I'm in a similar headspace where there are so many factors to consider trying to decide where to put Zone 0! This process might help.
1) [ ] Print out a couple
hard copies of your area map, one for each stakeholder. Ensure that:
[*
check*] The maps have your
contour lines,
water, and
roads/access drawn.
[ ]All
legal setbacks and restraints are also depicted.
-Draw the legally required distance the septic field must be from your water sources and creek bed.
-Consider other legal restrictions, like how close animals can be to the boundary edge.
[ ]Large trees trees and forest are depicted.
The above items are all behind
climate on the "Scales of Permanence", but are ahead of buildings and
structures. Dave Jacke &
Eric Toensmeier's book,
Edible Forest Gardens, Vol 2, have in depth discussion on this on page 193-195. Unlike Yeoman's and Mollison & Holmgren's permanence scales, Jacke+Toensmeier's scale wisely includes
legal constraints. I digress!
2) [ ] Make little
scale paper or cardboard cutouts representing your desired structures' area size so you can place them around the chart.
[ ] Also cut out a little rectangle depicting the minimum septic field size based on the desired house size. (Personally, I would definitely have the septic downhill, because I would not want to pay for an engineered pumping system, nor would I want to be reliant on the pump having power and functioning 24/7. I also value gravity fed water systems where possible, so having a windmill makes me wary compared to say...a ram pump or even better, direct fill of H2O to a cistern.)
[ ] Consider making other cut outs, like for a large garden, or cisterns.
3) [ ]
Scratch out any "no-go" areas for your structures based off legal requirements and each stakeholder's personal preferences.
[ ] Scratch out flooding areas, erosion prone areas, un-accessible areas, zone 5 wilderness areas, areas too close to beautiful trees or trees which may fall etc, areas without acceptable privacy, etc.
Eventually, each stakeholder may have only a few legally or socially acceptable zones 0 spots left.
4) [ ] Compare stakeholders' common spots, and
label the potential zone 0 areas "A" "B" "C" etc.
5) [ ] Have each stakeholder
list metrics they value in a potential zone 0: Things like good views, sun or shade considerations, easy access, privacy,
energy efficiency, easy proximity to production zones, low cost (short driveway/minimal length to grid access).
[ ] Allocate a "weight" to each metric...which metrics are the most important?
[ ] Have each stakeholder assess each potential site "A" "B" "C" etc. with each desired metric on a scale of 1-5 on how well it achieves that metric.
[ ] Multiply the assessed metric by the metric weights, and then sum them up for a grand total.
[ ] Compare everyone's grand total.
In the end you'll have significantly fewer possible areas to choose from.
6) [ ] Most important, as a final check remember that "the map is not the terrain" so check out the land
in person and figure out which of the best sites
just feel right while meeting essential criteria. Have stakeholders write out observations and gut feelings at each of the potential sites.
The weighted-metric process works for any number of decisions, of course. The hardest decisions then become not between a "good" and a "bad" choice but between two
very close or equally acceptable choices.