NATURAL RESOURCES

1. NATURAL RESOURCES Lane Kendig Strategic Advisor Kendig Keast Collaborative

2. Resource Protection • Sustainability is the current buzz word for resource management. • In the 1960’s and 1970’s there was a move to protect the environment. • Planners let it slip from their grasp. • Some states made it a required plan element. • Plans and codes did not follow through. • The previous efforts were right in using resources to direct planning.

3. Past Planning Ian McHarg’s mapping and overlays. 1960-70’s

4. Others Angus Hills Philip Lewis Environmental approach. Landscape approach

5. Mapping Had Problems • Mapping was very expensive even with today’s GIS. • Inaccuracy of data sources for site planning. • Topography • Soils • Wetlands • Floodplains • How does one apply the maps to to a site plan?

6. Resource or System • Discrete Resource • Easily defined. • Maps easily understood, but too many confuse. • Systems • Dynamic. • Diagrams of system and quantification. • Ecology is more abstract hard to understand. • Neither approach identifies needed protection level.

7. Protection Strategy • Evaluate the impact of development on systems. • Look at natural land types and vegetative covers for environmental benefits. • Look for resources that are moderators of systems. • Develop protection levels.

8. The Water Cycle • The water cycle is greatly impacted by development. • The impacts are on: • Surface water. • Flooding. • Surface water quality. • Low flows. • Ground Water • Aquifer recharge. • Aquifer quality.

9. Rain Fall Evapo-transpiration Run-off Shallow Recharge Aquifer Recharge

10. Rain Fall Evapo-transpiration Run-off - Increased Shallow Recharge Aquifer Recharge - Reduced

11. IMPERVIOUS SURFACES High LOADING RATE RUNOFF Pervious Land Cover Low 0.00 1.00 IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO (ISR)

12. Run-off Forest Run-off Savannah High Low Grasslands Lawn House & Drive Building & Parking

13. Ground Water Pollution Potential Slow Fast Soil Permeability Shallow Soil Depth Deep Layers of Impervious Few Faults Highly Fractured Geologic Stability High Potential Low Potential

14. Deep Aquifer Mining of aquifer. Source: Illinois State Water Survey A Comparison of Potentiometric Surfaces…1995-2000 LK 56

15. Water Quality Forest Water Quality Savannah Low High Grasslands Lawn House & Drive Building & Parking

16. Stream Regime Forest Regime Savannah Unstable Stable Grasslands Lawn House & Drive Building & Parking

17. Carbon • Carbon is impacted by impervious surfaces, clearing and grading. • Vegetation takes up carbon and gives out oxygen. • The vegetation can store the carbon. • Destroying through clearing or grading can release long stored carbon.

18. Carbon StorageMixed Wood Plains • Live above ground 21.4 • Dead wood 4.4 • Forest Floor 6.4 • Live below ground 4.3 • Soil organic 32.3 Source: EPA Carbon Storage in U.S. Forests 5 Oct. 2010

19. Carbon Storage Forest Savannah Low High Grasslands Lawn Carbon Loss High Low House & Drive Building & Parking

20. Total Carbon

21. Average per acre carbon storage in forests in the U.S. Metric tonnes per acre 0-40 41-55 56-70 71-85 85+

22. Weak Resource Protection Generally result in less protection and occasional failures. • Floodplains – FEMA regulations are weak. • Storm water – Mitigate. • Wetlands – Northern Illinois strong, but highly variable around the country. • Trees – Cut and mitigate with young trees. • Steep slopes -- Engineering to mitigate. • Unstable soils – Engineering to stabilize.

23. St. Louis reliever airport in 90’s flooding when levees were overtopped. Engineers are asked how can I build here? When they should not.

24. Protection Levels Resource Open Space Ratio Floodplain 1.00 Wetlands 1.00 Riparian Buffer 0.90 Drainageways 0.65 Woodlands, Mature 0.70 Woodlands, Young 0.60 Ravines 0.95 Aquifer Recharge Areas 0.60 Steep Slopes 25%+ 0.80

25. Approaches • Avoidance is the best approach. No damage is done. Residential development in Northern Illinois can achieve this. • Minimization is more practical for sites having extensive resource coverage. It minimizes destruction. • Mitigation is last resort. Destruction is offset and failures are predictable.

26. Development • Impervious surface a major problems for water and flooding. • Clearing and grading disrupts resources and carbon sinks. • Density decreases impacts. • Avoidance of resources protects carbon sinks and provides best land cover.

27. Density Paradox Pollutants versus Density Lbs/du. Lbs/ac. Lbs/ac. Density

28. Increase Density • At the regional level a density increase is critical. • Fewer square miles per 10,000 people. • Less miles of road, water, sewer, telephone, cable. • Less destruction of ground cover. • Less carbon and raw materials used for infrastructure. • Less to maintain. • Fewer miles to drive.

29. Increase Urban Density • Avoid areas with a high coverage of sensitive resources. • Convert Auto-Urban to Urban requires structured parking. • Permit higher buildings. • Convert Auto-Urban to Urban Core. • Convert Sub-urban to Urban.

30. Urban Town Street 1915Parking on street and alley.

31. Auto-Urban StreetParking occupies most of land.

32. AT GRADE PARKING5 Spaces per thousand s.f. The entire site is disturbed. Density increases at a declining rate. A lack of enclosure prevents a true urban environment to be created.

33. PARKING5 Spaces per thousand s.f. The density can be increased from 48% to 436% over one story auto-urban. More importantly the pedestrian can travel on sidewalks instead of navigating through parking areas.

34. Build to line with at grade parking.

35. Perrysburg, Ohio. • Sidewalk build-to line. • Maximize on street parking. • Weak D/H 5+

36. The view from office. AUTO-URBAN Most customers will have to use these areas. The view from townhouses.

37. Looks like good streetscape!

38. Plan is Auto-urban, more parking than buildings.

39. Urban Mixed Use

40. Residential above commercial.

41. The truth is revealed.

42. Its really Auto-Urban Residents get this lovely view and park here to walk to their unit.

43. Urban created with structured parking.

44. Urban with higher buildings and structured parking.

45. Urban Core • Higher intensity auto-urban (3 story) has an FAR of .42. • Urban core with an average height of 15 stories has an FAR of 2.80 • With 30% residential at 15 stories FAR increases to 3.47 by reducing the parking demand.

46. Mega form area Aerial photograph of Schaumburg, Illinois, edge city shopping and employment area.

47. Planned view of mega form containing all the existing uses in the edge city in a small area.

48. Planning for 3 Million Square Feet Particularly in an area rich in resources the amount of destruction can be limited. In terms of carbon, the length of trips can be greatly reduced as well.

49. Sub-urban to Urban • It is easiest to get people to transfer to higher density while preserving the housing type. • Suburban to Urban • 15,000 sf. 0.00 open space. - 2.46 du’s/ac. • 6,000 sf. 0.15 open space. - 4.44 du’s/ac. • Estate to Urban • 2 acre 0.00 open space. – 0.45 du’s/ac. • 12,000 sf. 0.15 open space – 2.54 du’s/ac.

50. Shift to Urban • The combination of commercial and office shifts from auto-urban to urban or urban core have greatest value. • For residential multi-family shifts to urban from auto-urban desirable. • The sub-urban to urban shift also has great value but has significant market resistance.