In 2008, the Village of Glenview board of trustees adopted A Plan for Nature in Glenview (Village of Glenview, 2008) and A Plan for Nature in Glenview Technical Report (Prah et al., Reference Prah, Stoll, Zimmerman, Miller, Carlson and White2008). These documents, together known informally as the natural resources plan, amend the village's comprehensive plan (Planning & Design Institute, 2004). The amendment expands on chapter 8 of the comprehensive plan, which discusses land use and zoning, demographics, transportation, and development corridors, and briefly considers environmental corridors and open space. By adopting this detailed amendment, the village board incorporated planning for biodiversity and natural resource protection into official village policy. The plan's recommendations for maintenance and ecological restoration of a network of natural areas and open spaces, as well as its promotion of engineered features such as rain gardens and naturalized detention basins, define it as a green infrastructure plan (Benedict and McMahon, Reference Benedict and McMahon2006).
Green infrastructure planning can occur at numerous spatial scales. Examples include state (e.g., for Florida, Massachusetts, and Maryland), regional (e.g., for central Indiana; the Twin Cities region, Minnesota; the Saginaw Bay region, Michigan; northwest lower Michigan; the Kansas City metropolitan area; and Portland, Oregon, metropolitan area), and county (e.g., Angelina County, Texas; and Kent County, Delaware) plans (Conservation Fund, 2011). Municipal plans for green infrastructure have been developed for larger cities internationally, such as in Sweden, the United Kingdom, and Canada(Amati and Taylor, Reference Amati and Taylor2010; Sandstrom, Reference Sandstrom2002). Among the many municipal green infrastructure plans developed in the United States (US) are those for Chicago, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Nashville, Houston, and Spartanburg, South Carolina (Chicago Department of Planning and Development, 2006; Conservation Fund, 2011; Landers, Reference Landers2009; Nashville: Naturally, 2011), and green infrastructure planning has been proposed as a response to shrinking cities (Schilling and Logan, Reference Schilling and Logan2008).
Implementation of green infrastructure plans may become less complex as spatial scale becomes more local and the cooperation of fewer agencies is required. Nevertheless, at the municipal level, ownership of desirable natural resources will remain varied, funding will remain scarce, parcels of open space will often be small, and the commitment of local officials and support of regional planning will be vital. Although many suburban Chicago municipalities have created commissions with an environmental focus, at present few have adopted a formal green infrastructure plan (but see Applied Ecological Services, 2004). They may, however, refer to a variety of regional plans, such as that of Chicago Wilderness (1999, 2004), a regional coalition of agencies with an interest in natural resources protection, which recognizes the conservation role of local governments as landowning and regulatory agencies, the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (2010), and various county and watershed plans. In collaboration with Chicago Wilderness, some suburban communities are in the planning or drafting stages of local green infrastructure plans (Chicago Wilderness, 2011). In addition, numerous communities in the Chicago region and elsewhere are adopting green infrastructure planning at the site scale, particularly by experimenting with low-impact development techniques such as bioswales, rain gardens, green roofs, permeable pavement, and other green features in conjunction with traditional development projects.
The Village of Glenview, which is an affluent suburb approximately 20 miles north of Chicago, encompasses approximately 13.8 square miles and 46,000 residents. Local government follows a council-manager model. The seven-member elected Board of Trustees (hereafter, Board) serves as the policymaking body and is advised by several commissions with Board-appointed membership. Most of the village was developed in the 1950s and 1960s, although the Glen redevelopment of the former Glenview Naval Air Station (GNAS) began in the mid-1990s.
In this article, we describe the development of the village's natural resources plan, the plan's implementation to date, and how a focus on preserving natural resources has fostered interdepartmental cooperation to enhance both natural open space and more technical engineered green infrastructure elements villagewide. We discuss the conditions that we consider vital to the plan's adoption and successes, as well as barriers to full implementation, and the plan's relationship to green infrastructure planning principles and regional green infrastructure plans such as the North Branch of the Chicago River Open Space Plan (Futurity, 2005), the North Branch Chicago River Watershed-Based Plan (Lake County Stormwater Management Commission, 2008), the Chicago Wilderness Biodiversity Recovery Plan (Chicago Wilderness, 1999), and Chicago Wilderness Green Infrastructure Vision (Chicago Wilderness, 2004). Our objective is to provide guidance for developing and implementing a comprehensive approach to green infrastructure at the community level in the hope that other local government leaders will find useful guidelines.
History and Development of the Plan
Table 1 provides a time line of major milestones in green infrastructure planning, implementation, and communications in Glenview. The village's five-member Natural Resources Commission (NRC), authorized in 2003, drove the creation and implementation of the natural resources plan. NRC members are volunteers appointed by the Board from among Glenview residents with expertise in natural resources management. The founding chair and a founding member each brought to the NRC decades of experience in village government (on the Village of Glenview board of trustees and plan commission and the Glenview Park District board).
Table 1. Time line of major milestones in green infrastructure planning, implementation, and communications in Glenview
In developing its mission statement, the NRC deliberately prioritized natural open space and habitat enhancement. Other environmental considerations (such as energy conservation, transportation, or recycling) are secondary concerns not explicitly addressed in the mission statement. This approach follows Benedict and McMahon's (Reference Benedict and McMahon2006) fundamental definition of green infrastructure as a network of interconnected natural areas and open space.
Prior to the formation of the NRC, the village had made progress toward implementing green infrastructure principles. In support of an effort to protect a natural area now known as The Grove National Historic Landmark, the village established a development-constraining Environmentally Significant Area zoning ordinance. A tree preservation ordinance extended legal protection of the urban forest to private property under certain circumstances.
Renewed and sustained attention to green infrastructure arose largely as a result of an extraordinary opportunity to develop 1,121 acres near the center of the village that were formerly part of the GNAS. The GNAS was decommissioned in the 1993 round of the federal Base Realignment and Closure process. Subsequently, the village became master developer of what became known as the Glen redevelopment. A 13-acre remnant prairie with three state-listed threatened or endangered plant species and a state-threatened bird species had been discovered at the GNAS in 1990 (Harza Environmental Services, 1995). Through the redevelopment process, this area eventually became the core of the 32-acre Kent Fuller Air Station Prairie preserve.
The discovery also supported an emphasis on native landscaping incorporated into the GNAS consensus reuse plan (Glenview Community Reuse Planning Group, 1995). Storm water from the redevelopment was directed into a newly created 45-acre retention pond known as Lake Glenview, which serves as the focal point of the 140-acre Gallery Park. The shoreline of Lake Glenview and 35 acres of surrounding uplands in Gallery Park are native habitat restoration areas. Native landscaping was also installed in roadway medians in the redevelopment, and was encouraged or required through the developments' codes, covenants, and restrictions in common areas of some of the private developments.
Formal natural resources planning began with a series of ecological assessments commissioned by the NRC. These focused on evaluating the condition of the West Fork of the North Branch of the Chicago River (hereafter, West Fork) (Miller, Zimmerman, and White, Reference Miller, Zimmerman and White2004), additional sites including several detention basins and open-space areas tributary to the West Fork (Miller, Zimmerman, and White, Reference Miller, Zimmerman and White2006), and all remaining open space greater than 1 acre in the village (Prah et al., Reference Prah, Stoll, Zimmerman, Miller and White2007). Prah et al. (Reference Prah, Stoll, Zimmerman, Miller, Carlson and White2008) summarize these assessments and provide recommendations to improve biodiversity and ecological functions. The briefer summary natural resources plan (Village of Glenview, 2008) organizes its recommendations according to policy recommendations and action plans.
Plan Implementation and Challenges
Upon the Board's adoption of the natural resources plan, the NRC prepared a five-year implementation plan. This document, updated annually, is an internal guideline for the NRC and has not been adopted by the Board. Constraints on implementation include a limited Board-approved budget for natural resources capital projects, a Board-imposed stipulation that construction of natural resources capital projects be at least 50% grant funded, and limited staff time. Nevertheless, in the three years since adoption, successful capital projects, communications campaigns, and programs have resulted from the natural resources plan. Figure 1 displays the locations of the village's green infrastructure assets and projects.
Figure 1. Location of Glenview, Illinois (inset). Public open space with natural habitat features, private rain gardens, and capital projects at village-owned sites.
Grant Funding
Because of the mutually reinforcing goals of improving water quality and improving natural habitat, several capital projects, some predating the natural resources plan and some recommended by the natural resources plan, have been partially funded by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency through section 319 of the Clean Water Act. These include three streambank stabilizations, installation of a green roof and permeable pavement at the interpretive center on the prairie, and retrofitting three dry detention basins from turf to native vegetation. A 3,000-foot river channel remeandering, wetland creation, and riffle-and-pool installation project was financed through the green infrastructure portion of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act. Projects designed to improve water quality also assist the village in demonstrating compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.
West Fork Corridor
Prah et al. (Reference Prah, Stoll, Zimmerman, Miller, Carlson and White2008) delineate four environmental corridors in the village, of which the West Fork corridor has the greatest concentration of public open space. Protection of the West Fork corridor has been an organizing principle for most of the capital projects arising from the natural resources plan to date, as 71% of the village is within the West Fork watershed. The village in turn constitutes approximately 12% of the West Fork's watershed (Lake County Stormwater Management Commission, 2008). Thus, activities in the village can have a strong impact on the West Fork's water quality. Streambank stabilization, remeandering, and riffle-and-pool projects have restored aquatic and terrestrial habitat along the West Fork corridor. As habitat within these open spaces is improved, the expected result is improved mobility and protection of wildlife and native plants along the corridor and the open spaces it connects (Brudvig et al., Reference Brudvig, Damschen, Tewksbury, Haddad and Levey2009; Damschen et al., Reference Damschen, Haddad, Orrock, Tewksbury and Levey2006).
Although a good deal of public land is centered on the West Fork, the majority of the West Fork corridor is in private ownership. The natural resources plan recommends developing incentive programs for residents and businesses to enhance its ecological function. The NRC has initiated a communications campaign to raise awareness of biological engineering approaches to streambank stabilization, and has applied for a grant to enable the village to offer financial assistance to residents choosing to stabilize their property by using such techniques. If funded, the program will be modeled on the existing rain garden program.
Rain Garden Program
Collaboratively created by the village's development department and the NRC, the residential rain garden reimbursement program provides incentive to private landowners to alleviate drainage problems on their property by using a green infrastructure technique. Residential scale rain gardens have been used to improve drainage on individual sites and throughout neighborhoods (Barr Engineering, 2006). Rain gardens have been shown to be effective at reducing flow volumes, sediment concentrations and loads, nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations and loads, bacteria concentrations and loads, heavy-metal concentrations and loads, and oil and grease (Hunt and Lord, Reference Hunt and Lord2006).
The village's rain garden reimbursement program slightly predates adoption of the natural resources plan, but the plan references the program as an initiative to expand and to serve as a model for other incentive programs aimed at protecting natural resources. The program reimburses residents 50% of their expenses to install a rain garden, up to $1,000. Related to the program are rain gardens installed in public or semipublic settings, which familiarize residents considering the program with the aesthetic and drainage properties of rain gardens.
To date, 28 residential rain gardens have been completed under the program (Figure 2). Table 2 summarizes the overwhelmingly positive answers of the 20 residents who responded to a 2011 follow-up survey about the success of the rain gardens and the program. Although participants self-select into the program and therefore may be predisposed to a positive view of rain gardens, the results of the survey encourage the village to continue to offer this and develop similar cost-share incentive programs.
Figure 2. Participation in the Village of Glenview's residential rain garden reimbursement program.
Table 2. Residential rain garden reimbursement program participant survey results
Detention Basin Retrofits
In aggregate, dry detention ponds occupy over 8 acres of open space available for habitat improvement (Prah et al., Reference Prah, Stoll, Zimmerman, Miller, Carlson and White2008). Three were selected for a land-cover retrofit from turfgrass to native vegetation, funded through the 319 program due to the anticipated improvements in water quality as they eventually drain to the West Fork. The deeper roots and coarser texture of native vegetation may better capture storm water during light rains, increasing the opportunity for infiltration and microbial and vegetative transformation or uptake of pollutants. Selbig and Balster (Reference Selbig and Balster2010) demonstrate that, in experimental rain gardens, pollutant removal was superior when landscaped with native plants rather than turf. Detention basin retrofits are recommended by the North Branch Watershed-Based Plan (Lake County Stormwater Management Commission, 2008) for their water-quality benefits and by the village's natural resources plan (Village of Glenview, 2008) for their habitat benefits.
In 1998, prior to the development of the natural resources plan, a large-scale project to naturalize a dry detention basin took place at the 65-acre Techny basin. The basin catches overflow during flood stages of the West Fork, and its flood-control functions are operated by the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago. Its habitat functions, however, contribute greatly to the village's green infrastructure because the basin is part of the largest remaining open-space complex and is along the West Fork corridor.
Associated Projects and Programs
The Glen redevelopment and natural resources planning processes raised awareness of green infrastructure throughout village departments. Shortly after the Board adopted the natural resources plan, a staff green team with interdepartmental membership was formed to identify opportunities to improve village operations with respect to natural resources, expanding the focus from habitat and water-quality issues to energy conservation and other environmental concerns. Additionally, in response to severe flooding during a 2008 storm, the village created a citizen's Stormwater Task Force. Major projects with habitat, storm water, and efficiency benefits arising through a combination of these forces include public rain gardens and a parking lot featuring permeable pavement, bioswales, and light-emitting diode (LED) lighting.
Communications
An essential component of the NRC's mission is to inform Glenview residents and the wider public about the presence and benefits of natural resources in the village, and the natural resources plan. The NRC hosts several habitat restoration and litter-cleanup volunteer workdays annually, prepares informational brochures and signs, develops print and electronic communications campaigns targeting specific resource issues, attends speaking events, and staffs tables at village events. NRC meetings are public, and special meetings are offered as natural resources capital projects are developed. The NRC also participates in regional planning and green infrastructure initiatives to stay aware of regionally relevant opportunities.
Relationship of the Plan to Green Infrastructure Planning Principles and Regional Plans
Benedict and McMahon (Reference Benedict and McMahon2006) list 10 principles of green infrastructure. Table 3 outlines these principles and the response of the village's natural resources plan to them. Moreover, the natural resources plan is consistent with regional green infrastructure planning priorities, placing them in a local context. In particular, the natural resources plan reflects the emphasis on open-space protection described in the North Branch of the Chicago River Open Space (Green Infrastructure) Plan (Futurity, 2005) and the importance of watershed planning outlined in the North Branch Chicago River Watershed-Based Plan (Lake County Stormwater Management Commission, 2008). Chicago Wilderness's Biodiversity Recovery Plan (1999) outlines eight steps necessary to achieve its overall goal “to protect the natural communities of the Chicago region and to restore them to long-term viability, in order to enrich the quality of life of its citizens and to contribute to the preservation of global biodiversity” (p. 7). In analyzing existing natural resources and making recommendations for their maintenance and restoration and resident outreach, the natural resources plan takes these steps within the local area and thereby contributes to the larger goal.
Table 3. Comparison of Glenview's natural resources plan with green infrastructure planning principles
a Benedict and McMahon (Reference Benedict and McMahon2006).
b Village of Glenview (2008) and Prah et al. (Reference Prah, Stoll, Zimmerman, Miller, Carlson and White2008).
General Guidelines
As the village continues to implement its natural resources plan, numerous challenges remain, including access to grant funding and capital projects funding, given competing municipal interests, outreach and coordination with other landowners in the village and in the region, and the overall developed nature of the suburb, offering small natural areas and a frequent need to retrofit rather than the luxury of advance open-space planning. Nevertheless, the NRC has several accomplishments. To municipalities contemplating green infrastructure planning, we recommend the factors we consider to have contributed to these successes:
1. A Board-appointed commission with well-defined priorities. The NRC, as an advisory body to the Village of Glenview board of trustees, is incorporated into the village's political structure. Importantly, the members, and particularly the founding chair, have long records of political involvement and influence in the village. This provides a significant advantage in building a relationship with the Board, which approves NRC initiatives. The NRC's firm commitment to habitat improvement has enabled it to focus its efforts. While other environmental priorities are supported by the NRC, most energy is dedicated to advocating habitat projects.
2. A well-researched plan. Prior to developing the natural resources plan, the NRC commissioned three studies providing extensive detail about the history and current conditions of natural resources in the village. These thorough ecological assessments provide a strong scientific basis for the recommendations of the plan.
3. Mutual benefits of storm-water management, water-quality improvements, and habitat restoration. The NRC's emphasis on habitat improvements, combined with the Stormwater Task Force's mandate to alleviate flooding, the federal Clean Water Act section 319 emphasis on water-quality improvement, and the federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System's requirements for municipalities to reduce non-point-source pollution, have combined to facilitate grant funding and Board support of several capital projects. To the extent that a habitat improvement project can also be viewed as a water-quality initiative, the project becomes more relevant to municipal responsibilities.
4. Consistency with regional plans. The natural resources plan is a local manifestation of green infrastructure goals described in several regional plans and of principles found in national and international green infrastructure planning. This consistency lends support and legitimacy to the plan, while the local scale of the plan allows for implementation beyond the scope of the regional plans.
5. Cooperation at the local level. Several of the properties in which the village initiated habitat protection and improvement have been transferred to Glenview Park District management. This is in keeping with the perception that natural area management, and associated passive recreation, are more closely aligned with the mission of park districts than with municipalities. Transfer of the properties was conducted as a public process with deed restrictions and other legal agreements to ensure that habitat protection continued. The natural resources plan also provides recommendations for Glenview Park District properties, and cooperation between the agencies is ongoing.
6. Peer recognition. Two Chicago Wilderness/Environmental Protection Agency Conservation and Native Landscaping awards and one Excellence in Conservation award, as well as a Friends of the Chicago River Silver Ribbon award, have been bestowed on village natural resources projects. The peer recognition increases the NRC's commitment to its work and, it is hoped, strengthens Board support by demonstrating that the projects have achieved their goals.
7. Incentives for private landowners. Through the rain garden program and a streambank stabilization program in development, the village encourages private landowners to implement green infrastructure on their properties. As the majority of land in the village is in private ownership, incentives and recognition for private actions consistent with the natural resources plan are important if they increase participation.
8. Community outreach. Through a variety of volunteer workdays, publications, meetings, events, and other communication efforts, the village attempts to keep residents informed about natural resources and their accessibility to residents who choose to enjoy them or participate in their improvement. Local public support is vital to continued implementation of the natural resources plan.
9. Adopting an implementation plan. The NRC has prepared a five-year implementation plan, reviewed and updated annually. The implementation plan, however, has not been adopted by the Board. Official adoption might facilitate approval of natural resources–related projects.
Conclusions
The Village of Glenview's natural resources plan grew in part from the momentum of the Glen redevelopment project, a unique opportunity occasioned by the closure of the GNAS. Nevertheless, green infrastructure planning is itself gaining momentum. Increasing focus on the utility of natural open space to provide storm-water management, climate-change mitigation, recreation, and other services will likely reinforce this trend. By creating a local plan, the village can be more agile in its search for and response to habitat improvement opportunities. Continued coordination with regional planning efforts, support of other jurisdictions seeking to develop green infrastructure plans, and attention to implementation will enable the village to continue its progress toward natural resources improvement goals.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank the Village of Glenview Natural Resources Commission for years of dedicated service. Members of the Natural Resources Commission have included Kent Fuller (originator and chair, 2003–2010), Henrietta Saunders (member from 2008 and chair from 2010 to present), Judy Beck, Rob Blomquist, Carol Freeman, Ron Ganim, Karen Glennemeier, Nancy Halliday, and high school student members Anders Ahlberg, Casey Chiappetta, Benjamin May, and Hannah Nelson. Thanks also to the consultants and contractors, Village staff, and Village board of trustees for authorizing and implementing the various projects that make A Plan for Nature in Glenview viable. Grant funding for several of the projects described in the article has been administered by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency and the Lake County Stormwater Management Commission (in part through its North Branch Planning Committee). Mike Digiannantonio of MGP created Figure 1.
