Appendix

List of Figures

            Figure 1: Hydrological changes caused by watershed development.
            Figure 2: Sources, impacts, and management of urban runoff pollution and where BMPs can be implemented.
            Figure 3: Indicating the most suitable placement of detention ponds in a watershed catchment to maximize water treatment
            Figure 4: BMP prioritization methodology developed by the county of Los Angeles.
            Figure 5: City of Guelph.
            Figure 6: Grand River Watershed.
            Figure 7: Development plans for the SGDC region.
            Figure 8: Five subcatchments that delineate study area.
            Figure 9: Land use classifications in the study area.
            Figure 10: Soil classes in the study area.
            Figure 11: Study objectives and their relation to using GIS.
            Figure 12: The order number of river channel segments in a natural basin drainage network.
            Figure 13: Illustration of a flow direction raster grid and a flow accumulation raster grid.
            Figure 14: Criteria and constraint raster maps.
            Figure 15: Flow chart of GIS functions.
            Figure 16: Environmental scenario and its most suitable site.
            Figure 17: Economic scenario and its most suitable site.
            Figure 18: Drainage order rankings in study area, using Strahler method.
            Figure 19: Relationship between detention pond storage volume and pond release rate.

List of Tables

            Table 1: Landuse classification statistics within the study area.
            Table 2: Soil classification statistics in the study area.
            Table 3: MCE model constraints.
            Table 4: Criteria standardization.
            Table 5: Nine point rating scale used to compare siting factors.
            Table 6: Pairwise comparison of stormwater detention pond siting factors for control scenario using equal weights.
            Table 7: Pairwise comparison of stormwater detention pond siting factors for the basic scenario.
            Table 8: Pairwise comaprison of stormwater detention pond siting factors for the environmental scenario.
            Table 9: Pairwise comparison of stormwater detention pond siting factors for the econimic scenario.
            Table 10: Comparison of scenario weights.
            Table 11: Constraint and criteria layers.
            Table 12: Control scenario statistics.
            Table 13: Basic scenario statistics.
            Table 14: Environmental scenario statistics.
            Table 15: Economic scenario statistics.
            Table 16: Proposed best site comparison.
            Table 17: Data needs.