed and existing parks withinAnklam Watershed 43

13. Schematic diagram of a reservoir routing system . . 70

14. Map of the proposed linear park system forAnklam Watershed 72

15. Map showing Anklam Wash tied to public and quasi-public lands via stream channels in the Tucsonurban region 75

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table

Page

1. Suitability of geologic foundation conditions tosupport intensive urban development

15

2. Compressive strength and stability of soilscompared to various foundation conditions 21

3. Soil erosion susceptibility of slope and soiltypes 22

ix

ABSTRACT

Development of procedures for a water-based linear park plan-

ning model has been undertaken to encourage recreation planners to use

stream channels and flood plains within small watersheds in semiarid

urban regions for recreation and flood control purposes. Dry stream

channels should be utilized as the core of a linear park system which

would include horse, bicycle, and hiking trails; picnic and play areas;

natural vistas and desert buffer strips; lakes; and also be part of a

larger continuous metropolitan recreation system. Localized flood

damage may also be reduced within small watersheds by diverting por-

tions of storm runoff from main washes into off-channel basins. Water

impounded in these basins may be retained for recreational purposes or

released after peak flow into the main channel.

Planning procedures outlined include: a statement of goals

and objectives, an inventory of natural resources, an analysis of

urban land use patterns, consideration of legal and administrative

constraints, economic feasibility, examination of criteria for site

selection and design, environmental impact analysis, and review of

procedures for plan implementation.

Anklam Watershed, located on the eastern slope of the Tucson

Mountains, Arizona, has been utilized as the model area for the con-

ceptual development of a linear park system.

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

In the twentieth century, man has been discovering, tooslowly, that an utterly vanquished natural environment is notwhat he wanted at all; and that in killing it, he has killeda part of himself. Thus, a new challenge of the land hasemerged. So far this new challenge has been met with somesuccess in two settings: many remaining wilderness areas areprotected by our great national park system, and in our agri-cultural areas new conservation techniques have brought someof the frunoutl land back into productivity. But there is athird setting where the challenge has not been met--in ourburgeoning metropolitan areas (Little 1968, p. x).

Less than 50 years ago 'host Americans lived in rural surround-

ings and outdoor recreation was a natural and unremarkable part of

daily life" (Perloff and Wingo 1962, p. 82). However, in recent years

unprecedented growth has occurred in the metropolitan regions of the

United States. Urbanization, along with more leisure time and im-

proved transportation systems, has resulted in a greater demand for

recreational facilities.

Sources of urban open space that have often been overlooked in

the development of new recreation sites are stream channels and adja-

cent flood plains. This land is desirable for parks because competi-

tion for use is generally limited. Furthermore, stream channels may

bisect entire urban regions and could be used as a means to connect and

integrate an urban outdoor recreation system.

Just as urbanization has led to a greater need for recreational

facilities, it has also resulted in an increased volume of storm runoff.

1

2

In the semiarid regions of the southwestern United States, DeCook

(1970, p. 49) has estimated that storm runoff volume may increase two

to three times following the urbanization of small desert watersheds.

This runoff often transforms dry stream channels into raging torrents

and commonly results in localized flooding. Under proper flood con-

trol management, the urban runoff could be controlled, and the flooding

greatly reduced. Portions of the storm runoff could also be used for

recreational and ground-water recharge purposes.

An interdisciplinary study team composed of faculty members and

graduate students at The University of Arizona is currently developing

a water management model which combines flood control techniques with

recreational water uses. The study team proposes to minimize flood

damage by diverting portions of storm runoff into off-channel basins.

A consideration of the study team is that a portion of the water trapped

in these basins be retained for recreational purposes.

Based on the water management model criteria a water-based

recreation planning model has been developed herein.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to develop procedures for imple-

mentation of a water-based recreation planning model for small water-

sheds within semiarid urban regions.

Two general assumptions made in the development of the recre-

ation model are that: (1) recreational development represents the best

use of most land which is immediately adjacent to stream channels in

urban areas, and (2) under proper flood control management, urban

3

runoff can be controlled and used for outdoor recreational purposes and

as a supplement for ground-water recharge.

Description of the Study Area

Anklam Watershed, selected as the model area for the recreation

analysis, is located on the eastern slope of the Tucson Mountains,

Tucson, Arizona (see Figures 1 and 2). The Watershed encompasses an

undeveloped area of approximately three and one-half square miles and

contains varied physiographic features including mountains, low hills

with gentle slopes, and a small section of the Santa Cruz River flood

plain. The saguaro-paloverde biotic community of the Lower Sonoran

Desert abounds within the Watershed.

Anklam Watershed was selected for the study for several

reasons: (1) its small areal size is conducive to the small flood con-

trol system being designed by the multi-disciplinary study team; (2)

the Watershed is located in an area of varied land use patterns; and

(3) the physiographic base and land use patterns vary significantly

from those patterns found within other small watersheds currently be-

ing examined by the urban hydrology study team in the Tucson area.

Modeling Considerations

The water-based recreation model has been designed to examine

major considerations encountered in the development of linear parks

along stream channels in semiarid urban regions (see Figure 3). The

basic elements of the plan are:

Figure 1. Map showing Anklam Watershed in relation to Tucson,Arizona.

4

5

iSITE

SELECTION

AND

DESIGN

I

ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT

ANALYSIS

URBAN

SETTING

i

LEGALAND

ADMINISTRATIVE

SETTING

ECONOMIC

SETTING

I

1 NATURAL

RESOURCE

SETTING

I

GOALS

AND

OBJECTIVES

CONSIDERATIONS

FOR

IMPLEMENTATION

6

Figure 3. Diagram suggesting procedures for developing a water-based

linear park planning model.

7

1. A statement of goals and objectives.

2. An analysis of the natural resource setting to determine

the suitability of the resource base to support a linear park system.

3. An examination of the urban setting to insure that a

linear park system harmonizes with land use patterns.

4. An examination of the legal and administrative setting to

assess water rights, tort liability, and methods of acquiring land

for a linear park system.

5. An examination of the economic setting which includes de-

mand and supply, costs versus benefits, and sources of funds to develop

a linear park system.

6. A site design for the park system.

7. An environmental impact analysis to define the impact

that a linear park system would have on the natural environment.

8. Considerations for implementation of the plan whereby a

strategy is developed for adoption of a proposed water-based linear

park system.

Sources of Data

Data used in the development of the linear park model have been

gathered from a number of sources. These sources include a review of

literature; interviews with Tucson city planners, Pima County planners,

and recreation consultants; on-site evaluation of Anklam Watershed;

construction and installation of water-measuring equipment within Ank-

lam Watershed; and consultation with members of the multi-disciplinary

urban hydrology study team.

CHAPTER 2

STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Goals and objectives are an essential part of the planning

process, as they define the purpose and scope of a plan, and serve as

a basis upon which operating procedures are structured and outlined.

Goodman (1968, P. 332) states that goals (1) provide an essential and

uncluttered statement of policy; (2) permit and encourage intimate in-

volvement by the planner, decision maker, and community in a plan,

(3) serve as a coordinating device, (i+) serve as an element of stabil-

ity and consistency in the implementation of a plan, and (5) serve as

a guide to legislative action.

A statement of goals and objectives also serves as the basic

foundation by which design proposals are drawn. Hence, the design and

planning processes of a plan should be a reasonably accurate expres-

sion of a set of basic goals and objectives.

Goals and Objectives for a Linear Park Model

The goal of the water-based linear park planning model is to

outline procedures that a recreation planner should follow in develop-

ing a flood control and linear park system along stream channels within

small watersheds in semiarid urban regions. The objectives of the

planning model are: (1) to use stream channels and flood plains as the

core of a linear park system, (2) to use the buffer zones within the

8

9

linear parks to house small storm runoff diversion and flood control

devices, and (3) to utilize stream channels within small urban water-

sheds as a connector to a larger metropolitan trail and park system.

Anklam Linear Park System

Major stream channels within Anklam Watershed have been used

as a setting for the model, and to facilitate understanding in pro-

cedural development of a linear park model, Anklam Wash (also known as

El Rio) and its tributaries will be utilized as the core of conceptual

linear park recreation system (see Figure 4).

As outlined in the general planning model (Figure 3) the next

step in the development of a linear park system is the examination of

the natural resource setting.

1 0

CHAPTER 3

NATURAL RESOURCE SETTING

The suitability of the land to support a water-based linear

park system is determined by an analysis of the natural resource base.

Factors to be examined include climate, geology, soils, slope, hydrol-

ogy, and native vegetation and wildlife.

Climate

Annual precipitation and temperature patterns determine the

number of days available for outdoor recreational activities.

Precipitation Patterns

Anklam Watershed is in an area which experiences two rainy

seasons. The greatest monthly amounts of rainfall occur during the

months of July and August. These summer storms are caused by the mi-

gration of the Bermuda High in which moist tropical air from the Gulf

of Mexico is blown into the area. Summer storms are usually intense,

short in duration, and local in nature.

Winter precipitation, which occurs from December through Febru-

ary, is caused by frontal storms in the zone of prevailing Westerlies,

blowing cold Polar and Arctic air masses into the region. The winter

storms are cyclonic in nature and can be characterized by general

cloudiness and gentle precipitation which is scattered over wide areas

of land. Snow rarely falls below the 3500 foot elevation.

11

12

Summer storms in the Tucson area account for 28 days of precip-

itation and winter storms average 22 days per year (U.S. Weather Bureau

1973). These two storm seasons averaged 50 days of precipitation with

0.01 inches or more per year in Tucson, Arizona.

By examining local precipitation patterns it can be assumed

that outdoor recreation activities within Anklam Watershed may only be

briefly interrupted during summer storms. However, outdoor recreational

activities may be curtailed for a day or more during winter storms.

Temperature Patterns

Temperature patterns should also be considered in planning and

developing outdoor recreation facilities since temperature extremes may

curtail recreational activities. As an example, the mean July tempera-

ture for Tucson is 86.30

F, and mid-day temperatures may reach 105 °F.0

In contrast the January mean for Tucson is 49.8F, with mid-day highs

0 0occasionally reaching no more than 35 to 40 F.

Based on precipitation and temperature patterns in Tucson, the

average number of days available for outdoor recreation activities in

Anklam Watershed is estimated to be 340 days per year.

Geology

The strength and compressibility of the geologic strata should

be examined in order to identify possible constraints that may be en-

countered in the construction of small dams and picnic ramadas within

the linear park system.

13

Geologic Base

Anklam Watershed is divided into two major geologic zones

(Brown 1939). The structure of the upper two-thirds of the Watershed

is volcanic in origin and composed of andesites, rhyolites, and tuffs.

The lower Watershed is sedimentary in nature and consists primarily of

alluvial deposits (see Figure 5). A small north-south trending fault

extends into a small portion of the northeastern section of the Water-

shed.

Structural Criteria

The following table by McHarg (1971, p. 108) indicates the

suitability of the geologic base to support structures (see Table 1).

Using McHargis criteria, as stated above, crystalline rocks

such as andesites and rhyolites serve as excellent structural bases

for heavy structures including small dams and recreation ramadas. Un-

consolidated sands, gravels, and clays found in much of the remainder

of the Watershed are of adequate stability to support intensive devel-

opment. Only land on or adjacent to the north-south trending fault

within Anklam Watershed is of sufficiently low standards that struc-

tural development would be inadvisable.

Slope

Percent slope of local physiographic features should be anal-

yzed to determine what impact development of a linear park system would

have on erosion susceptibility. Percent slope may also limit the type

of recreation facilities that can be reasonably developed within an

area.

14

oo

•n••n

Table I. Suitability of geologic foundation conditions to supportintensive urban development,

Foundation Geologicconditions formations

Good Crystalline rock (such as Ande-site and Rhyolite)

Adequateto

marginal

Poor

Shale, well packed and unconsoli-dated sediments

Fault zonesStream channelsFlood plains

15

16

Physiography

Anklam Watershed is located on the eastern slopes of the Tucson

Mountains. Mountains within the upper Watershed rise to an elevation

of 3300 feet, low rounded hills are found in most of the interior, and

a large flood plain, which lies just under 2400 feet in elevation, is

found at the lower end of the Watershed (U. S. Dept. of Interior 1968).

Classification of Slopes

Slope of topographic features within Anklam Watershed have been

divided into three categories of recommended use development.1 These

are: 0 to 7 percent, ideal for intensive use recreational development;

8 to 15 percent, adequate to very marginal for intensive use; and 16

percent and greater which is inadequate for intensive recreational use

(see Figure 6).

The 0 to 7 percent slopes, present in most of the lower and

middle sections of Anklam Watershed, are ideal for intensive use recre-

ational development. Hills within the interior of Anklam Watershed

which have slopes of 8 to 15 percent are not conducive to large in-

tensive recreation sites but are suitable for scattered picnic sites

and walking trails. The mountains within Anklam Watershed have slopes

varying from 16 to 35 percent. Slopes of 16 percent and greater are

subject to severe erosion. The erosion may be accentuated by cut and

fill, soil compaction, and construction associated with the development

1. These categories have been developed by compiling an aver-

age between Soil Conservation Service (Highsmith, Jensen, and Rudd

1962, pp. 40-45) and McHarg's (1971, p. 109) land use development

criteria.

17

18

of the recreation facilities. Hence, although some walking trails

could be incorporated into these areas, it is suggested that the moun-

tainous areas generally be left in their natural state.

Soils

Compressive strength, stability, and erosion susceptibility of

the soil determine the constraints encountered in the construction of a

flood control system and outdoor recreation facilities.

Identification of Soils

Anklam Watershed has not been completely mapped by the Soil

Conservation Service. It is assumed, however, that the unmapped soils

within Anklam Watershed are similar to mapped soils in regions adjacent

to the Watershed (see Figure 7).

The soil patterns within Anklam Watershed consist of rough,

broken, and stony material in the mountains, Final gravelly sandy loam

in the midlands, Laveen sandy barns for soil adjacent to the stream

channels, Tubac gravelly clay loam at the lower end of the Watershed

above the flood plain, Gila silt loam in the flood plain, and Cajon

sand for most of Anklam Wash (McGeorge 1931).

Compressive Strength and Stability

Intensity of recreation use should be based in part on the

carrying capacity of the soil, that is, the ability of the soil to sup-

port use without being damaged. Soils with excellent compressive

strength can carry greater loads of use without suffering severe

19

20

compaction and damage. Table 2 (McHarg 1971, P. 109) rates the various

compressive strength and stability of soil types.

Based on McHarg's criteria (see Table 2), soil compressive

strength and stability of the mountainous areas in Anklam Watershed are

excellent; the midlands, the lower Watershed, and flood plains have

very good soil compressive strength and stability; and compressive

strength and stability within the stream channels are rated as poor.

With the exception of the stream channels, the entire watershed

is composed of soil which has good to excellent compressive strength

and stability. These conditions are compatible with the proposed linear

park system, since intensive use areaswould be on or adjacent to the

flood plains whereas the stream channels would generally be left in

their natural state.

Soil Erosion Susceptibility

Soil erosion susceptibility is dependent upon slope and soil

type. McHarg (1971, p. 109) has developed a system to determine poten-

tial soil erosion susceptibility as indicated in Table 3.

According to Table 3, the mountains and hills in upper Anklam

Watershed are most susceptible to erosion. Moderate erosion can be ex-

pected in the midlands, while little erosion occurs on the flood

plains.

Since the mountainous areas of Anklam Watershed are subject to

serious erosion, they should be left in their natural state. Small

areas in the midlands and the entire flood plain within the Watershed

could be used for an intensive use park. Erosion along the banks of

a) 4 cs)u

G cd cd GcdOkucd

CO r-4 b0 ,r0

21

COcd

›.1 01-1 --WEEn--1 E Ca

CD I", a) cci y-, o4-) i,-2. y P 0 r4 triCO CD CO 0 1-4 1-1

(0 >1ti) CL 71 00'-Q 4-1 ›"0 0 H \N 1-4 Ca 0O 1-4 (NJ 0 Ca -H l-I 4-IZ CO "--" 0 CO CO 00 (0

n-1

oca 0bo 4-i

Y-, 0 G GG 0 cc! ai 0<4 o u CO

(1),

0 0CO (04J

22

23

the stream channels could be stabilized by providing for natural buffer

zones on both sides of the channels. Therefore, soil erosion suscepti-

bility does not conflict with the proposed Anklam linear park system.

Hydrology

Hydrologic characteristics of a watershed should be examined in

the development of a water-based linear park system to determine the

size of the flood control system and the potential use of storm runoff.

An examination of the hydrological characteristics should include the

measurement of precipitation; volume, velocity, peak flows, and fre-

quency of storm runoff; quality of runoff; and identification of major

ground-water recharge aquifers and flood risk zones.

Precipitation

The amount, frequency, intensity, and areal distribution of

precipitation affect the runoff characteristics within a watershed.

Amount of Precipitation. Rain gages were installed in Anklam

Watershed in the summer of 1972. Although insufficient data has been

collected to establish firm averages, 10.39 inches of precipitation

were recorded from August through December 1972 (see Appendix A).

United States Weather Bureau (1973) data show that the average annual

precipitation for Tucson, Arizona, as recorded at Tucson International

Airport is 11.24 inches from 1933 to 1972. It is assumed that the

average annual precipitation in Anklam Watershed is similar to that at

the Airport.

24

Frequency of Precipitation. There are two major rainy seasons

in the Tucson area: the summer monsoon resulting from moist tropical

air masses from the Gulf of Mexico, and the winter cyclonic storms

caused by Polar and Arctic air masses from the northern Pacific Ocean.

Intensity of Precipitation. The summer storms are character-

ized as relatively intense, short in duration and local in nature. The

winter storms are characterized by more gentle precipitation which is

scattered over wide areas.

Storm Runoff Characteristics

In the development of a water-based linear park system, runoff

from rainstorms should be measured to determine the size of the flood

control system as well as the amount of water that may be available to

maintain permanent recreation lakes.

A storm runoff measuring device was installed in Anklam Wash

in July, 1972. The gaging device records peak flow and the frequency

of flow. The volume of runoff in inches and acre-feet can also be cal-

culated from data collected from the measuring device.

Runoff as a Percent of Rainfall. The percentage of rainwater

which runs off a surface area is dependent upon storm and watershed

characteristics which include the amount and type of precipitation, the

duration of the storm, evaporation, soil composition and moisture levels,

the vegetative base, and the size of the watershed (Hoyt and Langbein

1955, pp. 35-76). Schwalen and Shaw (1957, p. 11) estimated that the

average amount of runoff was only 0.6 percent of the total precipita-

tion in the Upper Santa Cruz Basin in which Tucson is located.

25

However, for a much smaller watershed such as Anklam, percent of runoff

to rainfall averaged 7.3 percent over a five-month period (see Appendix

A). Other small watersheds in the Tucson urban area have estimated

runoff as a percent of rainfall averages of: 11.2 percent (for a four-

year period)forArcadia Watershed (3.5 square miles in size) in an

urbanized section of east Tucson; and 1.6 percent (over a five-year

period) for the W-2 section of Atterbury Watershed (4.5 square miles in

size) located in an undeveloped fringe area of southeast Tucson (Urban

Hydrology Study Data 1973).

Volume of Runoff. In the semiarid southwestern United States

runoff from summer storms usually occurs as swift wave crests which

carry a large load of suspended sediments. Summer storm runoff tends

to cause severe erosion and local flooding. Runoff from winter storms

commonly rises and recedes more gradually and flows over a longer

period of time.

Although insufficient data has been collected to establish a

reliable runoff pattern, approximately 73 acre-feet of runoff was re-

corded for Anklam Watershed from August through December 1972 (see Ap-

pendix A). This volume of runoff for Anklam Watershed may change in

future years as urbanization of the land area progresses. That is,

storm runoff has increased as much as three times as open desert areas

have been urbanized (DeCook 1970, p. 49).

The size of potential recreation lakes, as a part of the linear

park system, would be projected from the average amount of annual vol-

ume of storm runoff that can be diverted, retained, and utilized within

26

a watershed. DeCook (1970, P. 103) estimated that 30 acre-feet of run-

off per year would be required to maintain a one-acre lake in the

Tucson area, which is within the 73 acre-feet recording in Anklam Wash.

Peak Flows and Velocity of Runoff. The storm runoff measuring

device can also be used to determine velocity and peak flow of the

storm runoff.

Velocity of runoff is dependent upon the areal distribution,

duration, and amount of precipitation as well as soil composition and

moisture level within the watershed. Velocity tends to increase in

areas with steep slopes, impervious or rocky soils, and low density

vegetation. The intensity of storms may also affect the rate of run-

off, and often the intense summer rainstorms in the desert southwest

result in high velocity runoff.

Peak flows of storm runoff are associated with the velocity of

runoff, the type of storm, and the physical base of the watershed.

Peak flows are essentially the instantaneous runoff peaks in the stream

channels. Peak flows tend to cause the most serious damage when floods

Occur. The flood control and reservoir routing systems should be de-

signed to reduce the largest anticipated peak flows (see Figure 8).

Frequency of Runoff. Average number of days that storm runoff

can be expected to occur could be important in the design of the linear

park system.

For Anklam Wash the incomplete records show that measurable

runoff occurred six days in 1972 (see Appendix A). More complete

records show the urbanized Arcadia Wash experienced 17.5 days of

27

TIME

I - TYPICAL PEAK FLOW ( UPSTREAM OR WITHOUT RESERVOIR)

PEAK FLOW REDUCED BY RESERVOIR ROUTING SYSTEM

Figure 8. Schematic diagram showing reduction of peak flows via a

reservoir routing system.

Flow volume represented by areas I and II are equal.

28

runoff per year over a four-year period, and that there was measurable

runoff in Atterbury Wash for 7.5 days per year also over a four-year

period (Urban Hydrology Study Data 1973).

Quality of Storm Runoff. The quantity of sediments and pol-

lutants varies with the watershed and with storm characteristics. Pop-

kin (1972, P. 3 ), who collected his data from Arcadia Wash in an inten-

sively developed urban area, found that:

Runoff in the Tucson metropolitan area is typically high in

fecal and total coliforms, organic matter, sediment and turbid-ity, while low in dissolved solids and most inorganic constitu-ents. It may at times have high temperature and contain varying

amounts of pesticides and phenols.

DeCook (1970, pp. 50-51) stated that "the significant charac-

teristics of desert runoff, however, are likely to be suspended solids,

microorganisms, and possibly nutrients for plant growth . . ."

Since Anklam Watershed is currently undeveloped, storm runoff

would be similar in quality to the desert runoff described by DeCook.

However, with increasing urbanization the quality of runoff could be

expected to change toward that of urban runoff as described by Popkin.

Identification of Recharge Aquifers

The major source of ground-water recharge in the desert south-

western United States is through the infiltration of storm runoff

through permeable alluvial deposits along mountain fronts (Feldman

1966, p. 7). The alluvial materials, generally found in major stream

channels, act as a permeable surface which collects a portion of the

runoff. From the alluvial soil the water percolates into the ground-

water reservoir.

29

Lower Anklam stream channel is composed of sands and gravels

which act as a potential medium for the recharge of storm runoff. But

the runoff from intensive summer storms is not conducive to recharge

since the water tends to flow rapidly through the stream channel and

is generally heavily laden with silt. It is proposed that the Anklam

reservoir routing system divert a portion of storm runoff into off-

channel desilting basins. Water trapped in the basins could then be

slowly released back into the main channel thus increasing the proba-

bility of ground-water recharge.

Flood Risk Zones

Generally, storm runoff is confined within the banks of the

stream channel. However, under certain storm conditions runoff may

overflow the banks and flooding occur. The levels of flooding are

measured on a per-year frequency and are commonly referred to as the

50-year, 100-year, 500-year level or more.

Insufficient data have been collected in Anklam Watershed to

determine precise flood risk zones. Nevertheless, preliminary flood

zones could be estimated by using peak flow data collected by the

United States Geological Survey.

Since most of Anklam Watershed is undeveloped, the approximate

estimated flood zone should be retained as permanent open space and

included in the Anklam linear park system.

In summary, major hydrologic factors which should be examined

in the development of a water-based linear park system include the

following: volume, frequency, velocity, peak flow, and quality of

30

storm runoff; the flood risk zones and the principal aquifers. Each of

these factors relates to the size and design of the reservoir routing

and linear park facilities.

Vegetation

Native vegetative patterns should be examined in the develop-

ment of a recreation system since plant cover stabilizes the soil,

provides habitat protection to wildlife, and is inherent to the char-

acter and beauty of the natural setting.

In examining native vegetative patterns, it is necessary to

conduct an inventory of native species and determine the durability of

native plants to various levels of recreation use.

Vegetative Inventory

Anklam Watershed is located in the Lower Sonoran Desert. The

"saguaro-paloverde" and "creosotebush" vegetative communities are found

in the Lower Sonoran Desert (Lowe 1964, p. 24).

The saguaro-paloverde plant community is "composed of small-

leaved desert trees as well as of shrubs and numerous cacti, and best

development is attained on rocky hills, bajadas, and other coarse

soiled slopes" (Lowe 1964, pp. 25-25). Typical species of plants found

in the paloverde-saguaro community include the foothill paloverde,

saguaro, ironwood, cholla, hedgehog, and ocotillo. Blue paloverde,

mesquite, and catclaw are found in the dry washes.

The creosote bush community is found in less rocky and low val-

leys (Lowe 1964, p. 27). The plant species include the creosotebush,

31

bursage, cholla, and blue paloverde which are found along dry stream

channels.

Most of Anklam Watershed lies within the saguaro-paloverde bi-

otic community, and blue paloverde, mesquite, catclaw and creosotebush

are found predominantly within the floodplains of Anklam Wash.

Vegetative Carrying Capacity

Natural vegetation acts as a stabilizer within the biotic com-

munity. But intensive recreation use could damage the vegetative cover

and lead to soil compaction and severe erosion. To protect floral com-

munities, it may be necessary to impose restrictions on the number of

users or the types of facilities Nagar 1964, p. 3).

For Anklam Watershed it is suggested that mountain areas and

buffer zones along most of the stream channels be left in their natural

vegetative state. Recreation use would be limited to trails and small

picnic grounds within these areas.

However, land areas containing the flood control systems and

off-channel basins could be used for intensive use parks. These parks

would be planted with grass, shade trees, and exotic shrubs which could

withstand intensive use.

Wildlife

Although the existence of a variety of wildlife species could

enhance the aesthetic quality of a recreation system, development of

large parks may damage wildlife habitats and reduce wildlife popula-

tions. Hence, wildlife populations should be inventoried, and wildlife

32

habitats identified so that a linear park system could be designed to

have the least possible damaging impact on the fauna.

Wildlife Inventory

Mule deer, javelina, badger, and coyote are commonly found in

the Tucson Mountains (Shelton 1972, pp. 61-77). There are many varied

types of rodents, amphibians, and reptiles which include rattlesnakes,

the desert tortoise, and jackrabbits. Some of the more common birds

are the red-tailed hawk, Gambelfs quail, and roadrunner, gilded flickers,

and the cactus wren.

Wildlife Habitat

Mule deer tend to migrate throughout the Tucson Mountains and

subsist on annual herbs and shrubby vegetation. Javelinas tend to

travel in bands of three to fifty. They subsist on mesquite beans and

fruits of the prickly pear. Badgers and coyotes feed on rodents. Ro-

dents, amphibians, reptiles, and birds subsist on insects and seeds

from desert vegetation.

Impact of Park System on Wildlife

There is a conflict between park development and the preserva-

tion of wildlife habitats and species. The introduction of exotic spe-

cies of vegetation and the construction of recreation facilities for

intensive use parks would destroy wildlife habitats. Native animal

species would be forced out of these park areas. Even though buffer

zones along the stream channels would generally be left in their

natural vegetative state, a large portion of Anklam Watershed will

33

probably be urbanized and wildlife habitats destroyed. Native plant

communities within the linear parks would be able to support small

game, reptile, amphibian, and a variety of bird populations. However,

the larger game animals would not be able to subsist in these areas.

It is proposed that the mountains within Anklam Watershed be

preserved as natural open space parks. These mountain parks would

preserve large habitats which support a variety of wildlife populations

such as game animals, rodent and reptile, and bird communities.

Summary

The natural resource setting must be examined so the recreation

planner is cognizant of constraints as well as favorable factors en-

countered in the development of a water-based linear park system.

The resource inventory should include an examination of the

climate to determine the number of days available for outdoor recreation

activities; the geologic base in order to know the stability of the

strata to support dams and small structures; slope and soil types to

determine erosion susceptibility in development of park facilities;

hydrology to know annual runoff characteristics in order to design the

flood control, reservoir routing, and recreation systems; and vegeta-

tive and wildlife habitats to determine whether wildlife populations

can be protected and incorporated into the recreation system.

CHAPTER 4

URBAN SETTING

Man-related land use patterns should be analyzed in the design

of a linear park system to ascertain whether a water-based linear park

system would harmonize with existing land use patterns. The analysis

of the urban setting includes a study of population, zoning patterns,

land ownership, transportation routes, parks, and existing recreation

plans.

Population

Forecasting future populations is fundamental in projecting

outdoor recreation use as increased populations result in a greater de-

mand for outdoor recreation facilities.

Current Population Patterns

Currently, there are less than 50 residences within Anklam

Watershed. In 1970 less than 5000 individuals lived within a two-mile

radius from the center of Anklam Watershed (Comprehensive Planning Re-

port 2 1971, pp. 4-5).

Projected Population Patterns

According to the Population Report (Comprehensive Planning Re-

port 2 1971) the population residing within a two-mile radius from the

center of Anklam Watershed increased by nearly 250 percent from 1960 to

34

35

1970. In actual numbers this represents an increase in population from

1447 to 4980 in a ten-year period. If the same rate of increase occurs

between 1970 and 1980, approximately 16,000 individuals will reside

within the same two-mile radius. Hence, it is assumed that there will

be an increasing demand for outdoor recreation facilities in the Anklam

Watershed region.

Zoning

Zoning is one of the chief regulatory tools used by local govern-

ments to guide and control development within their jurisdictions. A

zoning ordinance typically prescribes how each parcel of land in a com-

munity may be used.

Zoning Classifications

There are seven major land use and zoning classifications in

Anklam Watershed (see Figure 9). According to the City of Tucson and

Pima County Zoning ordinances the classifications are:

1. CB-1, for local business and light retail.

2. CR-1, R-1, single family residential with one house per acre.

3. CR-2, single family residential, two houses per acre.

4. CR-3, R-3, high density residential, four houses per acre.

5. TR, a transition zone between residential and light commercial.

6. SR, RX-2, residential suburban ranch with one house per four

acres minimum.

7. DR, drainageway.

36

7co

37

Approximately two-thirds of Anklam Watershed is zoned for su-

burban ranch, which serves as a low density buffer zone between inten-

sive urban development and the open spaces of the Tucson Mountains.

The remaining one-third of the Watershed is zoned in a variety of pat-

terns including urban residential, multiple residential, commercial,

and major public and quasi-public. Two small areas have been zoned as

drainageways, land that could be used for park purposes.

If current zoning patterns for Anklam Watershed are left un-

changed, Anklam linear park system would harmonize with the current

land use designations and the natural character of the area. That is,

the natural openness of the park system would blend well with the open

space effect of suburban ranch zoning. Likewise, projected intensive

use parks are located in areas with high density zoning within the

Watershed.

Ownership

An investigation of land ownership should be made to determine

if any public and private lands are available for incorporation into

the recreation system.

Public Lands

Much of the lower one-third of Anklam Watershed is publicly

owned (see Figure 10). These lands include a 120-acre park site owned

by the City of Tucson, 60 acres controlled by the Arizona Fish and

Game Commission, and approximately 40 acres reserved for two school

sites. A small area of land used by Pima Community College is also

38

39

found in the lower Watershed. El Rio Park occupies approximately 20

acres of land on the edge of Anklam Watershed.

Brichta Grade School, Pima Community College, and El Rio Golf

Course are adjacent to the perimeter of Anklam Watershed. Each of

these areas could be easily incorporated into the linear park system.

Private Lands

The upper two-thirds of Anklam Watershed is privately owned.

Much of this land is owned by seven individuals (William Stumps, Land

Manager, personal interview, July, 1972). Since a large portion of the

proposed linear park system traverses private land, access rights or

the fee simple would have to be negotiated with the property owners if

the land was included in the linear park system.

Transportation

A review of current and projected traffic routes within a

watershed should be made to determine if a proposed linear park system

and transportation network are compatible.

Current Traffic Routes

Anklam Watershed is traversed by four paved two-lane streets.

They are Anklam Road, Speedway, Silverbell Road, and Greasewood Road

(see Figure 11). Traffic volume averaged less than 3000 vehicles per

day for each street in 1972 with the exception of Speedway which had a

volume of 4500 vehicles per day; this is considered light use (Depart-

ment of Community Development 1973, p. 7.4). Only one improved dirt

40

road traverses the Watershed, but jeep trails interlace the entire

Watershed.

Projected Traffic Routes

Projected improvements for streets that traverse Anklam Water-

shed include a westward extension of 22nd Street across the southern

portion of the Watershed and the paving of a section of Greasewood Road

(Department of Community Development 1973, p. 7.7).

Anklam Watershed is also located in the path of the proposed

Avra Valley Parkway which has been recomended by the Transportation

Planning Agency (Comprehensive Planning Report 5 1973, p. 19). It is

proposed that the divided, four-lane, limited access parkway be built

by 1980. Portions of the parkway would probably follow along Anklam

Stream Channel.

Analysis of Traffic Patterns

The current volume of traffic traversing Anklam Watershed is of

sufficient size to break the continuity of a linear park recreation and

trail system. Continuity of the linear nature of the system should be

preserved by using large culverts under Anklam and Speedway Roads as

pedestrian underpasses for the trail systems. Large culverts could

also be constructed at the intersection of 22nd Street and Anklam Wash,

and at the intersection of Greasewood Road and Anklam Wash.

Although the culverts would be dry for approximately 345 to 355

days per year (Urban Hydrology Study Data 1973), barriers would have to

42

be erected along the trails when storm runoff is flowing in the stream

channel.

Jeep roads in Anklam Watershed could be used as pedestrian

paths and, with grading and the application of surfacing material,

could be converted into bicycle trails. The stream channels could be

used for horse trails.

An engineering design for the proposed Avra Valley Parkway is

unavailable. From a general map of projected freeways and parkways for

Tucson, it appears that portions of the Avra Valley Parkway follow

along Anklam Wash (Comprehensive Planning Report 5 1973, p. 19). To

protect the Anklam linear park system from the parkway, a large buffer

zone should be located between the proposed Parkway and Anklam Stream

Channel.

Urban Parks

An inventory of existing and projected parks should be per-

formed to determine if they can be incorporated into the linear park

system.

Inventory of Existing Parks

El Rio Park is the only park within Anklam Watershed (see Fig-

ure 12). It is approximately 20 acres in size and has been landscaped

with grass, exotic trees, and bushes. El Rio Park contains a public

swimming pool, large picnic areas, playground apparatus, and baseball

fields.

o0

O

5 2

z

4-)

0cs4

-E x 0

G.

IMININ1111011.111111111111.11111/0.,1111/1111I .M.1111111111I-Siiiimarszu

1111•11111=111111111111111111111101

iULUUHIRURiammo11•111111111111111111M1111 Mt

00

•

43

44

Major parks within close proximity to Anklam Watershed are:

Tucson Mountain Park and Saguaro National Monument West which are to

the west; three sections of state-owned land including Cat Mountain

which are to the south; and El Rio Golf Course, the Santa Cruz River,

"A" Mountain Park, and Kennedy Park which lie to the east. A continu-

ous regional park system based on stream channels could tie the exist-

ing parks to the proposed Anklam linear park and trail system.

Inventory of Projected Parks

Land for a large regional park has been set aside for future

development in Anklam Watershed (see Figure 12). This land consists of

approximately 120 acres. A site design has not yet been drawn for the

park site. However, the area is of sufficient size to house a flood

control system and recreation lakes.

Two sections of Anklam Wash have also been zoned as drainage-

ways. These areas could be used as natural buffer zones along the

Stream Channel.

Coordination of Recreation Plans

An inventory of recreation plans that relate to utilization of

stream channels for park systems should be performed. An inventory of

plans may reduce duplication of effort, may provide an insight into new

engineering techniques and designs, and may lead to a coordinated area-

wide recreation scheme.

45

Review of Plans for the Tucson Area

Plans for recreation systems in the Tucson area which relate to

the development of Anklam linear park system include:

1. Parks Master Planning - 1971 Parks and Recreation Depart-

ment, Tucson.

2. Planning an Open Space System: A report for community dis-

cussion, l97, Department of Community Development, City Plan-

ning, and Pima County Planning Department.

3. Proposed Land Use Map - Model Cities Area, 1971, Tucson:

Department of Community Development.

4. Santa Cruz River Green Belt Study, 1972. Bureau of Outdoor

Recreation, Department of Interior.

5. Task Force Transportation, Bike Path, 1972, Tucson: Model

Cities Task Force Transportation.

6. Trails Systems Plan, 1960, Pima County Planning: Depart-

ment of Parks and Recreation.

These plans discuss and outline methods of utilizing portions

of stream channels for recreational purposes. Some of the plans show

that stream channels and adjacent lands could be used to form a contin-

uous park and trail system throughout the Tucson urban area. The pro-

posed Anklam linear park system could be readily tied into many of

these plans.

A synopsis of each of the plans is found in Appendix B.

46

Review of Regional Plans

Plans from two cities not located in the desert southwestern

United States that base park systems on stream channels are:

1. Cultural Benefits from Metropolitan River Recreation-San

Antonio Prototype, 1972.

2. Drainage Plan - Denver Planning Office, 1967.

A synopsis of these two plans is found in Appendix B. Essen-

tially, these plans discuss the development of two different concepts

for recreation use of river fronts. The Denver Plan is oriented toward

the flood control, green belt, and trail system development of stream

channels and flood plains, whereas the San Antonio Plan discusses the

intensive commercial development of river fronts used in harmony with

an exotically landscaped park and trail system.

Summary

The urban setting is examined to determine if the proposed

linear park system will harmonize with the urban land use patterns.

Important factors to consider when analyzing the urban setting in-

clude: population patterns as a means to project user demand for the

recreation system; zoning patterns to determine how well the recrea-

tion and flood control systems will fit into land use patterns; owner-

ship as a means of identifying public lands that could be incorporated

into the system and private lands that should be acquired for the sys-

tem; and an analysis of existing recreation plans used to reduce dupli-

cation and to incorporate new ideas and proposed park areas into a

continuous regional park system.

CHAPTER 5

LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE SETTING

Utilizing surface runoff and stream channels for recreational

purposes involves complex legal and administrative procedures. Chapter

4 is designed to examine the legal and administrative constraints en-

countered in the conversion of stream channels into water-based linear

parks. Legal considerations to be examined in the development of a

linear park model include appropriation of storm runoff and tort lia-

bility. The administrative actions to be examined include a descrip-

tion of a variety of techniques to acquire land for an urban recreation

system.

Legal Constraints

Holub (1972, P. 2), a law student and member of the Urban

Hydrology study team, has stated:

The legal questions which surround urban runoff and its uses

include, tort liability from floods, water rights to the in-

creased flows, land-use restrictions along the banks and flood

plains to prevent encroachment. • • .

Holub has further stated:

The legal questions applicable to a specific proposal are

largely shaped by the locations of the project, the owner-

ship of the land in the project area, and the history of de-

velopment of the project area.

47

48

Appropriation of Storm Runoff

Legal appropriation of storm runoff is dictated by legislative

and judicial actions. Each state has unique laws governing the use of

surface water. It follows then that surface water law in Arizona should

be examined in the development of a water-based linear park system.

Origin and Scope of Legislation. The Territorial Legislature

of Arizona adopted the first laws concerning appropriation and use of

water in 1851. In effect, they adopted the theory of prior appropria-

tion; that is, the first user had first right to surface water. In

1864, the First Arizona Territorial Legislature adopted the Bill of

Rights. Article 22 of the Bill of Rights stated:

All streams, lakes and ponds of water capable of being used for

navigation or irrigation are hereby declared to be public prop-

erty; and no individuals shall have the right to appropriatethem exclusively to their own private use, except under such

equitable regulations and restrictions as the legislature shall

provide for that purpose (Goss 1968, p. 11).

Subsequently, the Arizona Territorial Legislature adopted the

Howell Code. Chapter 55 of the Code deals specifically with regula-

tions controlling the use of water. Important sections of the chapter

as described by Goss (1968, pp. 12-16) include:

Section 1. This section declares all rivers, creeks and

streams of running water within the Arizona Territory to be public but

still open to irrigation and mining uses.

Section 3. Section 3 grants all inhabitants of the territory

who possess arable and irrigable lands the right to construct public

aqueducts to obtain water from running streams.

49

Section 17. Section 17 provides that during periods of scar-

city owners of lands shall have preference of water use according to

the date of their obtaining title occupancy of the land, with the old-

est occupant having the first right to the water.

Following the adoption of the Howell Code, ownership and use of

surface water have been determined by judicial decisions. A few sig-

nificant decisions include (Goss 1968):

Campbell v. Shrivers (1 Arizona 161). The court was faced with

determining the legality of priority of use of water. The decision es-

tablished the rule "first in use, first in right."

Dalton v. Rentaria (2 Arizona 275). A senior appropriator of

water had not exercised his right for sixteen years. The senior ap-

propriator was seeking to re-establish his right to use the water by

claiming priority of use over a junior appropriator. The court decided

that an individual loses his rights to appropriation due to abandonment.

In this case, sixteen years of non-use was considered to be abandonment.

Clough v. Wing (2 Arizona 371). This decision provides that a

water appropriator is entitled only to that amount of water that is

necessary for his need. No one has a right to waste water.

Kibbey Decision. This decision provided that an application of

water for a beneficial use is sufficient reason to establish a water

right.

In 1919 the Arizona State Legislature adopted a State Water

Code. The Code did not change the intent and precedences established

by the Howell Code but did establish a centralized administrative

agency to appropriate water rights.

50

Surface water laws have changed little since the adoption of

the State Water Code. One significant change is that if the use of a

water right is not exercised within a period of five years, one's right

to water is forfeited and the water is subject to appropriation by

other land holders. Also, in England v. Ally Ong Hing (105 Arizona 65,

the State Supreme Court ruled that seasonal waters of a creek would be

subject to appropriation, even though the flow was intermittent (Holub

1972).

Justice Struckmeyer of the Arizona State Supreme Court stated

in 1952 that all surface water in Arizona had been completely appropri-

ated (Mann 1963, p. 41). There is some legal question, though, as to

whether increased runoff resulting from urbanization can be considered

unappropriated water. If so, land holders owning property adjacent to

stream channels may have a right to apply for appropriation of the new

water.

Runoff data is currently being collected in Anklam Watershed.

As the area is urbanized new water can be identified and a claim for

its appropriation made. This new water could be used for permanent

lakes within the linear park system.

Other Means to Obtain Water Rights. Other means by which local

governments can obtain water rights include appropriation of rights

from irrigation districts that have been recently urbanized, and ren-

tal of rights from senior appropriators (Holub 1972, p. 13).

51

Tort Liability

Legal precedents concerning tort liability should be examined

in the development of a linear park system. In Tucson, Arizona, urban

runoff has often been considered a nuisance by the courts, that is,

"water to be gotten rid of as quickly as possible with the least amount

of property damage and injury to life" (Holub 1972, p. 4). But, in

1965, in Sanderson v. Tucson (104 Arizona 151) the City of Tucson was

sued for the wrongful death of a woman who was washed from a car and

drowned during a rainstorm. The case was finally decided by the Ari-

zona Supreme Court which ruled that the City was not liable (Holub

1972, p. 6) since:

Nearly every summer the Tucson area is subjected to 'high in-

tensity storms--i.e. rainstorms in which the amount of rain

received in a very short time is comparatively high. In these

storms, water cannot be carried away fast enough to prevent it

from flooding certain areas . . . . In any rainstorm, the

amount of 'runoff' is determined not only by the amount of rain

but also by the nature of the ground on which it falls. Soft

earth, covered with vegetation, will absorb and hold much of

the rain that falls. Buildings, paved streets, parking lots,

airplane runways, etc., reduce the area that would otherwise

absorb water, and replace them with impervious materials. The

more such improvements increase, the more runoff increases.

In the parts of Arizona where rainfall is sparse and in-. . .frequent--including Tucson--it formerly was felt that the dam-

age and inconvenience of some flooding was more acceptable than

the expense of extensive sewer and drainage systems.

But in Tucson v. Koerber (82 Arizona 347) the court had previously

ruled that "• . . even though a municipal corporation has no duty to

keep a stream flowing in a safe condition, and protect private property

from overflowing, if it assumes to act it must act without negligence."

Therefore, the local government is liable for injury or damage that is

52

a result of their negligence in the alteration of natural stream

channels.

As proposed in the linear park model Anklam Wash should be left

unaltered with the exception of a flood control and reservoir routing

system. Under the Tucson v. Koerber ruling, local governments would not

be liable for injuries or damages that occur on the unaltered channels.

However, special care should be taken in the design and construction

of the flood control and reservoir routing systems to protect against

liability through negligence.

Administrative Constraints in Land Acquisition

Many stream channels in Arizona are privately owned. In the

development of a water-based linear park system acquisition of stream

channels should be attempted.

There are various methods by which a local government can ac-

quire control over undeveloped stream channels. These methods include

the police power, fee simple, easements, the tax approach, trades, and

donations. The following synopsis of the methods are based on Little's

book, Challenge of the Land (1968).

The Police Power

The Police Power is a legal tool by which local governments can

place restrictions on the use of land for the welfare of the public.

Zoning is an application of the Police Power.

Zoning. Recently, the Arizona State Legislature passed a law

which allows flood plain zoning. Hence, undeveloped lands within

53

specified flood risk zones could be zoned as flood plains, and only low

density use and/or open space would be allowed.

The major weakness of zoning is the ease with which variances

can be obtained. Hence zoning is considered as only a temporary means

of preserving open space for recreation areas.

The Fee Simple

Fee simple, that is, buying land outright, is the most effec-

tive way for a local government to acquire recreation land. The fee

simple can be acquired either by voluntary sale or if declared neces-

sary for a public purpose through involuntary sale--i.e., condemnation.

The fee simple can be expensive, and the method is often hindered by a

time lag in obtaining approval for appropriations to purchase the land,

during which time real-estate speculation forces land costs to rise.

Easements

Local governments can purchase specified use-rights from prop-

erty owners. They also can be obtained through voluntary or involun-

tary sale for necessary public purposes. Easements can include the

purchase of rights-of-way along stream channels for walking and bi-

cycle paths or the right to restrict land use to those activities that

do not interfere with the natural amenities of an area.

Easements are a fairly effective means for gaining certain

recreational or open space rights. However, since the land is not

owned outright, only those uses specified within the easement are al-

lowable.

54

The Tax Approach

The tax approach requires tax assessors to price land at its

value of its present use. As an example, agricultural land within an

urban area is assessed as farm land rather than at the value of the en-

croaching residential community. The tax break is designed to encour-

age the large land holder to keep his area in open space.

The tax approach is only a temporary means of preservation

since lucrative profits can be made when the open space land is eventu-

ally sold. The tax approach is currently not constitutional in many

states, including Arizona.

Trades

Oftentimes local governing agencies can acquire desired recrea-

tion land through trades with private land owners. That is, certain

public lands could be traded for park sites that are privately owned.

Donations

Land owners are often allowed tax breaks by donating land for

recreational or open space purposes. The major drawback to this means

of acquisition is that the land may be separated from the proposed

linear park, thus breaking continuity in the system.

Land Acquisition for Anklam Wash

Since the desired area for much of the proposed Anklam linear

park is undeveloped, and land values are still relatively inexpensive,

the most effective means to acquire land for the proposed linear park

system is to purchase it outright.

55

If funds are unavailable to purchase land for the linear park

system, then open space easements could be purchased to preserve the

natural character of the mountainous areas. Flood plain zoning could

be employed to preserve the major stream channels.

Summary

It is important for the recreation planner to be knowledgeable

about water law, risks associated with tort liability, and administra-

tive techniques available to acquire water rights and land for develop-

ment of a water-based linear park system. Water law must be considered

in planning a water-based recreation system to determine whether access

and use of storm runoff is legally possible. Tort liability must be

considered in the construction of any recreation or flood control facil-

ities that may alter the stream channel. And, to most efficiently ac-

quire land for the linear park system, the planner should be aware of

the various administrative procedures to obtain ownership or use rights

to the desired land.

CHAPTER 6

ECONOMIC SETTING

Economic considerations are an important phase of a linear park

recreation planning model. Generally, public parks are not revenue

generating institutions. Hence, if the costs of a project, compared to

expected benefits are exorbitant, the park system may never be developed.

Economic considerations to be examined include demand versus supply,

costs compared to benefits, and sources of funds to pay for the develop-

ment of a linear park system.

Demand and Supply

The provision of public recreation facilities at nominal or

zero user fees is considered an economic externality. That is, any

individual can use the park while the public as a whole pays for this

use. Public parks are not generally revenue generating institutions.

Rather, as Lee (1962, p. 6) states,

Historically, outdoor recreation services have been produced in

both the private and public sectors of the economy . • . . In

the private sector recreation services have been sold on the

market in accordance with pricing rules . . But, in the

public sector pricing has not been in accordance with such pric-

ing rules, and outdoor recreation facilities have been available

to the consumer at a zero or nominal price.

Because there is an absence of a market mechanism for establish-

ing price per use, economic e fficiency is often measured in terms of

56

57

user consumption (the user day) as a function of supply (capacity of

the park). Therefore, Lee (1962, p. 7) states:

The rated capacity of an area to accommodate consumer partici-pation . . may be regarded as an underlying unit of measureof what is produced at a site, (supply) while the user day• . constitutes a meaningful and useful measure of a unit ofconsumption (demand).

Factors of Demand

Factors of demand should be used to determine the size of the

park system and the types of facilities needed. Methods used to pro-

ject recreation demand include the simple trend extension, statistical

surveys and analyses, and judgment (Clawson and Knetsch 1966, pp. 113-

141). Few studies have been accomplished which attempt to measure de-

mand for water-based recreation activities in semiarid regions. One

such study by DeCook (1970, pp. 93-104) attempted to measure the demand

for recreation lakes in the Tucson urban area. DeCook sampled 415

households throughout the Tucson metropolitan area. The results of the

study showed that two five-acre lakes did not satisfy the potential de-

mand for water-based recreation in the Tucson urban area. Rather, a

derived demand curve showed an apparent demand for five twenty-acre

lakes within the urban area, and the interviewees indicated a desire to

use these lakes for boating and fishing activities.

Similar surveys could be conducted to determine the demand for

bicycle and walking trails in the urban area. The results of such sur-

veys could help determine overall user demand for a water-based linear

park system.

58

Park standards manuals have also been developed to recommend

types of facilities that are necessary to serve specified user criteria.

Park standards could be used to apply to facility development for neigh-

borhood, district, or regional parks within the linear park system.

Factors of Supply

Park facilities as outlined in standards manuals may include

playground equipment, large play fields, picnic and swimming facili-

ties, and lakes. Other supply considerations may also include the

flood control and reservoir routing system, trails, occasional picnic

areas, scenic overlooks, and restrooms along the trail. The size of

the trails and the type of paving material could be determined by pro-

jected demand.

Cost-Benefit Analysis

The cost-benefit ratio is a comparison of the projected costs

of developing and maintaining the system to proposed benefits derived

from the park system.

Cost Factors

Cost factors to consider in the development of a water-based

linear park recreation system include site acquisition; construction of

flood control and recreation facilities; maintenance of the facilities

including administrative operations, repair, care and policing, and

loss of tax revenue from land included in the park system.

Site Acquisition. Location and size of park sites can greatly

affect land acquisition costs. Land within an undeveloped urban fringe

59

area, such as Anklam Watershed, is cheaper than a comparable amount of

land within an intensively urbanized region. Since undeveloped land is

less expensive, larger tracts can be purchased at greater cost savings.

Construction of Facilities. The construction of flood control

and recreational facilities should be considered in cost analysis.

Construction of a flood control system requires the movement of

large areas of earth for the water diversion system, development of

large low terraces for water filtration, and construction of basins and

dams for the impoundment of the diverted runoff. The flood control sys-

tem also requires impermeable linings for lake basins, pipes and pumps

for turf irrigation, and a dam and return channel.

Park facilities include the construction of picnic ramadas,

restrooms, activity centers, play fields, trails, the planting of vege-

tation, and the assembling of playground apparatus.

Operation and Maintenance. Operating expenses would include

the cost of supplemental water to maintain the surface level of recre-

ation lakes since water losses due to evaporation and seepage may aver-

age as much as 20 feet per year in Tucson (DeCook 1970, p. 103). Other

maintenance costs include water for irrigation of the park turf, and

user consumption such as drinking fountains, power for lights and other

electrical needs, and personnel to guard and maintain the park system.

Maintenance costs may be the most expensive cost factor of all

as they include care of the grounds and facilities, litter collection,

and repair of damaged facilities.

60

Benefits

The major monetary benefits that can be derived from a water-

based linear park system include flood protection, the use of storm

runoff for turf irrigation and groundwater recharge when possible, in-

creased property taxes on land adjacent to the linear park system, and

potential revenue generated from user fees.

Other benefits that should be considered include social and

merit benefits. Social benefits are those benefits which provide men-

tal and physical well-being gained through the use of public parks.

This so-called well-being has traditionally been thought to help make

the individual better adjusted in society. Thus, society has been

willing to pay for public outdoor recreation facilities. But there has

been some question as to whether public recreation facilities should

receive special support in relation to other forms of recreation.

Hence, another type of benefit which relates more specifically to out-

door recreation areas is merit-wants benefits. Merit wants are de-

scribed by Musgrave (in Angus, Corssmit, and Foster 1971, p. 8) as:

• . . public wants if considered so meritorious that their

satisfaction is provided for through the public budget,

over and above what is provided for through the market and

paid for by private buyers.

Since outdoor recreation is one of those situations which

satisfy merit wants, Angus et al. (1971, pp. 8-9) state:

Situations which would call for public policy action arise

where: (1) society decides that land should be used for

recreation or in some other balanced multiple-use fashion;

(2) society wishes to prevent degradation of natural re-

sources; (3) society wishes to preserve recreation resources

for future generations; (4) society decides to correct

61

individual choice by supplying outdoor recreation services whenconsumer patterns would not lead to their production at all.

The first three situations apply mainly to federal and state situations

while the fourth situation applies primarily to urban parks.

Although urban parks may be completely justified through merit

wants, traditionally, the cost-benefit analysis has been used to jus-

tify the development of recreation systems. Essentially, the estimated

values of the benefits are divided into a sum of the total costs. The

ratio provides an indicator of economic feasibility to the decision

maker. But this method does not account for social or merit wants.

Source of Funds for Park Development

Various local, state, and federal programs which provide mone-

tary grants for the development of recreation and open space systems

are available to city and county parks and recreation departments.

Local Funding

Methods to fund park and recreation development at the local

level include annual appropriations, federal revenue sharing, special

appropriations, and general obligation and revenue bonds.

State Funding

State aid for the development of parks and recreation systems

include annual appropriations, state funds from federal revenue shar-

ing, special earmarked funds for specified recreation projects such as

a state trail system and fish and wildlife habitat protection, revenue

bonds, and general obligation bonds.

62

Federal Funding

The federal government has a number of programs which provide

monetary grants for the development of open space and recreation sys-

tems. They include (Bureau of Outdoor Recreation 1966b) the following

grants.

Grants from the Department of Housing and Urban Development

(HUD). These grants include the following programs:

1 • "701" Program. The "701" program can be used by cities to

develop capital work plans and comprehensive land use plans.

2. Section 704. Section 704 of the Housing and Urban Develop-

ment Act authorizes the Secretary of HUD to provide grants to local

governments to acquire sites for future public works and recreation

centers.

3. The Open Space Land Program. The Open Space Land Program

(Urban Development Act of 1965) authorizes the federal government to

match 50 percent of the cost to preserve urban open space land for park

and recreation, conservation, and scenic or historic purposes.

4. Urban Beautification Improvement Program. The Urban Beauti-

fication Improvement Program provides up to 50 percent of matching funds

for park development.

5. Neighborhood Facilities Program. The Neighborhood Facili-

ties Program provides up to two-thirds of the cost of neighborhood com-

munity centers, youth centers and other public buildings to provide

health, recreation, or similar services.

63

6. Model Cities Program. The model Cities Program provides up

to 100 percent financing for small parks and recreation systems within

a Model Cities area.

Grants from the Department of Interior. Monetary grants pro-

vided by the Department of Interior include:

1. The Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965. The Land

and Water Conservation Act authorizes matching grants to state and

local governments to acquire and develop public outdoor recreation fa-

cilities. Funds are available for urban areas and can be used in the

construction of trails, picnic areas, and general park development.

2. Recreation and Public Purposes Act of 1954. The Recreation

and Public Purposes Act provides for the sale of public domain for

recreation use at very inexpensive prices. The land can be acquired

from the Bureau of Land Management.

3. Office of Water Resources Research. Monies for research

can be granted from the Office of Water Resources Research. Grants are

made to local governments, universities, or others for research inves-

tigations into economic, legal, social, engineering, recreational,

ecological, and other problems related to water resources.

4. Small Reclamation Projects Act (PL 84-984). The Small

Reclamation Projects Act authorizes loans and grants for the construc-

tion of water supply projects which cost less than $10 million. The

projects must be used primarily for irrigation but multipurpose uses

may be included in the project.

64

Grants from the Department of Agriculture. Funding from the

Department of Agriculture includes:

1. Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act. The Water-

shed Protection Act allows the federal government to give technical and

financial assistance in developing public recreation facilities.

2. "Greenspan." Greenspan, a part of the Cropland Adjustment

Program (PL 89-321) enables farmers to convert cropland to conservation

areas. The program also provides financial assistance to local govern-

ments to acquire agricultural lands for developing wildlife and recre-

ation facilities or for preventing air or water pollution.

Other Federal Programs. Various assistance programs are also

offered by the General Services Administration, the Army Corps of Engi-

neers, the Federal Power Commission, the Department of Labor, and the De-

partment of Health, Education, and Welfare.

A number of alternatives are available in the acquisition of

funds for the development of parks and open space systems. It should

be emphasized that many of the federal grants require matching funds

for the development of the projects, and that most federal grants re-

quire that recreation departments develop a set of goals that are part

of an overall comprehensive plan.

Summary

An economic analysis is an important step in planning a water-

based linear park system. The planner should be aware of potential de-

mand for the recreation system in order to design facilities for the

park to meet this demand. Costs and benefits of the project should be

65

estimated to determine economic feasibility of implementing the park

system. Merit benefits represent an important although non-monetary

benefit. Also, major sources of funds to design, construct, and oper-

ate a linear park system should be identified.

CHAPTER 7

SITE DESIGN

Results from the analysis of natural resource, urban setting,

legal, and economic constraints should be applied to site selection

and facility design.

Site Selection

Site selection for the development of a linear park system

should be based on the following criteria:

1. Economic Analyses. Undeveloped stream channels and urban

fringe land is generally inexpensive within metropolitan regions and

should be used for a linear park system when possible.

2. Legal Analyses. The most effective means of acquiring land

for a recreation system is to purchase desired sites outright.

3. Natural Resource Analyses. All land within a maximum pro-

jected flood plain and mountainous areas with slopes exceeding 16 per-

cent should be included within a linear park system.

4. Urban Analyses. Parks, public facilities, and land zoned

for drainageways should be included within a linear park system.

Private lands located within the projected park system should be

purchased.

Anklam Watershed is located in an undeveloped area. The pro-

posed linear park system would incorporate flood plains, mountains,

and parks into the system.

66

67

Design of the Flood Control System

The flood control and reservoir routing system would be de-

signed to accommodate the largest anticipated flood. The flood control

system includes diversion structures in the main channel, diversion

channels, water filtration and cleansing systems, storage basins, and

a return canal from the storage basin to the main channel.

Diversion Dams

Professor Resnick (Director of Water Resources Research Center,

The University of Arizona, personal interview, 1973) of the urban hy-

drology team suggests that rubber or spring-loaded dams could be used

to divert a portion of peak flow of storm runoff from the main stream

channel into an off-channel basin.

Rubber Dam. The rubber dam operates much like a large elon-

gated sausage-like balloon which creates a dam in the main channel.

Stream flow is detained behind the rubber dam up to a pre-determined

level at which hydrostatic pressure causes the balloon to gradually

flatten and release excess flows. The portion of the storm runoff de-

tained behind this dam, when reaching a designated level, would flow

into a diversion canal. At the termination of the storm, water and

sediments impounded behind the rubber dam would be slowly released into

the main stream channel.

Spring-Loaded Dam. A spring-loaded dam would divert storm run-

off much like a rubber dam. The mechanism consists of a series of

spring-loaded plate sections which would be placed in an "up" position

at all times within the stream channel. Storm runoff would then be

68

impounded behind the dam. As the volume of storm runoff increased, the

hydrostatic pressure of the flow would tend to gradually push the

spring-loaded sections, one by one, to a horizontal position. At in-

termediate points, the flow of runoff would be at a sufficient level so

that a certain portion of the water would pass through the diversion

channel.

Diversion Channels

Diversion canals would carry a portion of storm runoff from the

main channel to an off-channel basin. Capacity of the diversion canal

would be based on the measured runoff characteristics, and the size of

the storage basin. The diversion canals might have to be lined with an

impermeable base to prevent erosion.

Water Filtration and Cleansing Systems

The urban hydrology team has experimented with two relatively

inexpensive methods of storm runoff treatment that could be incorporated

into a flood control system. Popkin (1972, pp. 3-6) designed a pilot-

treatment facility to test the effectiveness of soil and grass filters

on storm runoff. For each runoff flow that was tested and analyzed

(trial) Popkin (1972, pp. 8-9) found that:

Total fecal coliforms • . . show a decrease in time with each

trial and from early to later trials. . . . Suspended solids

were reduced in concentration when runoff ran through the treat-

ment plant . . . . Coliforms generally decreased with succeed-

ing trials. . . . Total and fecal coliforms in seepage samples

generally show a decrease with each trial. . . . Bacterial anal-

ysis of lysimeter tail samples produced more scattered results.

Increasing grass and soil establishment again seemed to be more

effective in bacterial removal from runoff. Chemical oxygendemand follows the general pattern of reduction in both grassand soil filtering.

69

One year of data is not sufficient time to prove the effective-

ness of the soil and grass filter mechanisms. If in subsequent years

the filter mechanisms are found to be effective, they could easily be

incorporated into the reservoir routing system.

Grass and soil filters would be located between the outlet of

the diversion channel and the storage basin. These grass and soil fil-

ters could be designed either as large, shallow, step-like terraces or

gently sloping plains (see Figure 13). As the storm runoff flows out

of the diversion channel, it spreads out and slows down, resulting in

the deposition of suspended sediments on the grass areas. By the time

the diverted water has reached a storage basin, it should have been

filtered sufficiently to permit non-contact recreational activities such

as boating or fishing.

Storage Basin

Storage basins would be designed to hold the diverted storm

runoff. At the termination of the storm, the impounded water could be

slowly released back into the main channel.

The impounded storm runoff could also be permanently retained

for recreational uses. To accomplish this, modifications to the basins

would have to be made. An impermeable lining on the bottom of the lake

would be installed, and the storage capacity above the permanent level

of the lake would be increased. The physical design of the basin may

also have to be altered to reduce the rate of evaporation.

DeCook (1970, p. 103) stated that approximately 30 acre-feet of

water runoff would be required to maintain a one-acre lake 10 feet deep

71

per year. Seventy-three acre-feet of storm runoff was recorded in

Anklam Watershed in 1972. If this volume of storm runoff was a con-

sistent average and could be physically diverted, there would be enough

water to maintain a two-acre lake within the linear park system. How-

ever, since the 73 acre-feet does not represent "new water," the run-

off may already be appropriated. Thus, supplemental water sources may

be required if a recreation lake is desired. These supplemental

sources could include treated sewage effluent, industrial effluents,

or the domestic water supply.

Return Canal

A return canal from the storage basin to the main stream chan-

nel would be constructed to serve as the final link in the reservoir

routing system. The canal would facilitate the drainage of impounded

water in the off-channel basins.

Design of a Recreation System

Different types of parks would exist within the linear park

system. These parks would include linear parks, intensive use parks,

and mountain parks (see Figure 14).

Linear Parks

The linear parks would be based on estimated flood plain lim-

its. The flood plains may vary in width from very narrow areas where

the stream channel has been deeply cut to fairly wide areas where cut-

ting has not occurred and perhaps where other channels join together.

The narrow and deep-cut channels should be adequately buffered on both

72

73

banks to prevent severe erosion. The broad flood plains should be left

unaltered.

Design considerations in the development of flood plain buffer

zones should include sufficient width, density of vegetation, and con-

tinuity to form visual breaks in the urban pattern.

Trails. Walking and bicycle trails would be an important fea-

ture of a linear park system. Walking trails would require no special

design or surfacing. But special requirements for bicycle trails in-

clude (Bivens and Associates, Inc. 1972): a minimum width of 5 feet,

a general grade of 0 to 31/2 percent, a maximum grade of no more than 10

percent for very short distances, and a special surface covering.

Picnic Areas. Picnic areas and rest stops should be spaced

along the trail systems. If possible, these stops should be located

close to unique physiographic features or scenic vistas.

Intensive Use Parks

Intensive use parks would be located on large areas of land

that are preferably publicly owned, and adjacent to stream channels.

These park areas would be planted with exotic vegetation and would con-

tain playground equipment, large play fields, swimming facilities,

lakes, trails and restroom facilities. The intensive use parks would

also be accessible by automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic.

Mountain Parks

Mountainous areas with slopes exceeding 16 percent could serve

as natural parks which would be tied into the linear park system.

74

Natural vegetative and wildlife habitats would be preserved and only

hiking trails and scenic overlooks would be introduced into the area.

Regional Connector System

The proposed park system could also serve as a means of con-

necting public parks, schools, golf courses, and small retail areas

outside of the watershed. As an example, the projected trail system

within the lower end of Anklam Watershed could be tied to the Model

Cities bicycle path which is projected to extend from El Rio Park to

Kennedy Park. The trail system in the upper end of the Watershed could

be extended into the state and county lands. Trails could be developed

in these public lands along stream channels to form a continuous system

of trails that would extend from Kennedy to Tucson Mountain Park (see

Figure 15). Anklam linear park system would then be a major link in a

continuous regional trail and park system.

Summary

Analysis of the natural resource setting, urban setting, legal

and administrative setting, and the economic setting lead to park site

selection and facility design. For Anklam Watershed those lands which

should be incorporated into a linear park system include all public

lands in the Watershed, flood plains, and mountainous areas with slopes

of 16 percent and greater. Facility design may include a flood control

and reservoir routing system which would consist of the diversion dam,

diversion canal, filtration system, off-channel basins, and a return

canal. The recreation facilities may include linear parks left in

75

mr, ••• .- - 4. 'rf• s s 1 ;_ _ _ I I' '. --• II I I i, I I •

( I

\ I

‘SI \ ' I 0I lbI

I- - - - -,-

,, I ,

1.?.. I C.

A-4-6-8-4 -A- 6-4- A-4-A•

6-6 -A-a- 6-6-4-6- II-6-A-

- a 6-4-A-A-A-A- 4-4- 4-

- 6 - 8 - 4-4-.6 - A-A -6 - A - A - 6-4-8 -A-A -A- - - -A -A -A-A-A-A-A -A -A -4 -A -A --

.1

IP

110-46/...a.kaVal

166i I 1, 111,1 0 1, ,TITL

: \ - -,t - - r — 0t "- - + --

------- --d ;,, 0)01 I

rol la 1 _ _ fr _ _i_ _ J_T I . I 1

I j 'e %am - - ii -CY iir - i- --1-, 0- 1 - - t0.4__J__1._

I s 0 10 0 1 01 s 0 : 1 :La _4....1.__ ol o Is, i 1

'°° - " -1 --- i --1

i0 1 e 1 01 o 1 1L. __i_CI 0 I ' ' I 0 IL 'Po I I

I -115-1...-J L.- -

4 •I " i 1 I 0 I 1 1t- - - - -1 - I - _I

- t- —4- I--

1 ,si., 1 1

I 1 : I 1‘, II d 1 1 ,,, ;

1 , 1 I 1 ,, o. l_, _L_ -L --I r - • t — i -- - -n-. - - -.

I • f I PUBLIC AND QUASI PUBLIC

1---1--- RECREATION LANDS

I I National Forest— - I I NctionaI Monument1 Bureau of Land Management

J Indian ReservationStale LandsUniversity of ArizonaExishng City and County Perks

poTENTIAL WATER-BASED UNEAR PARK SYSTEM

Major StreamChannelsAnkiom Waistshed

Figure 15. Map showing Anklam Wash tied to public and quasi-publiclands via stream channels in the Tucson urban region.

76

their natural state and crossed by trails, intensive use parks planted

with exotic vegetation and containing varied play ground equipment and

picnic ramadas, and mountain parks which would be left in their natural

state serving as buffer zones.

CHAPTER 8

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

An environmental impact analysis is a statement of the impact

that development of a potential park system would have on the existing

environment. The impact statement is required when federal assistance

is used in the development of a park system.

Federal Requirement

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Public Law 91-

190) provides the legislative basis for environmental statements and

reports.

The guidelines of the Act (Reitze 1972, p. 99) require that all

federal projects and continuing activities that are

. . . directly undertaken by federal agencies; that are sup-

ported in whole or in part through federal contracts, grants,

subsidies, loans, or other forms of funding assistance; that

involve a federal lease, permit, license, certificate or other

entitlement for use require an impact statement.

Section 102(2)(C) of the Act (Reitze 1972, pp. 98-99) requires

all federal agencies to

(0) include in every recommendation or report on proposals

for legislation and other major federal actions significantly

affecting the quality of the human environment a detailed

statement by the responsible official on

(i) The environmental impact of the proposed action,

(ii) any adverse environmental effects which cannot be

avoided should the proposal be implemented,

77

78

(iii) alternatives to the proposed action,

(iv) the relationship between local short-term uses of man'senvironment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and

(v) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of re-sources which would be involved in the proposed actionshould it be implemented.

Format of Analysis

A format that could be followed in developing an environmental

impact statement for a water-based linear park system as developed by

the Bureau of Land Management (1972, p. 1-1) includes:

1. A description of the proposed action and alternatives.

2. A description of the existing environment,

a. non-living components

b. living components

c. ecological interrelationships

d. aesthetics

e. human interest values

3. An analysis of the proposed action and alternatives,

a. unmitigated impacts

b. possible mitigating measures

c. adverse impacts that cannot be avoided

d. relationship between short-term use and long-term

productivity

e irreversible and irretrievable impacts and commit-

ment of resources

79

4. Recommendations for the mitigation of environmental im-

pacts.

5. An analysis of the intensity of public interest or con-

troversy.

6. A listing of persons, groups, and government agencies

consulted.

7. A list of participating staff agencies.

Once the environmental impact analysis has been accomplished,

the planner should review the site design to determine if unnecessary

environmental degradation will occur if the plan is implemented. If

changes are needed in the site design a second environmental impact

analysis should be performed. The environmental impact analysis thereby

serves as a check on the site design which forces the planner to exam-

ine potential long-range social and ecological effects implementation

of the park plan may have on the proposed site.

Anklam Watershed

The proposed Anklam linear park system attempts to incorporate

and protect desert plant and animal species found in the natural biotic

community characteristic of the area. However, some impact would oc-

cur from the construction and use of trails, picnic areas, flood con-

trol systems, and intensive use parks within the Watershed. Thus, even

though an environmental impact analysis may not be required, one should

be performed by the planner to insure that the plan would have the

least negative impact on the existing environment.

CHAPTER 9

IMPLEMENTATION

Implementation represents the last phase of the planning model

and is the process by which the site design is transformed into re-

ality. The implementation process generally includes capital improve-

ment budgeting, approval of the budget by the governing body, and site

acquisition and development (Bureau of Outdoor Recreation 1966a, pp.

17-20).

Capital Improvement Budgeting

Generally agencies of local governments are required to submit

an annual budget for plans, programs, and operating costs. Priorities

are attached to each program.

Funding requests from each agency are then compiled into a city-

or county-wide capital improvements budget. Since there is a greater

demand for funds than can be provided, each program within the capital

budget is given a priority rank. Ideally, priorities are determined by

how well the projected program fits into the overall scheme of a com-

prehensive plan.

A water-based linear park system such as Anklam offers many at-

tractive amenities which could be used to gain a high priority within

a capital improvement budget. These amenities include the potential

for matching funds, flood control, parks, merit benefits, ground-water

80

81

recharge, the ecologically sound principle of preserving plant and ani-

mal habitats in the mountainous regions, and using large open space

areas for natural buffer zones for an expanding city.

Approval of Budget

A capital improvement budget is submitted to local governing

agencies on an annual basis. Since there is usually a ceiling on the

amount of money which can be spent each year, monies for the budget are

allotted to agencies and programs on a priority basis. Hence, a high

priority for a water-based linear park system may result in the budget-

ing of the proposal.

Site Acquisition and Development

The final phase of the implementation process is site acquisi-

tion and development.

Site Acquisition

Incremental acquisition of land for a water-based linear park

system would probably result in higher land prices and a fragmented

recreation system. Therefore, all land included in the proposed linear

park plan should be obtained as a unified whole.

Site Development

Once the linear park sites have been acquired, site development

can be programmed on an incremental basis. Flood control and reservoir

routing systems should be constructed first, whereas parks, recreation

facilities, and trails could be developed as user demand warrants.

82

Special Appropriations

Special appropriations could be requested from the local govern-

ment if the linear park plan is not included within a capital improve-

ment budget.

Justifications for these appropriations must be well-founded

and locally supported. A request for funds to develop the recreation

system would be based on the difference between total cost of the pro-

ject and funds available through matching grants. Support for the

linear park project could be solicited from other governmental agencies

that would benefit from the system, such as the public works department,

parks and recreation, and the city or county.

Public support generated by special interest groups and local

residents would lend credibility to the need for the water-based linear

park system and should be actively solicited by the planner.

Summary

Implementation marks the success of the proposed linear park

proposal. To be implemented the plan must receive a high priority

within the capital budget. Once approved, sufficient funds should be

made available in order to acquire all desired lands for the system.

Construction of the flood control and reservoir routing system should

receive the top priority in facility development. The trails and in-

tensive use parks could be developed as user demand warrants.

CHAPTER 10

CONCLUSIONS

Summary

A planning model for utilizing storm runoff and stream channels

for recreational purposes has been designed for urban areas within the

desert southwestern United States. The model includes the following:

1. Statement of goals and objectives.

2. An analysis of the natural resource setting to determine

suitability of the land to support a linear park system.

3. A study of the urban setting to determine if the linear

park system would harmonize with land use patterns.

4. A review of the legal and administrative setting to under-

stand appropriation rights and tort liabilities in the use and control

of water and design of a recreation system.

5. An estimate of the economic setting to compare benefits

versus costs as a means to determine the feasibility of developing the

park system.

6. An analysis of the data for site selection and design of

the linear park system and the flood control and recreation facilities.

7. A provision for an environmental impact analysis to examine

what impact a linear park system would have on the existing environ-

ment.

8. Considerations for implementation of the proposed water-

based linear park system.

83

84

Statement of Goals and Objectives

The goals and objectives define the purpose and scope of the

plan and serve as a basis upon which operating procedures are struc-

tured and outlined. A statement of the goals and objectives also

serves as the basic foundation by which proposals are drawn. The goal

of the water-based linear park planning model is to outline procedures

that a recreation planner should follow in developing a linear park

and flood control system along stream channels within small watersheds

in semiarid urban regions. The objectives are: (1) to use stream

channels and flood plains as the core of a park system, (2) to use buf-

fer zones within the linear parks to house small storm runoff diversion

and flood control devices, and (3) to utilize stream channels as con-

nectors to larger metropolitan trail and park systems.

Natural Resource Setting

Major natural resource factors to consider in the design of a

linear park system include: climate, to determine the number of days

of potential recreation use within the park system; geology, to de-

termine compressive strength of the geological base to support small

dams and picnic ramadas; percent slope and soil types to insure that

recreation development would not cause severe erosion; hydrology, to

determine the size of the reservoir routing system and linear parks;

and fauna and flora in an attempt to protect wildlife habitats and pre-

serve the natural character of the watershed.

85

Urban Setting

The urban setting is examined to determine if a proposed linear

park system would harmonize with land use patterns. Factors that

should be examined include: population, to estimate potential demand

for the recreation system; zoning, to be cognizant of land use pat-

terns and determine whether a linear park system would be compatible

with these patterns; ownership, to identify public and private lands

that should be included within the park system; transportation pat-

terns, to insure that streets and parkways will not break the continuity

of the system but still provide adequate access to the user; parks,

public buildings, and other recreational facilities within close prox-

imity to the linear park to determine if these facilities could be tied

into a continuous park system; and recreation plans from all levels of

government should be examined to reduce duplication in effort.

Legal and Administrative Setting

Legal and administrative considerations that should be examined

in the development of a water-based linear park system include: water.

law, to determine legal rights to storm runoff; tort liability, to in-

sure that the design of the recreation and flood control systems is ac-

complished to avoid personal injury to the user through negligence in

design; and administrative techniques, to be knowledgeable about vari-

ous techniques to acquire land and access rights for recreational pur-

poses.

86

Economic Setting

Economic factors that should be examined in the development of

a linear park system include: an estimation of user demand which in

turn would be used to determine the size, type, and number of facili-

ties to be incorporated into the park system; cost of site acquisition,

construction, and maintenance compared to the benefits of a water-based

linear park system such as projected monetary return, flood control,

ground-water recharge, merit benefits resulting from physical and men-

tal well-being from using the system, ecological preservation, and vi-

carious benefits; and sources of funds that could be used in planning

and developing the recreation system.

Site Selection and Design

Once data from the natural resource, urban, legal, and economic

settings have been analyzed, the linear park sites and reservoir rout-

ing systems are designed. Park sites should be based on flood plains,

mountainous areas with slopes of 16 percent or greater, and public

lands. Recreation facilities should be developed to reflect potential

demand, and flood control systems should be designed to contain the

largest anticipated storm runoff peak flows. The flood control and

reservoir routing systems include a small dam in the main channel, a

diversion canal, a water-cleansing and filtration device, off-channel

basins, and a return canal to the main stream channel. Trails would be

incorporated into the linear parks; playground equipment, swimming

pools, and picnic ramadas may be incorporated into larger intensive use

parks adjacent to the stream channel. Inclusion of permanent

87

recreation lakes in these intensive use parks is dependent upon water

law and amount of annual runoff. Natural open space parks would be

acquired for the steeper mountainous areas that may, exist within a

watershed.

Environmental Impact Analysis

Prior to implementation an environmental impact statement is

required if federal assistance is to be used in planning or developing

a linear park system. An environmental impact analysis includes an

examination of the impact of the linear park and flood control systems

on the existing environment, any adverse effects the water-based sys-

tem will have on the existing environment, alternatives to the proposed

plan, the relationship between local short-term uses versus the main-

tenance and enhancement of long-term productivity of the environment,

and any irreplaceable or irretrievable commitment of resources that

would be committed if the proposed plan were to be implemented.

Implementation

The final phase of the planning model is implementation of the

plan. Implementation is often dependent upon priority of the proposal

within the capital budget, matching grants from governmental agencies,

potential land to be acquired, and public and governmental support for

the plan. Implementation also includes decisions regarding acquisition

of land for the system and scheduling the development of the flood

con-

trol and recreation systems.

88

Conclusions

The water-based linear park model outlines a unique method by

which stream channels and storm runoff could be utilized within semi-

arid urban regions for recreational purposes. The model could be ap-

plied to intensively developed urban areas as well as undeveloped urban

fringe regions.

"Walk-to" linear parks could be part of a unified city-wide

park system. The continuous nature of the system would enable the user

to pass through many diverse zones. Trails and desert buffer strips

would extend from the backyards of individual residences to exotically

landscaped parks, schools and other public institutions, business and

commercial districts, and even to completely natural mountain parks.

The linear park system would provide an opportunity for a mul-

tiple of activities including walking and sightseeing, cycling, pic-

nicking, fishing, and engaging in organized sports and playground

activities. The park system would draw a heterogeneous population

where each individual could find a variety of activities in which to

participate.

Besides providing recreational opportunities, the park system

would be valuable as a desert buffer strip and would provide for a

flood control and ground water recharge system.

Anklam Watershed would be ideal for the development of a water-

based linear park system. Anklam Watershed is located in an undevel-

oped urban fringe area, the main stream channel bisects two urban

89

parks, three schools are located along the channel, and Anklam stream

channel passes through a unique desert biotic community.

Recommendations

Since a water-based linear park system could be of great value

to a metropolitan area in the desert southwestern United States, the

following recommendations are submitted:

1. That hydrological data continue to be collected in Anklam

Watershed so that annual patterns can be established and used to design

a water-based linear park system.

2. That under the guidance of the Water Resources Research

Center and the Department of Watershed Management at The University of

Arizona, a prototype park system can be developed following the guide-

lines of the recreation planning model to test the practicality of the

flood control and water-based linear park system.

3. That the prototype park system be located within Anklam

Watershed, since the watershed is generally undeveloped and bounds a

highly diverse physical as well as cultural setting.

4. That the site design include a park and flood control sys-

tem as well as a potential plan for residential and commercial de-

velopment with the intent of blending diverse uses into a harmonious

physical setting.

5. That the city and county governments within the Tucson

Metropolitan Region join together in approving and financially support-

ing the development of the project.

APPENDIX A

HYDROLOGICAL DATA SUMMARY FOR ANKLAM

WASH, TUCSON, ARIZONA

1972

90

9 1

Lc)co o O c.r) 0u-) Lc) Oh 0,-) 0,-) ,..i.CV lf) nS::1 I-1 01 0

•

tie tie tie tieo 0 (NJ 00 0 CV 0 %.0

0 0 ŒN 0 00 0

[LI

r:44-14--14-4O 0

rz4cocli

Lk4

cuO 0

4-1•• X

•HO E

PA

coa)

Ca0, 0 0 0 0 0,

cs.1Ln

0(.4

0(ID

C.Jr-I

C \ i1--4

in0

COI-4

1111--1

ONcc-)

0•

0 0 ,.-i 0 0 CV CV

r--1

tie-' 1e-8 tie0

tie0

tieo

tie0

-6'e0

tier-4

tieLn

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0

cornNJ

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lr)

0 0 0 0•

0 0 0 000

00

00

00

• • •

o 0 0 00 0 0 0

ct0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0Coo 000 in 0 0 0

Lr) 0000 Lr) 0000000 .0 -.I - 00 '.00 ooro .0 0 0 NI Q N 0

r-I

r-- Ch 00 u 0 N-co 0-) 0 0 Lr)0 0 0 0 r.-1 0 0 0

• •

• • •

cri N. %.0 n0 ,I" N-

r-- - 0 Lo un 00 CV

1-4 1--I l'n r-I Cn I-4

0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0Lch ON 00 '.000 ..t 0

• • •

•

0 co 0 Lc) -1t CO .1- 0 c:), 0,

cr) (NI 0 ,--t cc)

tie tie- tie tie. tie0 0 0 0

0 0 cVI 0 0

cocri

rn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0•

O'N

cdLn 0000 .1- 0 0 0<f 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 (NI 0 0 0

• • • • • • • • •

c11 aJ

c‘J .0 c.) cnI 0 co cn o rn Lco NJ .0 .0 Is) cri Ch

CsJ Ca CN CY, CD CD CO !HI CD 0 •--( cc) Li-) cc) Lf

▪

-) Co cc) 0

. • • •

4 rio 4 4 .121

0 CO (3.) Lio CO CV 0 CD CV CV Ln Co CV 00 CO 0 0 0 0 0

CO ....t C.) CS, cri tri c*.1 c.) 1-1 r-I CD r-I CD 1....."- in Lf) --I- co 0, ..d .

cri ci cc, ,—i .0 0 0 c0 r-4 0 0 ,—; cc) cv cV iri Co ,--4 cri 0

.• •. • • • . •

H Hr-4

if) N" CY, H4 NJ N. CO CT Ln N. CT 00 4.11 •-t 4r)

Cs,/ Cs.1 CV CV cc)

r"-- CO CO CO CO 00 00 CO CO CO CO a's C' 4Tn (TN \ 0 0 0 0 01-1

a) coE

0

92

cs.1 (NJ 0 0 00 n.0 (NJI I 1111N000cn-1-.1- N- O

0000O q) 0 cnI• • • • • • • • •

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0011111100000 0 0 0 0O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 001111110000000 00o 000000000

0000000 00011111100 0000000

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0• • • • • • • • •

o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 001111110 00000000

al 0c.) c.)

as • Ln 0 C) r-4 cd cd cs.1 Ln CO in

1--1 0 CY') r-1 r-4 1-1 • 0 0(.1 N

H

•

Hto

• X

G) O 0fa4

co

CO 4-44-1 0 -2

4-1

cdt)13.MP4> 4-I

<0 u)

rr)0 0 0 0 0 0 0

N- CnI 0

v--4 0 cn 1-4 r-4

1-4

cll a)

n.1 U CO 0.1 0

c.) O cd cd 1 .1- N

0 0cn1 C

• HH

CO CO O's 01Lfl N- r-I CO r-4 N. CO Cel

"-I 1-4 r-4 1-4 v-1 1-4 ('J C-clr-I

0 0 0 CI 0, CD 0 C) 0 0r-1 n-4 r-I ,--1 (NI

r•-I 1-4 r-4 /-4 1-1r- /--1 r-4

e-N

a)

3-)

0ai

•

4 cn

93

ii>510 0CD 0

1

rzi

f:4(4-44-49-400

COCd

•-) •G X

CD0

P-1

r-1•-1

CD 4-i4-1 0 .2•r4Cd CO' 4_1

1/41DCY•

cn1 cnI. .

0 00 0 co0 0

• •

0

P.0 0 S-C> CD r-4CD 0 cr

▪

) 1/4.04-)

0

CD4-4

0 0 cd0 0

✓ -- 103 •

L1-1G

cd 1/47-

CU r"--G1/4

cy0

L1-4

r-4

•

4J

C.) CdX "0a)

4-1W 4-4

CO co a) 01-4 'OCO

CD CV 0000 k

▪ r-4 4-1 C1.1

a) 4-)coa)4E-la)

CS COC \I

e.".. e", •-n e•-n

r 4 CV Cvl r-1n-., ...-.., ,......• s....,

CO W CO CO

r--4 ,--4 r.-1 r-1

Cd Cd Cd Cd

4--) -6-.1 4 -1

CV CV 0 0 0 0

e--1 .--4 H H H H

•

CO

IN•

r— 0

co

N-C-4r-1

0a-) r"--

INN- 0

r4L11

Co

a)O 4

a)G. 0

1+-1

4-1.1-.1 4-1

0

04-1

- -0- a)CD '0

4-1 3.40(-)

Ca D)

C

-

d Cd4-1

o 04-) 4-1

4-)

• co

co

4

e1

C\I Cr)

• Cl)r-4 r-1

Cd Cd4-) 4-)0 0H H

APPENDIX B

A SELECTED REVIEW OF RECREATION PLANS

Tucson Urban Area

1. Parks Master Planning - 1971, City of Tucson Parks and Recrea-tion Department, Tucson, 1971.

The plan defines the goals and standards of the Park and Recre-ation Department and provides actual as well as sketch plans for allexisting and proposed parks for Tucson to the year 1985.

2. Planning An Open Space System: A Report for Community Discus-sion, Tucson: Department of Community Development, City PlanningDivision; Pima County: Planning Department, 1971.

This report attempts to consolidate existing and potentialopen space in the Tucson area into an integrated plan. It briefly

defines and discusses the recreation use of open spaces, drainage sys-

tems, parks, urban spaces, corridor spaces and trailways. The report

includes maps depicting open space areas in Tucson and Eastern Pima

County.

3. Proposed Land Use Map - Model Cities Area, Department of Com-

munity Development, Tucson (Study Area Two) 1971.

This map shows the existing and proposed parks, and open spaces

for the Model City Study Area 2. Proposed park sites are found along

the Santa Cruz River and El Rio Park.

4. Santa Cruz River Greenbelt Study, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation,

Western United States Water Plan, 1972.

This study deals with conversion of the sewage farm in Tucson

into a water-based recreation park. The park would be located along

the Santa Cruz River and would contain permanent lakes using treated

sewage effluent.

5. Task Force Transportation, Bike Path. Model Cities Task Force

on Transportation: The Bikepath Subcommittee, Tucson, 1972.

A loop bikepath extending from Kennedy Park along the Santa

Cruz River to El Rio Park has been proposed. Money has been allocated

94

95

to develop a one mile segment of the bikeway from El Rio Park to theManzo Residential District. This trail system could eventually be partof a continuous system extending from El Rio Park through Anklam StreamChannel to Kennedy Park.

6. Trails System Plan. Pima County Department of Parks and Recre-ation, 1960.

A map showing a proposed linear park and trail system for theTucson Urban Area. The trails are based on the major stream channelsin the metropolitan area, and serve as connectors to major recreationareas as Tucson Mountain Park, the Catalina Mountains, and SaguaroNational Monument East. The proposed system could be part of the Ari-zona State Trails System.

Regional Plans

1. Cultural Benefits from Metropolitan River Recreation-San An-tonio Prototype, Technical Report No. 43, Texas Water Resources In-stitute, Texas A&M University, 1972.

An analysis of user response to the development of a park-business complex along a natural river in the core of San Antonio.The study demonstrates how an urban river system can be developed intothe focal point for community activities.

2. Drainage Plan - Denver Planning Office, Comprehensive PlanBulletin No. 10-2, 1967.

A plan designed to use stream channels for flood control andrecreational purposes. The plan is composed of maps, engineering de-sign figures, and analysis of feasibility of the drainageway system.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Angus, James, Cornelis Corssmit, and John H. Foster. Criteria for Public Supply of Outdoor Recreation Facilities. Research Bul-letin 592. Amherst, Mass: University of Massachusetts, May1971.

Bivens and Associates, Inc. "Preliminary Bikeways Design Criteria,"Unpublished Newsletter, Phoenix, Nov. 3, 1972.

Block, Philip W. Park and Recreation Sketch Plan for the Las VegasValley. Unpublished Internship Report, Graduate Program inUrban Planning, Tucson: University of Arizona, 1971.

Brown, R. Geologic Map and Structure Section of the Tucson Mountains,Arizona. U.S.G.S., U.S. Department of Interior. Bull. Geol.Soc. Am., Vol. 50, 1939.

Bureau of Land Management. Department of Interior. "Format for En-

vironmental Analysis Record." BLM Manual, Section 1792, Wash-

ington, D.C., 1972.

Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Department of Interior. Community Ac-

tion Guide for public officials, "Planning." Washington, D.C.,

1966a.

Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Department of Interior. Community Ac-

tion Guide for public officials, "Technical and Financial As-

sistance." Washington, D.C., 1966b.

City of Tucson, Department of Community Development, City Planning

Division, and Pima County Planning Department. "Planning an

Open Space System: A Report for Community Discussion,"1971.

Clawson, Marion, and Jack L. Knetsch, Economics of Outdoor Recreation.

Resources for the Future, Inc. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press,

1966.

Comprehensive Planning Report No. 2. City of Tucson; Planning Divi-

sion, Pima County; Planning Department, Town of South Tucson,

Pima Association of Governments, and Tucson Area Transportation

Planning Agency. "Population: A Report for Community Informa-

tion." Tucson, Arizona. November, 1971.

96

97

Comprehensive Planning Report No. 5. City of Tucson Planning Division,Town of South Tucson, Pima County Planning Department, Pima As-sociation of Governments, Tucson Area Transportation PlanningAgency. "Transportation Planning: A Report for Community Dis-cussion." Tucson, Arizona. February, 1973.

Cultural Benefits from Metropolitan River Recreation-San Antonio Proto-type. Technical Report No. 43, Texas Water Resources Institute,Texas A&M University, 1972.

Darling, F. Fraser, and John P. Milton (eds.). Future Environments of

North America. Garden City, N.Y.: The Natural History Press,

1966.

Dasmann, Raymond F. Environmental Conservation. 2nd Edition. New York:John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1968.

DeCook, K. J. Economic Feasibility of Selective Adjustments in Use of

Salvageable Waters in the Tucson Region, Arizona. Ph.D. Disserta-

tion. University of Arizona, 1970.

Department of Community Development, Planning Division. Interim Con-

cept Plan, Tucson, Community Inventory and Analysis - I. Tucson,

Arizona, July, 1973.

Drainage Plan, Denver Planning Office. Comprehensive Plan Bulletin No.

10-2, Denver, Colorado, 1967.

Feldman, Arleen D. Chemical Quality of Water in Relation to Water Use

and Basin Characteristics, Tucson Basin, Arizona. Unpublished

Master of Science thesis. University of Arizona, 1966.

Goodman, William I. (ed.). Principles and Practices of Planning.Washington, D.C.: International City Managers Association, 1968.

Goss, James Walton. Legal and Administrative Controls on the Transfer

of Water in Arizona. Unpublished Master of Science thesis, Uni-

versity of Arizona, 1968.

Greene, Christine R., and William D. Sellers, Arizona Climate. Tucson:

University of Arizona Press, 1964.

Haney, John A. A Program for Open Space Planning in the Tucson Area.

Unpublished Internship Report for Master of Science degree.

(Graduate program in urban planning.) University of Arizona,

1970.

Highsmith, Richard M., J. Granville Jensen, and Robert D. Rudd. Con-

servation in the United States. Chicago: Rand McNally and Com-

pany, 1962.

98

Holub, Hugh. Some Legal Problems of Urban Runoff. Unpublished paperpresented at the joint meeting of the Hydrology Section, ArizonaAcademy of Science and Arizona Section, American Water ResourcesSection at Prescott College, Prescott, Arizona, May, 1972.

Hoyt, William G., and Walter B. Langbein. Floods. Princeton, NewJersey: Princeton University Press, 1955.

Lee, Ivan M. Economic Analysis Bearing on Outdoor Recreation Develop-

ment. Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission (ORRRC)

Report 16, Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office,

1962.

Little, Charles E. Challenge of the Land, Open Space Preservation at

the Local Level. New York: Pergamon Press, 1968.

Lowe, Charles H. (ed.). The Vertebrates of Arizona. Tucson: Uni-

versity of Arizona Press, 1964.

Mann, Dean F. Politics of Water in Arizona. Tucson: University of

Arizona Press, 1963.

McGeorge, W. T. Soil Map Tucson Area, U. S. Department of Agriculture-

University of Arizona Agricultural Experiment Station, Tucson,

Arizona, 1931.

McHarg, Ian L. Design with Nature. New York: The Natural History

Press, 1971.

Meeting Arizona's Current Outdoor Recreation Needs. Arizona Outdoor

Recreation Coordinating Commission, Van Cleave Associates, Inc.,

Phoenix, Arizona, 1969.

National Commission on Urban Problems. Building the American City.

New York: Frederick A. Prager, Pub., 1969.

Parks and Recreation Department. City of Tucson. Parks Master Plan-

ning - 1971, January, 1971.

Perloff, Harvey S., and Lowdon Wingo, Jr. "Urban Growth and the Plan-

ning of Outdoor Recreation," Trends in American Living and Out-

door Recreation. ORRRC Study Report 22. Washington, D.C.:

U. S. Government Printing Office, 1962.

Popkin, Barney P. Effect of a Grass and Soil Filter on Tucson Urban

Runoff: A Preliminary Evaluation. Unpublished paper presented

at the joint meeting of the Hydrology Section, Arizona Academy

of Science and the Arizona Section, American Water Resources

Association, Prescott College, Prescott, Arizona, May, 1972.

99

Reitze, Arnold W., Jr. Environmental Law. Vol. 1. Washington, D.C.:North American International, 1972.

Schwalen, H. C., and R. S. Shaw. Water in the Santa Cruz Valley.Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 288. Tucson: Uni-versity of Arizona Press, 1957.

Scott, Mel. American City Planning Since 1890. Berkeley and LosAngeles: University of California Press, 1969.

Shelton, Napier. Saguaro National Monument, Arizona. Natural History

Series, National Park Service, Washington, D.C., 1972.

Shomon, Joseph James. Open Land for Urban America, Acquisition, Safe-

keeping, and Use. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1971.

Smith, H. V. Climate of Arizona. Agricultural Experiment Station

Bulletin 279. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1956.

Strong, Ann Louise. Open Space for Urban America. Department of Hous-

ing and Urban Development. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government

Printing Office, 1965.

Sutton, S. B. (ed.). Civilizing American Cities, A Selection of

Frederick Law Olmsted's Writings on City Landscapes. Cambridge,

Mass: The M.I.T. Press, 1971.

Urban Hydrology Study Data. Unpublished storm runoff and precipitation

data for Anklam, Arcadia, and Atterbury Watersheds, Tucson, Ariz.

Water Resources Research Center, University of Arizona, 1973.

U. S. Department of Commerce. Census of Population. PC (VI-4) Arizona.

Washington, D.C., 1970.

U. S. Department of Interior. Geologic Survey. "Cat Mountain Quad-

rangle Pima Co.-Arizona," 7.5 minute series (topographic) NE/4

San Xavier Mission 15' Quadrangle, Washington, D.C., 1968.

U. S. Weather Bureau, Department of Commerce. Local Climatological

Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data - Tucson, Arizona,

Washington, D.C., 1973.

Wagar, J. Alan. The Carrying Capacity of Wildlands for Recreation.

Forest Science-Monograph 7-1964, Society of American Foresters,

1964.

Wallace, Edmund. Drainage Course Parks - Feasibility Study and Design

Criteria. Unpublished report used for Inter-County Regional

Planning Commission, Denver, Colorado, 1961.

1 00

Webber, Melvin M. "Relations Between the Social Physical Environmentof Outdoor Recreation and Mental Physical Health: A ConferenceSummary." Trends in American Living and Outdoor Recreation.ORRRC Study Report 22, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Print-ing Office, 1962.

Whittaker, Robert H. Communities and Ecosystems. Current Concepts in Biology Series. New York: MacMillan Co., 1970.

Whyte, William H. Open Space Action. ORRRC Study Report 15. Washing-ton, D.C.: U.S, Government Printing Office, 1962.