Wicker Park Bucktown Green Infrastructure Guide by Andrew Broderick

WICKER PARK BUCKTOWN GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE GUIDE: A Neighborhood Specific Tool for Stormwater Management Planning and Design Prepared for Wicker Park Bucktown SSA #33, Chicago, IL December 17, 2010 Andrew J. Broderick, Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Michigan

Acknowledgements Wicker Park Bucktown SSA Commissioners David Ginople Larry Griffin Joseph Hall Wayne A. Janik Sheila Kailus Brent Norsman Laura Weathered

Wicker Park Bucktown SSA Guide Development Committee Members Larry Griffin, Co-Chair Laura Weathered, Co-Chair Suzanne Keers John Paige Kirsten Hull Daniel Dean

WPB SSA Leadership Jamie Simone, Program Manager Eleanor Mayer, Assistant Program Manager Adam Burck, Executive Director, Wicker Park Chamber of Commerce

Wicker Park Bucktown Special Service Area #33 Academic Advisor Professor Larissa Larsen, Department of Urban Planning, University of Michigan

Wicker Park Bucktown Chamber of Commerce 1414 N. Ashland Chicago, IL 60622

Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning University of Michigan 2000 Bonisteel Boulevard Ann Arbor, MI 48109

List of Organization Acronyms Found in this Guide BCO – Bucktown Community Organization CCAP - Chicago Climate Action Plan CCGT – Chicago Center for Green Technology CDOE - City of Chicago Department of Environment CDOT – City of Chicago Department of Transportation CNT – Center for Neighborhood Technology DPZ - City of Chicago Department of Zoning and Land Use Planning DWM – City of Chicago Department of Water Management EVA – East Village Association IGIG – Illinois Green Infrastructure Grant Program IEPA – Illinois Environmental Protection Agency MWRD – Metropolitan Water Reclamation District ULI - Urban Land Institute U.S. EPA – United States Environmental Protection Agency USGBC - United State Green Building Council WPB – Wicker Park Bucktown Special Service Area #33 WPB GIG – Wicker Park Bucktown Green Infrastructure Guide WPC – Wicker Park Committee

Table of Contents 3.3 Green Infrastructure Strategies in Detail

1.0 Executive Summary 1.1 Impetus for Action 1.2 Chicago Climate Action Plan Summary 1.3 What is Green Infrastructure? 1.4 Green Infrastructure Glossary 1.5 Purpose of Guide 1.6 The Wicker Park Bucktown Neighborhood 1.7 Community Input and Planning Process

2.0 Recommendations 2.1 Educate and Spread the Word 2.2 Utilize the Tools 2.3 Incentivize the Guide 2.4 Evaluate Effectiveness 2.5 Advocate for Change 2.6 Implement Recommendations

3.0 Toolbox 3. 1 Built Typologies Typology 1: Narrow Lot Single/Multi Family Building Typology 2: Worker’s Cottage Typology 3: Large Mixed Use Building Typology 4: Strip Commercial Building with Parking Lot Typology 5: Commercial Corridor Street Typology 6: Residential Street Typology 7: Public Park/Plaza 3.2 Development Checklist

Green Infrastructure Guide

4 6 7 8 9 10 11

Bioinfiltration Green Roofs Pervious Paving Rain Barrels / Cisterns Stormwater Plants 3.4 Case Studies

St. Margaret Mary’s Maxwell Street Market Plaza Chicago Center for Green Technology Chicago’s 48th Ward

15 17 18 19 20 21 28

3.5 Chicago Resources

Green Programs: Roofs, Alleys, Homes, and Permits Illinois EPA Green Infrastructure Grant (IGIG) Center for Neighborhood Technology

33 34 36 38 40 42 44 46

4.0 Sources

5.0 Appendices

List of Figures and Tables Cover (from top to bottom): WPB Masterplan, Author’s Photo, Low Impact Development Center, Author’s Drawing

Figure 23: Bioswale Parkway in Brooklyn, NY, New York City Department of Environmental Protection (2010)

Figure 1: Diagram of Stormwater, U.S. EPA (2003). Protecting Water Quality from Urban Runoff

Figure 24: Bioswale Parkway in Brooklyn, NY, New York City Department of Environmental Protection (2010)

Figure 2: News Article, Chicago Tribune (2010) Figure 25: Residential Street Plan and Section Drawings, author’s drawings (2010) Figure 3: Amount of Rainfall Projection for Chicago, Chicago Climate Action Plan (2007) Figure 26: View of Existing Corner Park, author’s photo (2010) Figure 4: Projected Amount of Rainfall Events in Chicago, Chicago Climate Action Plan (2007) Figure 27: Aerial Photograph of Existing Corner Park, Google Earth Pro (2010) Figure 5: Bioswale in Parking Lot, Green City Blue Lake: Sustainability in Northeast Ohio. Figure 28: Park Plan Drawing, author’s drawing (2010) Figure 6: Five Point Intersection, Wicker Park Bucktown Masterplan (2009) Figure 29: Roadside Bioswale, Low Impact Development Urban Design Tools Website (2010) Figure 7: Map of City of Chicago, author’s drawing (2010) Figure 30: Vegetated Bioswale in Parking Lot Median, Morton Arboretum (2010) Figure 8: Utilize the Toolbox Diagram, author’s drawing (2010) Figure 31: Section Drawing through Bioswale, Chicago Stormwater Manual (2010) Figure 9: Front Cover, NYC Green Infrastructure Plan, New York City Department of Environmental Protection (2010). Figure 10: Pervious Pavers in Parking Stall, Evergreen State College, Olympia, WA, Green Infrastructure Album, Picasa (2007)

Figure 32: Section Drawing Flow-Through Planter, Chicago Stormwater Manual (2010) Figure 33: Intensive Green Roof Detail, Feldman Architects (2010) Figure 34: Green roof Tear-away Section Perspective, Chicago Stormwater Manual (2010)

Figure 11: Three-story Single Family Greystone Home, author’s photo (2010) Figure 35: Rain Barrel Section Sketch, Low Impact Development Center (2010) Figure 12: Narrow Lot Single/Multi Family Building Isometric Drawing, author’s drawing (2010) Figure 36: Section-perspective of Pervious Pavement, Chicago Stormwater Manual (2010) Figure 13: Worker’s Cottages in Bucktown, author’s photo (2010) Figure 14: Worker’s Cottage Isometric Drawing, author’s drawing (2010)

Figure 37: Permeable Pavement and Traditional Concrete, New York City Department of Environment (2010)

Figure 15: Converted Warehouse Loft, author’s photo (2010)

Figure 38: Buttonbush Photo, Chicago Botanical Garden (2010)

Figure 16: Large Mixed Use Building Isometric Drawing, author’s drawing (2010)

Figure 39: Building a Bioswale, Center for Neighborhood Technology (2007)

Figure 17: Commercial Strip Development on Ashland Ave., author’s photo (2010)

Figure 40: Pervious Pavers and Bioswale at Maxwell Street Market Plaza, CDOT (2010)

Figure 18: Strip Commercial Building and Parking Lot Isometric Drawing, author’s photo (2010)

Figure 41: Rain garden and large cistern a CCGT, brightgreenresearchblog (2010)

Figure 19: Ashland Avenue, author’s photo (2010)

Figure 42: Green Alley in northern Bucktown, author’s photo (2010)

Figure 20: Linked Green Sidewalk System, METRO Portland Green Streets Guide (2003)

Tables

Figure 21: Commercial Corridor Plan and Section Drawings, author’s drawings (2010) Figure 22: Moffat Street, author’s photo (2010)

Table 1: Pervious Pavement Matrix, Dietz (2007) Table 2: WPB GIG Plant Matrix, Morton Arboretum (2010), City of Chicago Bureau of Forestry (2010), Shaw and Schmidt (2003) WPB - Special Service Area #33

List of Appendices 5.1 List of Interviewee and Stakeholder Roundtable Participants 5.2 Maps of Reported Basement Flooding in Chicago 5.3 Illinois Watersheds Map 5.4 Wicker Park Bucktown SSA Map and Land Use Statistics 5.5 Municipal Ordinance Overview 5.6 List of Alleys with Flooding Problems in Wicker Park Bucktown 5.7 What is LEED 3.0? 5.8 Typology Calculation Worksheets

â&#x20AC;&#x153;There is an urgent need for an alternative basis for urban landscape form that is in tune with the growing awareness of, and concern for, the issue of energy, environment, and natural resource conservation.â&#x20AC;? - Michael Hough, landscape architect and urban planning professor 32

Green Infrastructure Guide

1.1 Impetus for Action Urban neighborhoods have a profound effect on both natural and engineered water drainage systems.1 In most cases, an increased amount of impervious surfaces such as roofs, streets, parking lots, and sidewalks result in a loss of natural drainage capacity and an increased reliance on conventional engineered sewer systems.

More broadly, green infrastructure is a significant element in urban and regional planning in the Chicago area as it is a driver of community improvement, water pollution mitigation, and has significant infrastructure cost savings.

The impact stormwater has on these surfaces is manifold. First, the increased rate and volume of stormwater runoff exacerbates downstream flooding, raises erosion and sedimentation levels, and increases habitat loss.2 Second, water quality is degraded by pollution sources including petrochemicals on streets and fertilizers on lawns.3 Furthermore, the impact of stormwater will be exacerbated in the future by the increased frequency of heavy rainfall events caused by climate change (see section 1.2).4 In fact, heavy rainfall events have doubled in Chicago since the 1970s.5 There are three reasons why the Wicker Park Bucktown neighborhood needs a green infrastructure plan: 1. The neighborhood consists of 79.4% impervious surface area, and the remaining 20.6% includes areas such as un-built private lots and turf grass lawns that are categorized as â&#x20AC;&#x153;pervious,â&#x20AC;? but consist of compacted soil or other materials that limit stormwater absorption.6 2. The neighborhood is adjacent to the North Branch of the Chicago River, and sits within the Great Lakes / Calumet River Watershed. The City of Chicago prioritizes cleaning its natural waterways, and water resource management is at the forefront of environmental sustainability efforts at the municipal level.7 3. The neighborhood wishes to further enhance its image as an attractive place to live, work, and play, and environmental sustainability is recognized as a key element in neighborhood attractiveness.8 These characteristics make Wicker Park Bucktown a prime neighborhood to implement innovative green infrastructure measures.

Figure 1: Diagram of Stormwater. Side-by-side diagrammatic comparison of stormwater action in a greenfield setting (left) and an urban setting (right). Note the high amount of impervious cover in the urban setting and the resulting high runoff percent (55%).

Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Like many large and old cities across the country, Chicago has a combined stormwater and wastewater sewer. This system sends all storm and waste water to one of three central wastewater treatment plants where it is treated and returned to the natural water system. This system functions well most of the time, and the positive outcome of this process is that all the water is treated as opposed to a separate sewer system where stormwater runoff goes directly into the natural water system untreated. However, in the event of a major storm event, the combined sewer system overflows and discharges untreated storm and waste water into the natural water system. This event effects water quality, diminishes habitat, and results in the closure of beaches along Lake Michigan.9 The City of Chicago recognizes the importance of stormwater management best practices and green infrastructure in dealing with CSOs. In 2009, the WPB - Special Service Area #33

Septembe

07:29: in Ch Find a story:

Neighborhood News Pages

Breaking N

More Breaking News: Blagojevich's belongings to be auctioned...

Woman critical after hit by car in McHenry...

Flood fallout: Area beaches still closed to swimming July 26, 2010 11:38 AM | No Comments | UPDATED STORY

Lake Michigan beaches, including those along Chicago's 26-mile lakefront, remain closed to swimmers today because of contaminated storm water overflow into Lake Michigan. Beaches were also closed Sunday. The Chicago Park District said on its hotline that it would reassess the city beach situation Tuesday. The Metropolitan Water Reclamation District said sewer overflow was discharged into the lake Saturday at the Wilmette pumping station and the Calumet and Chicago rivers. Information on beach conditions is available at the park district's web site. --Staff report

Figure 2: Flood Fallout News Article. A news article reports that all beaches along Chicago’s Lake Michigan shoreline were closed in the middle of summer due to water contamination from a combined sewer overflow event.

city established a Stormwater Ordinance that seeks to control the amount and rate of stormwater runoff. The ordinance requires either the capture of the first half inch of runoff on site or reduce the total impervious surfaces by 15% over existing conditions (see Appendix 5.5).10

Non-point Source Pollution Stormwater runoff is a leading source of non-point source pollution, which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) defines as any source of pollution that doesn’t come from a “discernible, confined, or discrete conveyance point,” but rather comes from diffuse sources.11 Stormwater is the leading agent in this category as it washes fertilizers, animal waste, petrochemicals, road salt, and other sediments into waterways. According to the U.S. EPA, most states now identify non-point source pollution as the most significant threat to water quality.12 Green Infrastructure Guide

Other Flooding Problems During heavy rainstorms, the large amount of stormwater runoff can often cause flooding. There are two main types of floods that occur in Chicago. First, street flooding, which occurs when conventional hard-pipe storm sewers back-up on to streets and, especially, alleys. This causes problems for transportation, and, at worst, can damage trees and buildSources of Non-point Pollution from ings. Second, basement floodStormwater Runoff in Urban Areas:13 ing occurs when storm drains overflow into basements (see Appendix 5.2). Both of these problems often act at the same time and cause great inconvenience and expense to local residents, especially property owners.14 The Chicago sewer system is designed to manage a 5-year storm event. A rain event greater than that will cause a back-up and possibly an overflow.15

- oil, grease, and toxic chemicals from motor vehicles - pesticides and nutrient from lawns and gardens - viruses and bacteria from pet waste - road salt - heavy metals from shingles and motor vehicles - sediment such as dirt and sand

Rising Infrastructure Costs In Chicago, like many urban centers, infrastructure is getting older and more costly to maintain and replace. The Department of Water Management (DWM) spends $50 million each year to clean and maintain the 4,400 miles of sewer pipes and 340,000 ancillary structures. DWM also spends $30 million a year in new construction.16 According to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s Green Infrastructure Study, the cost effectiveness of green infrastructure strategies are significantly stronger than a conventional engineered system and treatment infrastructure. 5

1.2 Chicago Climate Action Plan Summary The Chicago Climate Action Plan (CCAP), completed in 2007, is a comprehensive, research-based report that is the road map for how the Chicago region can reduce the impact of climate change and adapt to changing climate conditions. The plan seeks to reduce overall greenhouse gas emission, the primary cause of climate change, by 25% by 2020 over 1990 greenhouse gas levels.17 The plan focuses on changes to temperature, precipitation, and overall ecosystem adjustments. For the purposes of this guide, the projected increase in overall precipitation and more heavy rain storm with dry periods in between are particularly relevant. Chapter 3: Water is the most relevant section of the CCAP. It reveals two important projections.

2. More heavy rain storms with dry periods in between Heavy precipitations events â&#x20AC;&#x201D; rain and snow storms â&#x20AC;&#x201D; may increase considerably, thus increasing the risk of flooding and stormwater contamination.1

1. More precipitation overall per year Annual precipitation could increase by about 20% over the coming century. Most of this increase would occur in winter and spring, with little change in summer and fall.18

Figure 4: Projected Amount of Heavy Rain Events. This chart shows the projected rise in number of days of heavy rain events under two scenarios: lower total greenhouse gas emissions (in blue) and higher green house gas emissions (in red).

The CCAP also projects a 24 to 43% total increase of stormwater runoff due to the increase in precipitation.20 These projections increase the need for preemptive stormwater management planning that focuses on alternatives such as green infrastructure.

Figure 3: Amount of Rainfall Projection for Chicago. This chart shows the projected rise in precipitation amount during the Winter-Spring months under two scenarios: lower total greenhouse gas emissions (in blue) and higher green house gas emissions (in red).

WPB - Special Service Area #33

1.3 What is Green Infrastructure? Green infrastructure strategies seek to mitigate negative affects of stormwater run-off by restoring the natural, pre-development hydrological conditions on a site.21 Green infrastructure stands apart from other stormwater management approaches through its emphasis on cost-effective, lot-level strategies that reduce the impacts of development. By addressing runoff close to the source, green infrastructure can enhance the local environment and protect public health while saving developers and local governments money. Green infrastructure goals include: - Protecting and restoring existing hydrologic functions - Managing and cleaning water on-site - Designing stormwater features to be accessible to site users - Designing the site to minimize or eliminate use of potable water for irrigation22 One hallmark of green infrastructure is its flexibility. It offers a wide variety of approaches that vary in degree of scale, investment, and complexity to reduce the rate and volume of run-off. Towards this end, innovative site planning and building development techniques such as rain gardens, bioswales, green roofs, rainwater harvesting, landscape planting, and porous pavements are used to “capture, cleanse, recycle, and infiltrate water on-site.”23 A growing number of green infrastructure strategies and environmental planning initiatives have been implemented in American cities recently. For example, in 2008, Portland, Oregon, launched a green infrastructure initiative titled “Grey to Green: Going Green for Clean Rivers”, which is a plan of action to foster both macro and micro scale green infrastructure issues.24 The current rise in interest and application of water resource management strategies is fostered by the creation of several methods of assessment for effectiveness. In 2009, the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Infrastructure Guide

(LEED) program, which is administered by the United States Green Building Council, launched a Neighborhood Design (ND) rating system that rates environmental sustainability efforts ranging from site selection to energy efficiency to water use all at the neighborhood scale. That same year, the Sustainable Sites Initiative, lead by the American Society of Landscape Architects and the Lady Bird Johnson Foundation, created the SITES rating system, which focuses on ecological aspects of site selection and design. These rating systems, while their approach may be different, attempt to encourage and reward effective environmental design strategies through quantitative, Benefits of Green Infrastructure:25 research-backed guidelines. - Enhanced property values - Infrastructure cost savings While green infrastructure is sup- Improved water quality ported though technical research, rating systems, and case studies, - Improved wildlife habitat there are still impediments to imple- Thermal pollution reduction menting strategies at the commu- Able to retrofit landscape nity level. Challenges include public education and outreach, perceived - Reduce stormwater overload and actual cost increases, applying - Decreased flooding appropriate financial and regulatory incentives, developer push-back, and built out property with little room for grade level strategies.26

Situating Green Infrastructure within “Sustainability” Janis Birkeland, in her book Positive Development, writes that sustainability means “that all future generations will inherit substantive environmental and democratic rights – control over the means of survival, an increased ecological base, and genuine social choice.”36 Indeed, there are hundreds of definitions of sustainability, but this one features the phrase “increased ecological base” that positions green infrastructure — a strategy to improve water-based ecology — as an operative method within sustainability. In this regard, green infrastructure is one component of many under the umbrella of environmental sustainable design. 7

1.4 Green Infrastructure Glossary Note: unless otherwise noted, all definitions from: Nathan, K., Strom, S., & Woland, J. (2009). Site Engineering for Landscape Architects, (5 ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.

Green Roof – Roofs with a vegetated surface and substrate that seek to reduce stormwater runoff and mitigate the urban heat island effect through transpiration and evaporation and filter water through growing media.

Bioinfiltration - The act of water being absorbed into a vegetated surface consisting of trees, shrubs, perennials, and a growing medium like soil.

Extensive – Roofs that have a substrate that is less than 4” deep. These roofs are often comprised of a raised panel system that ‘sits’ on top of an existing roof. They usually don’t require as much structural load requirements.

Bioretention – A technique that uses planting strips, gardens, and swales to collect and filter stormwater. Bioswale – A sloped, vegetated area specifically designed for stormwater infiltration and conveyance.

stormwater run-off by restoring the natural, pre-development hydrological conditions on a site.

Figure 5: A bioswale in a parking lot, Cleveland, Ohio.

Compaction – The densification of a soil by a mechanical process.

Intensive – Roofs that have a substrate that is more than 4” deep. These roofs can accommodate larger shrubs and trees, and are often times accessible by humans. They usually have additional structural load requirements. The roof on City Hall in Chicago is an intensive roof. Impervious – The property of a material that does not permit the movement of water through it.

Combined Sewer System – A type of sewer system that combines both stormwater and wastewater and moves the towards a central treatment facility. Under normal conditions, all water is sent to the treatment facility.28

Infiltration – The downward entry of water into the immediate surface of a soil.

Combined Sewer Overflow – The release of untreated storm and waste water into a natural water feature during a heavy rain event that overloads the water treatment system. This event harms the health and habitat of the watershed. 29

Non-point source pollution – According to the U.E. EPA, it is any source of pollution that doesn’t come from a “discernible, confined, or discrete conveyance point,” but rather comes from diffuse sources including stormwater runoff.31

Filter Strip – A vegetated buffer zone for removing sediments and pollutants before runoff reaches ponds, waterways, or other drainage facilities.

Peak discharge – The maximum instantaneous flow rate of stormwater resulting from a given storm condition at a specific location.

Greywater - The nonhuman waste fraction of wastewater that can be re-used for specific non-consumption uses like irrigation and toilet flushing.30

Pervious – The property of a material that permits movement of water through it.

Green Infrastructure* - A site planning strategy to mitigate negative effects of

Pervious Concrete/Asphalt – Site poured concrete/asphalt featuring porous

WPB - Special Service Area #33

1.5 Purpose of Guide aggregate that allows water to pass through. Pervious Pavers – Precast interlocking pavers that allow water to pass through. Porous – Having many small openings through which liquids may pass. Rain Barrel – A barrel connected to a building’s roof gutter system that collects water for use in irrigation. They are usually for small-scale applications like residential homes. Rain Cistern - Similar to a rain barrel, but much larger. They are used for large scale projects and they might be above or below ground, or in the basement of a building. They can also connect to a greywater system. Rain Garden – A small scale bioinfiltration system that is vegetated and designed for stormwater infiltration, but it doesn’t slope inward like a bioswale. Runoff – That part of precipitation that isn’t absorbed on-site and is carried away the area on which it fell. Sediment – Solid material, both mineral and organic, in suspension, being transported, or having been moved from its original site by air, water, gravity or ice. Watershed – Region or area contributing to the supply of a stream or lake. Wicker Park Bucktown is in the Chicago/Calumet Watershed (see Appendix 5.3).

*Note: there is a second meaning of the term “green infrastructure” that refers to large-scale connectivity of green spaces for the preservation of wildlife habitat and natural resources. This definition, however, is not adopted by the U.S. EPA and is not used in this guide. Green Infrastructure Guide

WPB is seeking to advance its environmental sustainability efforts as a result of its 2009 Master Plan, which outlined several environmental endeavors ranging from stormwater management to green building technologies*. 33 Currently, most green infrastructure environmental sustainability planning occurs at the city or regional level, and many green infrastructure strategies operate on large, suburban greenfield sites. The Wicker Park Bucktown Green Infrastructure Guide (WPB GIG), however, seeks to address green infrastructure on a place-specific urban neighborhood level. As one outcome of this planning process, this guide seeks to determine how the community might identify and implement green infrastructure strategies. The guide is a resource tool for multiple stakeholders including property owners, developers, property managers, and community organizations as well as policy decision makers. Specifically, the guide aims to address three objectives: reduce demand on the City of Chicago’s stormwater infrastructure system, improve the quality of water runoff entering the Chicago River, control urban flooding, and promote best practices in ‘green’ design amongst developers, business owners, and property owners in the neighborhood. Finally, this plan will serve as a model for other dense, urban communities in temperate climates to help establish and implement green infrastructure strategies. This guide is the first piece of the puzzle for addressing environmental sustainability in the Wicker Park Bucktown neighborhood. Other potential subjects for further investigation include energy efficiency, resource and material use, urban forestry improvement, and a strengthened community recycling program.

*The following recommendations in the WPB Masterplan are addressed in this guide: 5.1 Adopt an official stance on density and development; 5.2 - Promote Low Impact Development (LID)(LID is interchangeable with green infrastructure); 5.3 - Work to redevelop strategic sites; 6.3 - Integrate stormwater best management practices into streetscape design; 6.4 - Green the alleyways; 6.5 Improve the urban forest; 6.6 - Make Western and Ashland Avenues green boulevards.

1.6 The Wicker Park Bucktown Neighborhood

Lake Michigan

er Riv

Wicker Park Bucktown

O’Hare Airport

ica

As a result of the neighborhood’s rich and textured history, land use in the neighborhood is a combination Figure 6: Five Point Intersection with Flatiron Building . The iconic Flatiron of mixed use, Building at the five point intersection of Milwaukee Ave., North Ave., and Damen Ave, which is the heart of Wicker Park Bucktown. The downtown commercial Chicago skyline is in the background. and residential types with a small amount of industrial, institutional and park land. Most buildings are between two to four stories tall, and spaced closely together resulting in a density typical of most historic urban neighborhoods in Chicago. Along the commercial corridors, the neighborhood land use is overwhelmingly mixed use with 83 % of parcel frontage requiring a ground floor commercial space

(see Appendix 5.4).35 On residential streets, housing ranges from single family residential homes to duplexes and townhouses to multi-unit apartment buildings and converted lofts.

The Wicker Park Bucktown neighborhood is a vibrant, diverse, and historic neighborhood on Chicago’s near northwest side. From the 1850s through the 1950s, the neighborhood was a multi-ethnic, working class immigrant community. In the 1960s the area went through a period of disinvestment and neglect similar to many urban American neighborhoods. The neighborhood began to revitalize itself as it transitioned into an alternative culture and creative arts hot spot. Young professionals began to relocate to the neighborhood in the late-1990s given its affordable rents, ‘hip’ culture and proximity to downtown. Today, the neighborhood is growing rapidly stemming from a mixed-tapestry of young professionals, an underground arts culture, and revitalized real estate and commercial markets. The neighborhood has a nationally recognized “brand” that blends “diversity with creative and cool.”34

The ‘Loop’

Like most of Chicago’s Northside, Wicker Park iver oR cag Chi Bucktown is mostly flat. The neighborhood, once a City of Chicago grassland prairie adjacent to swampy lowlands where the Chicago River meets Lake Michigan, is now an intense mix of buildings and streets with little remnants of its natural history. 0 2 4 miles The adjacent river was used mostly for industrial Figure 7: Map of the City of Chicago showing the location of purposes throughout the Wicker Park Bucktown in relation to the ‘Loop’ and O’Hare Airport. The Chicago River and Lake Michigan are the most city’s history. However, important natural water features in the city. recent efforts are underway to restore the river’s water quality. Finally, the neighborhood boasts a high quality street tree canopy and several urban parks that serve as habitat for urban wildlife.

WPB - Special Service Area #33

1.7 Planning Process and Community Input This guide is the product of a five month long planning process that focused on obtaining and using community input, client feedback, and technical advice at several junctions. The planning process also entailed an intensive literature review, field investigation, and academic criticism. With the overarching goal of developing a guide that is usable, realistic, and place-specific, the planning process was separated into five contiguous phases.

This phase also involved presenting the findings from the literature review, and developing a common understanding of what green infrastructure is across multi-constituency groups.

Phase One: Project Kickoff and Research Period

Phase Three: Guide Development Part One

Phase one involved an initial meeting with the client, WPB, to discuss the project premise, goals, deliverable expectations, and timeline. A field investigation was also conducted. This involved walking the neighborhood, analyzing urban conditions and patterns of neighborhood districts, corridors, blocks, and buildings. This phase also involved a preliminary literature review, which investigated sources regarding green infrastructure and information specific to the neighborhood and Chicago.

Phase three involved creating a rough draft for review and feedback. The built typologies and development checklist took shape, as did the recommendations and executive summary. Multiple conversations with the client were had regarding the direction this guide was heading. This phase concluded with a presentation of the draft to the WPB Guide Development Committee, which is in charge of setting the framework for new development occurring within the WPB District (see Appendix 5.4 for map). The committee provided additional feedback on the draft, which was also incorporated into the final edition.

Phase Two: Community Engagement and Research Review Phase two involved reaching out to various community stakeholders including representatives from neighborhood organizations such as the Wicker Park Committee, East Village Association, and Bucktown Community Organization. The 32nd and 1st Aldermanic Wards were contacted, as were private developers, local residents, and property managers. Green infrastructure experts from the Center for Neighborhood Technology and Conservation Design Forum were asked for their expertise. Municipal experts from the Chicago Department of Environment, Department of Transportation, Department of Community Development, and Department of Zoning and Land Use Planning were also interviewed.

(note: for the full list of interviewees and stakeholder roundtable participants, please see Appendix 5.1)

Phase Four: Guide Development Part Two Phase four involved developing the implementation strategy enhancing and refining the recommendations, and brainstorming incentive strategies. The development checklist was finalized and the built typologies were completed. The final draft was completed and delivered to the client.

Phase Five: Guide Approval The final part of the project involves presenting the final guide to the WPB Commission for formal adoption into WPBâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s official documents.

In mid-October, a stakeholder roundtable meeting was held at WPBâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office. This roundtable was an open forum for feedback and opinions on what this guide could become and how it could be used. This event proved to be of paramount importance, as many of the thoughts and ideas from that meeting found their way into this guide. Green Infrastructure Guide

Section 1 Endnotes 1. Strom, N., Nathan, K., Woland, J., (2009)

26. ibid

2, Patchett, J., Price, T., Simone, J. (2007)

27. Strom, N., Nathan, K., Woland, J., (2009)

3. ibid

28. City of Chicago Department of Building (2010)

4. Mailhot, A., Duchesne, S. (2010)

29. ibid

5. City of Chicago Climate Change Taskforce (2007)

30. Kibert, C.J. (Ed). (2005)

6. Wicker Park Bucktown Special Service Area #33 (2009)

31. U.S. EPA (2003)

7. City of Chicago Department of Environment (2010)

32. Quoted in METRO Portland (2002)

8. Wicker Park Bucktown Special Service Area #33 (2009)

33. Wicker Park Bucktown Special Service Area #33 (2009)

9. City of Chicago Department of Building (2010)

34. ibid

10. City of Chicago Department of Water Management (2010)

35. ibid

11. U.S. EPA (2003) 12. ibid 13. ibid 14. City of Chicago Department of Environment (2010) 15. City of Chicago Department of Building (2010) 16. ibid 17. City of Chicago Climate Change Taskforce (2007) 18. ibid 19. ibid 20. ibid 21. U.S. EPA (2000) 22. Sustainable Sites Initiative (2009) 23. Patchett, J., Price, T., Simone, J. (2007) 24. Pelletier, M. R. (2009) 25. U.S. EPA (2000)

WPB - Special Service Area #33

2.0 Recommendations

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Stormwater is not a mechanical system. It is an environmental process, joining the atmosphere, the soil, vegetation, land use, and streams, and sustaining landscapes. In every landscape the falling of rain, the shining of the sun and the blowing of the wind are the beginning of all life.â&#x20AC;? - Bruce K. Ferguson, professor of landscape architecture36

2.1 Educate and Spread the Word One of the central challenges to green infrastructure is educating people about the harmful environmental effects stormwater has on water quality and the huge public financial expense of building and maintaining infrastructure to manage stormwater. It is easy for stormwater to seem innocuous, and the infrastructure that manages it invisible. In order to promote green infrastructure, WPB should focus on educating the public on the environmental effects of stormwater run-off and how the use of green infrastructure strategies can solve the problem. Education initiatives should be categorized by user group so the information is tailored by interest and need. However, everyone should be made aware of the general flow of stormwater in an urban setting, the importance of reducing the amount of untreated runoff that goes into the sewer system, and the danger of combined sewer overflows.

- Focus primarily on residential and small business typologies, and how a semi-skilled or novice can implement these strategies. - Incorporate cost information and explain the multiple benefits for a home owner or business owner. - The education session should be a series that focuses on a new topic each time or it could be a one day seminar with general education followed by topic-specific break-out sessions. These sessions might include hands-on demonstrations of how to install pavers, choose/care for native plants, install rain barrels, install rain gardens

User Group: Developers (Potential partners: Baum Realty, CCGT, CNT, USGBC, ULI)

User Group: Property Management Companies & Condominium Associations (Potential Partners: Living Room Realty, Wicker Park Garden Club, BCO, CNT, CCGT)

- Provide an education session on green infrastructure and development in the WPB district.

- Provide an education session on green infrastructure and retrofitting existing buildings in the WPB district.

- Focus primarily on new construction with some discussion of ways to retrofit existing buildings.

- Relate the expenses to savings over time since this group is responsible for long term stewardship of buildings and manages building improvements/ maintenance.

- Include information about how developers could use WPB GIG, take advantage of the incentives being offered (see recommendation 2.3), and discuss the green infrastructure development checklist. - Incorporate cost information and explain multiple benefits of green infrastructure. User Group: The Do-It-Yourself (DIY) Weekend Warriors (Potential partners: Living Room Realty, Wicker Park Garden Club, BCO, CNT, CCGT) - Provide an education session on green infrastructure as it relates to retrofitting existing buildings and other small scale, inexpensive DIY techniques. Green Infrastructure Guide

General User Group: Education/Demonstration Campaign (Potential Partners: CCGT, CNT, BCO, Wicker Park Garden Club, WPC, property owners) - Encourage interested parties to visit CCGT’s or the City of Chicago Department of Environment’s website to see the array of education and incentive programs that are available. - Encourage interested parties to visit CNT’s website for more education. - Work with the Wicker Park Garden Club (or other local clubs as they become available) to inform people of the WPB GIG and have special 17

2.1 Educate and Spread the Word

2.2 Utilize the Tools

“stormwater plant” tables at their plant sales.

Green infrastructure strategies often require rethinking conventional practices in Chicago, and that is why this guide has a toolbox to assist decision making. It is a resource to help various stakeholders take action by incorporating green infrastructure elements into their projects. The toolbox contains useful things like a developer checklist, visual built typology illustrations, case studies, and an in-depth report on individual green infrastructure elements.

- Develop larger scale education opportunities. For example, create ‘pop-up’ shops on a busy commercial street with different demonstration displays inside showing how green infrastructure elements such as a rain barrel or green roof function. - Create garden walks and home renovation tours by partnering with BCO and other organizations that sponsor tours so that green infrastructure projects are highlighted. Spread the Word: Websites, Newsletters, Signage, and Press (Potential Partners: WPB Chamber of Commerce, CNT, BCO, WPC, 1st and 32nd Wards, Our Urban Times, EVA, WPC, and Holstein AC) - Distribute a press release to local partner organizations so they can publicize the release of the WPB GIG. - Send a brief WPG GIG summary write-up for neighborhood organizations to include in newsletter. - Post the entire WPB GIG online and create an interactive web component. For example, the checklist should be interactive and hyperlinks in the document should be active. - Establish a frequently asked question document and update it over time. - Any project that receives WPB GIG designation or rebate will receive a sign/ plaque to be posted on the project. This should be a requirement of receiving a rebate. - Issue a press release for any project that receives WPB GIG designation or rebate. Residential projects may refuse the press release if they choose.

WPB - Special Service Area #33

2.3 Incentivize the Guide One of the core challenges to implementing green infrastructure strategies on private developments is providing incentives, especially when strategies might cost more up-front. WPB can create their own financial incentives to encourage green infrastructure within its boundaries. It can also encourage green infrastructure through non-financial incentives. 2.3.1 Offer home and business cost differential rebates to defray the upfront costs of green infrastructure strategies to businesses and property owners within the WPB boundaries. WPB should provide a rebate for the incremental cost difference in installing WPB GIG approved techniques in the following home and business repair projects: - Gutter repair and rain barrel projects - Surface parking lot improvements including vegetated swales and rain garden installation

trees, permeable pavers, rain barrels or cisterns, and green roof trays. This effort would also require complementary programs including hosting an online garden bulb purchasing event as a fundraiser activity and conducting workshops to provide instruction on the installation of bulk purchased items. 2.3.4 Encourage local community organizations to establish a “BlueGreen Thumb Recognition Award.” This award would recognize a local property owner’s implementation of a significant green infrastructure strategy. 2.3.5 Encourage the 1st and 32nd Ward Alderman offices to allocate a portion of their Aldermanic Menu Program budget towards green infrastructure improvement projects including funding for green alleys and other improvement projects within the public right-of-way (see a list of problem alleys in Appendix 5.6). 2.3.6 Seek other financial incentives for green infrastructure.

- Roofing and paving improvement projects such as green roofs and permeable paver installation 2.3.2. Create a green infrastructure public amenity space rebate for a business that wishes to install a demonstration intensive green roof that is accessible to the public. WPB will provide financial and technical assistance to help offset the cost to construct the project if the following conditions are met: 1. The project has a required public access component such as regular tours, open hours, coordinated stops on Bucktown and Wicker Park garden walks and other relevant neighborhood events. 2. The project’s development plan is reviewed and approved by a pro bono advisory committee to ensure compliance and effectiveness of the demonstration project. 2.3.3 Offer the coordination of bulk purchasing of preferred plants, Green Infrastructure Guide

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency recently announced a $5 million annual Green Infrastructure Grant for projects of all sizes created by the private, public, and non-profit sectors. There are three categories for different types of projects: combined sewer overflow and rehabilitation, stormwater retention and infiltration, and green infrastructure small projects category.37 Most projects in Wicker Park Bucktown fit under the third category. Beginning in 2011, the Chicago Department of Environment (CDOE) will offer financial and technical support for green infrastructure projects to promote biodiversity, manage stormwater, and fight climate change. The initiative, called “My Action Plan,” will engage residents in actions that support the Chicago Climate Action Plan. Residents will be able to access financial and technical support through an online tool that will provide site-specific recommendations and allow them to track their actions on an interactive map. The financial incentives for green infrastructure projects are currently funded through grants from the USDA Forest Service and the U.S. EPA. More information will be available at www.chicagoclimateaction.org/.38 19

2.4 Evaluate Effectiveness It is important for WPB to evaluate the effectiveness of new green infrastructure elements while continuing to ‘set-the-bar’ for neighborhood innovation in green infrastructure planning and design. Evaluating effectiveness establishes a goal that WPB can pursue by using this guide, and it adds “teeth” to implementing green infrastructure in the neighborhood. The following ideas are options to consider for evaluating projects that use this guide, specifically the green infrastructure checklist (section 3.2). The baselines and new targets suggested here could be a way for WPB to issue incentives. Crucial to evaluating effectiveness is establishing a baseline from which to measure progress. There are two options for creating a baseline: Adopt the average pervious surface area of 20% for the WPB district according to the WPB Masterplan as a baseline for all new projects to use OR Adopt a parcel-specific baseline based on the current percent pervious coverage of a particular site. Both of these baselines have advantages and disadvantages. Adopting the average pervious surface of the WPB district is a very simple metric that is backed by the masterplan calculation*. However, it doesn’t account for the varied site conditions found in the WPB district and the rest of the neighborhood. For example, a worker’s cottage on a residential street has, in general, a greater percentage of pervious surface area compared to a shared-wall, 4-story mixed use building on Milwaukee Avenue. The built typologies (section 3.1) illustrate this point. The parcel-specific baseline is a much more accurate calculation of the current condition, and, thus, serves as a better baseline in which to measure progress. It does involve a more complex calculation of total square footage,

which some homeowners could have a hard time doing without appropriate tools. The developer checklist (section 3.2) uses this metric. Finally, flexibility is very important to consider when establishing new targets. Setting reasonable targets is key in order to move the middle-percent of homeowners who might consider green infrastructure on a small scale but wouldn’t necessarily want to build an intensive green roof over their entire structure. Also, using a percentage of pervious surface area is a very good way to level the playing field between different size sites with different land uses. The following are two different options to set new targets for evaluating effectiveness: Option 1: Use the development checklist to set new targets based on improving (a) total pervious surface area and (b) total reduction in peak discharge. For new developments: (a) Use the 20% benchmark for pervious coverage (established based on WPB’s Masterplan) and exceed that by 10%, so the total pervious surface area would be 30% minimum. (b) Use CNT’s Green Values Calculator® to meet at least a 40% reduction in peak flow discharge over conventional scenario. For existing buildings: (a) Calculate current percent of pervious coverage using the development checklist, exceed that by 10%, but not to be below 30% total pervious area. (b) Calculate current peak flow discharge using CNT’s Green Values Calculator®, exceed current peak flow discharge by 10%, but not to be below at least a 40% reduction in peak flow discharge.

* According to page 64 of the Wicker Park Bucktown Masterplan, the total percent of impervious surface area in the district is 79.4%, which means that 19.6% of surfaces are pervious.39

WPB - Special Service Area #33

2.5 Advocate for Change Option 2: Set an annual gross square foot of new pervious surface goal for the entire WPB district that rises every year. It would look something like this: Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

5,000 gsf of pervious surface added 7,500 gsf 10,000gsf

5,000 gsf total 12,500 gsf total 22,500 gsf total

This option is more flexible as it is a simple aggregation, but it isn’t nearly as rigorous as option 1. There isn’t an indicator for total peak flow reduction. This idea is like setting a portfolio standard for WPB that challenges WPB to increase its annual impact on stormwater management (see recommendation 2.5, suggestion 5). It is very simple to calculate and emphasizes the greater whole of the district as opposed to individual parcel targets. Option 2 might be a measuring tool for the WPB district, while option 1 might be a measuring tool for individual parcels. Finally, it is worth consulting CNT to get an expert engineer’s opinion on what the acceptable targets are for reducing total peak flow discharge and evaluating overall effectiveness. CNT created the Green Values Calculator®, which is a simple and free online tool that property owners and developers can use to calculate the benefits and costs of green infrastructure compared to conventional hard-pipe stormwater management options.40

In addition to implementing green infrastructure at the neighborhood-level, WPB should advocate for changes to policies and regulations at higher levels of government. Changing public policy, ordinances, and review standards at the city and regional level can greatly advance green infrastructure and have a huge effect mitigating stormwater run-off. Chicago is very fortunate to have a large source of surface freshwater (Lake Michigan) to provide ample amounts of quality drinking water to millions of customers. In fact, about 80% of Chicago area residents receive their water from the Lake.41 However, there is still the need for policy and regulation to ensure a stable and sustainable water future for the city and region. The following ten suggestions will improve the future longevity of water conservation and improve stormwater management. Each suggestion includes a discussion on the political palatability of the idea as well as financial considerations and an outlook for implementation. It is important to note that these suggestions are beyond WPB’s capacity and core mission to implement, and this guide won’t address these issues beyond this section. Nevertheless, these suggestions are necessary as they recognize that change must come from the municipal/regional policy arena in addition to the community-level. Local citizens should work with their elected officials to encourage the adoption of these suggestions.

1. Adjust water rates to reflect the full costs of water provision and management. American household water use is increasing, and the water distribution and wastewater infrastructure is aging. However, water prices are artificially low as they don’t reflect the continued maintenance and improvement of water infrastructure.42 Currently, Chicago has the lowest water rates per capita of any major U.S. city including New York and Philadelphia.43 This idea seeks to adjust the way water is priced by factoring all costs – operations, maintenance and capital improvement costs – into the price consumers pay. This is known as full-cost pricing, and it encourages water conservation and Green Infrastructure Guide

2.5 Advocate for Change recuperate the cost of providing, removing, and treating water. Some communities use a graduated rate scale that provides a certain amount of gallons for a low-rate, and then set higher rates at multiple tier. Other ways to price water include time of day pricing, which charges higher prices at the water utility’s peak demand period, and water surcharges, which charge a higher rate for excessive water use. Also, seasonal rates may make sense for Chicago as water demand fluctuates between summer and winter months. Required Action: Determine full-costs of operation and maintenance, change water and sewer rates the water utility provider charges. Responsible Entities: City of Chicago Department of Environment (CDOE), City of Chicago Department of Water Management (DWM), Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD), City of Chicago City Council and Mayor’s Office Political Palatability: This idea would raise the water bills for virtually every property owner in the City of Chicago, which is a very tough sell during lean economic times. The challenge is to craft an argument for full-cost pricing that educates the public on the challenges of future capital improvement and maintenance costs, water scarcity issues, and the cost of doing nothing.

water Pricing, U.S. EPA

2. Develop masterplans for regional watersheds and sewer systems that encourage inter-jurisdictional stormwater management cooperation and address green infrastructure on a macro-scale. Historically, political boundaries largely ignore watershed boundaries, and water distribution systems are often operated by central public utility corporations that serve multiple jurisdictions. This condition creates overlapping interdependencies on water systems – both natural and man-made – that often compete against prioritizing environmental conditions. Regional cooperation is necessary for the continued stability of water provision and for the improvement of water quality in the region. Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning’s (CMAP) Go To 2040 Plan, released in October 2010, outlines several action items that seek to improve watershed planning including the provision of green infrastructure strategies.45 Required Action: Create masterplans for watershed and sewer systems that set the framework and define the long term vision of water system planning at the regional level.

Financial Considerations: Full-cost pricing would significantly raise revenues for the water utility and increase funding streams for capital improvement projects and continued maintenance. However, every property owner in the City would be billed for this expense. A fraction of the price increment increase could be used to fund green infrastructure programs.

Responsible Entities: CMAP, City of Chicago Department of Environment, City of Chicago Department of Water Management (DWM), Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD), counties and local jurisdictions within the Chicago Region’s seven counties — Cook, Dupage, Kane, Kendall, Lake, McHenry, Will, and local watershed protection NGOs.

Implementation Timeline: 5 - 10 years. This idea will take years to develop the political capital and consumer knowledge necessary for the idea to gain traction.

Political Palatability: Regional planning efforts that address watershed planning, such as CMAP’s Go To 2040 Plan, are already underway. Also, the acknowledgement of the threat of non-point source pollution and the importance of ensuring future water quantity and quality standards are powerful issues that can spark intergovernmental planning and cooperation.46

Precedent: San Jose Water Company, San Jose, California – the utility provider adds an additional user fee on the flat rate water bill based on different customer classes.44 More info: Case Studies of Sustainable Water and Waste22

Financial Considerations: Plans cost money, time, and human capital to WPB - Special Service Area #33

2.5 Advocate for Change produce. Implementing a plan’s action items is also costly. Political capital is extremely crucial to the financial viability of this idea. Implementation Timeline: 0 to 5 years Precedent: Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan, New York City, New York – this plan advocates for compact land use decisions, protective overlay zoning districts, and stormwater best management practices that seek to mitigate the environmental impact development has on the local watershed. This plan is required by local law. More info: Volume 2: Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan, New York City Department of Environmental Protection.47

3. Encourage the City of Chicago to seek a comprehensive green infrastructure plan to “green” at least a third of the city’s impervious cover similar to what the City of Philadelphia and City of New York are doing. A citywide green infrastructure plan would greatly increase the viability and implementation of green infrastructure strategies on a large scale. A green infrastructure plan can set performance standards to control runoff, explore ways to incentivize green infrastructure strategies, and set targets to reduce the total amount of impervious surface. This idea dovetails well with existing environmental sustainability efforts at the city level including the Sustainable Development Policy, the Green Permit Program, and the Green Alley Program (see section 3.5 for more information on these programs).

Responsible Entities: City of Chicago Departments: Building, Community Development, Environment, Parks and Recreation, Transportation, Water Management, Zoning and Land Use Planning. The effort should be steered by the Department of Environment. Political Palatability: As more large cities get behind green infrastructure strategies as a way to mitigate environmental impacts of flooding and combined sewers overflows and reduce infrastructure costs, this idea is politically tenable in the immediate future – perhaps once the next mayoral administration is elected. Cities such as New York and Philadelphia already have plans in place, and Chicago should join them with a best-in-class plan. Financial Considerations: Given the city’s current budget crisis, the costs associated with the development of a plan would be challenging to finance. However, the competition amongst top tier cities to be the ‘greenest’ could be the impetus behind financing a plan. Implementation Timeline: 0 to 2 years Precedent: New York City Green Infrastructure Plan, New York City – this 400page plan details ways the city can optimize existing water systems, control runoff, institutionalize adaptive management, monitor water quality, reduce combined sewer overflow, and engage stakeholders in stormwater management decisions.48 The plan is effective because it addresses place-specific biophysical and built environment conditions, water quality issues, and considers the local governmental decision making structure.

Figure 9: Front cover of NYC Green Infrastructure Guide.

Required Action: Create a citywide green infrastructure planning document that is approved as a guiding policy statement by the City Council and signed Green Infrastructure Guide

by the Mayor.

4. Develop a continuous and dependable source of financing for green infrastructure projects. This idea piggybacks on CMAP’s suggestion in its Go To 2040 Plan. The basic premise of this idea is to create a dependable source for green infrastructure 23

2.5 Advocate for Change strategies to be built. One possible way to do this is to assign property-specific user fees adjusted based on the percent of the property that is impervious surface. The revenue generated from this additional stormwater fee would be used to fund green infrastructure pilot projects of various types and scales throughout the city that would meet performance criteria outlined in the city’s green infrastructure plan. Required Action: Create a dependable revenue stream to fund green infrastructure projects by creating an additional user fee based on impervious surface area for a property. Responsible Entities: City of Chicago Departments: Environment, Transportation, Water Management, Zoning and Land Use Planning. Political Palatability: This idea would raise the cost of utilities for almost every property owner in the city. Similar to suggestion one, this idea would need to build a significant amount of political capital based on community environmental improvement rationales and the full cost of providing and managing water for this idea to gain traction. Financial Considerations: This idea greatly improves the ability to finance green infrastructure improvements. However, it would add an incremental cost to property owners. Also, creating a database to track impervious surface area for every parcel in Chicago would require a lot of staff time and money. Implementation Timeline: 1 to 4 years Precedent: Stormwater fees, City of Ann Arbor, Michigan – this regulation rewards pervious surface areas by requiring property owners to pay a user fee based on the percent of impervious surface area within a parcel. The fee system requires the analysis of aerial photographs for every parcel in the city to determine the percent of impervious surface area.49

5. Create a Green Infrastructure Portfolio Standard (GIPS) for the City of Chicago that is similar to the program outlined in the IEPA Green Infrastructure Study (pg. 91). A portfolio standard is a regulatory tool that incrementally increases the amount of green infrastructure projects over time for a specific governmental boundary. This could be measured as percent of total parcel or as a total square footage amount. This is what the State of Illinois already does with renewable energy requirements.50 This idea would phase-in a larger portion of green infrastructure projects as part of the total stormwater management efforts for the City. As the IEPA study states, the percentage of effective pervious area could be used as the leading indicator for the green infrastructure portfolio. This element can be a tool for implementing the citywide green infrastructure plan. Required Action: Set a portfolio standard with increasing annual benchmarks for achieving greater effective pervious surface area. Start with a low target and increase by 1% a year until 33% of all surfaces are pervious. This would help the City reach its goal of “greening” a third of the surface. Responsible Entities: City of Chicago Departments: Environment, Transportation, Water Management, Zoning and Land Use Planning, and the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District. Also, the IEPA could help establish and support the creation of the portfolio as pilot project that could extend to other municipalities in the state. Note: The City of Chicago has a combined sewer system, but the majority of other cities and sewer districts operate on separate sewer systems (known as “MS4” districts). Political Palatability: This idea could gain political traction after the citywide green infrastructure plan is created and vetted — once green infrastructure has momentum. Financial Considerations: GIPS can operate at a relatively low cost to the public sector. The program would require full time staff members. It would add to costs of construction for new developments, but that cost would be WPB - Special Service Area #33

2.5 Advocate for Change countered by savings from suggestions one, full cost pricing, and four, stormwater fees.

lowing departments: Building, Environment, Transportation, Water Management, Zoning and Land Use Planning.

Implementation Timeline: 2 - 4 years

Political Palatability: This idea would require approval by the City Council and Mayor’s office, so a substantial amount of political capital would be required to create an amendment. Also, the city would have to build the case that this overlay district would indeed improve the quality of life in certain areas of the city that are prone to flooding.

Precedent: The City of Chicago has a mitigation bank for wetland preservation that seeks to balance the total amount of wetlands within the City. This idea is similar to a GIPS as it sets a regulatory target to maintain an amount of wetlands.

6. Include a stormwater management sensitive area overlay district in the municipal ordinance to increase stormwater performance standards and require the use of green infrastructure in areas susceptible to street and basement flooding. This proposal recognizes that not all neighborhoods in Chicago are equally susceptible to the same environmental problems. Some neighborhoods are more prone to flooding problems than others, and this regulatory tool would impose stricter standards to new developments, renovations, and public right-of-way improvements to ensure that street flooding and basement flooding is mitigated. The overlay district could also use the City of Chicago Stormwater Ordinance Manual as a guide for improving land use and site planning in affected areas. Required Action: Amend the zoning ordinance text and map documents to create a zoning overlay district that identifies sensitive areas in the city that would require increased stormwater management performance standards. Specifically, amend Chapter 17-7 ‘Overlay Districts’ of the City of Chicago Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Ordinance. The City of Chicago Department of Environment and Department of Water Management would be responsible for identifying areas prone to flooding that would become special overlay districts.

Financial Considerations: Amending the zoning code itself is a relatively low-cost legislative action, but financing and incentivizing the incorporation of green infrastructure strategies in specific overlay districts would require substantial financing mechanisms. Implementation Timeline: 0 to 2 years

7. Recommend that the Chicago Department of Transportation (CDOT) start an ‘Adopt-a-Parkway’ program that encourages the use of bioinfiltration systems. This idea seeks to create an official adopt-a-parkway program by setting a formal application procedure, establishing funding, and creating standards for the creation and continued maintenance of adopting parkways by private land owners to encourage the use of green infrastructure elements such as bioswales, rain gardens, and specific stormwater plant requirements. This idea already exists albeit in a different form. Property owners are already required to maintain the parkway, but this idea takes the relationship one step further by encouraging property owners to implement green infrastructure in the parkway. In return, CDOT can offer technical or financial support and sign an agreement to maintain and/or replace the property owner’s investment if road maintenance is required that affects the parkway.

Responsible Entities: City of Chicago City Council, Major’s Office, and the folGreen Infrastructure Guide

2.5 Advocate for Change Required Action: Create a new program

the total surface area of a parking lot. This requirement could tie into the GIPS program outlined in suggestion five.

Responsible Entities: CDOT, Alderman Offices, local property owners Political Palatability: This idea doesn’t require a lot of political capital from the City as the idea elevates the status, degree of formality, and incentive structure of the existing parkway agreement between CDOT and property owners to make parkways “green.” Financial Considerations: CDOT should consider offering technical support and financial incentvies to property owners as an incentive to implement green infrastructure. Implementation Timeline: 0 - 2 years

- Establish a maximum automobile parking ratio for off-street parking based on zoning district in addition to the established minimums - Require parking curbs that are low-enough that the front of automobiles can go over the curb. This would reduce the total length of a parking stall from 18’ to 16’ in most parking lot designs.

Figure 10: Pervious Pavers in Parking Stall. Evergreen State College, Olympia, Washington

Precedent: Chicago Gateway Green is a non-profit that seeks to beautify Illinois’ expressways, gateways, and neighborhoods. They have several programs that seek to provide landscaped green spaces within the public right-of-way.51 Perhaps the adopt-a-parkway program could be an additional service they offer.

Required Action: Amend various portions of Title 17 of the City of Chicago Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Ordinance including Chapter 17-8 ‘Planned Developments,’ Chapter 17-10 ‘Parking and Loading,’ Chapter 17-11 ‘Landscaping and Screening.’

8. Rethink parking lot design regulations and guidelines to seek lot size reduction strategies.

Responsible Entities: City of Chicago City Council, Mayor’s Office, and the following City Departments: Building, Environment, Transportation, Water Management, Zoning and Land Use Planning; and MWRD.

Surface parking lots are one of the largest contributors to urban stormwater runoff.52 They also present one of the biggest opportunities to incorporate effective green infrastructure strategies. Several actions should be taken to reduce the amount and rate of stormwater runoff from parking lots. First, the Chicago Landscape Ordinance Guide should be edited to include green infrastructure design recommendations such as the strategies outlined in section 3.0 of this guide. Second, the City of Chicago parking code requirements should include the following revisions: - Set a percent pervious surface requirement based on zoning district for 26

Political Palatability: Proposed changes to ‘green the code’ are an increasing trend for progressive municipal governments across the nation. The ordinance and guideline changes proposed in this suggestion is not out of reach, and new political leaders looking to lead the city’s environmental sustainability efforts would be wise to push for progressive ordinance revisions. Financial Considerations: Amending the zoning code itself is a relatively lowcost legislative action, but financing and providing incentives for the incorporation of green infrastructure strategies into developments would require increased costs associated with the installation and maintenance of green WPB - Special Service Area #33

2.5 Advocate for Change infrastructure elements compared to conventional prescriptions. These costs would require incentives in the form of government rebates or grants, funding for which might come from suggestion four. Implementation Timeline: 0 - 5 years Precedent: The City of New York recently passed a text amendment to the zoning ordinance to reduce the impervious surface area of parking lots that serve commercial and community facilities. The impetus for change was the inclusion of parking lot design standards in the city’s sustainability plan, PLANYC 2030, which outlined several measures to implement green infrastructure elements.

9. Update the State of Illinois building and plumbing codes to include interior rain harvesting for non-potable uses. This idea supports current state legislation (SB 2549; sponsored by Sen. Susan Garrett (D-Highwood) and Rep. Kevin McCarthy (D-Orland Park)) that enables harvested rainwater to be used for non-potable uses such as toilets for domestic buildings.53 This idea promotes water recycling and reduces water use. Currently, the State Plumbing Code doesn’t have minimum standards, which would guide local public health officials in approving rainwater harvesting systems.

and education about rainwater harvesting. Financial Considerations: This idea costs relatively little as it is mostly a legislative change. The bill also recognizes the additional economic benefit to the construction industry for the installation of underground or interior rainwater harvesting systems. Implementation Timeline: 0-1 year Precedent: The City of Portland, Oregon, enables rainwater harvesting for non-potable use in its city code.54

10. Update the City of Chicago Urban Tree Planting List to include “native” and “stormwater absorption” categories. The City of Chicago maintains an active and highly-regarded tree planting program that seeks to improve the “urban forest.”55 One document that serves this effort is the City of Chicago Urban Tree Planting List. This guide is a useful tool for deciding what types of trees are appropriate for different site conditions found in an urban setting. The guide could be improved by including a category to identify native trees and a category to identify trees that are exceptional at absorbing stormwater. Required Action: Update the City of Chicago Urban Tree Planting List

Required Action: Approve State of Illinois legislation Responsible Entities: City of Chicago Bureau of Forestry Responsible Entities: State of Illinois House of Representatives, State of Illinois Senate, and Governor’s Office Political Palatability: This idea supports draft legislation that requires majority vote to pass. This bill requires a large amount of education to gain political traction. Many people are unaware of the benefits and viability of rainwater harvesting. The Metropolitan Planning Council and the Chicago Department of Environment have added their expertise to develop the bill Green Infrastructure Guide

Political Palatability: This is a low-profile decision that requires very little political capital to accomplish Financial Considerations: Staff time and technical expertise would be required to revise the document. Implementation Timeline: 0 to 2 years 27

2.6 Implementing the Recommendations Where to begin? That question is easy to ask and hard to answer after plans are created. Implementing plans is the most crucial task of any planning professional, and it is often best to start where it is most intuitive. In this guide, it is best to start by educating and spreading the word (recommendation 2.1). This recommendation should be the highest priority in the shortterm, as it is the best way to get the ball rolling, building political, social, and human capital. This guide is designed to be a tool starting day one and the dissemination of this guide and increasing public awareness about green infrastructure will empower people to take action themselves. Set the stage for future decision making WPB program staff can present options for setting new targets and establishing new incentives that the Guide Development Committee and the WPB Commission can determine. The local knowledge, expertise, and leadership within these entities can guide green infrastructure decisions in the best way possible for the neighborhood. This guide is a script for future development in the neighborhood, but it is a flexible document that can be improvised upon to gain a better outcome. WPB should also arrange a meeting with the neighborhood groups (BCO, EVA, WPC) and the neighborhood alderman offices, 1st and 32nd Wards, to go over this guide in more detail, tailor this guide to the specific groups’ needs, and address any questions. Finally, the Advocate for Change recommendation (2.5) focuses on higher levels of government to foster change at a system-wide level (state, watershed, county, sewerage district, and municipal). While it is out of the scope of WPB to enact these policy changes, the intent of this recommendation is to recognize that stormwater management issues must be solved at both the micro- and macro- levels. The suggestions in that section are meant to inform the readers of macro-level water resource issues and encourage citizens to work with their elected officials to take action.

The Role of Other Entities This guide mentions many stakeholders (property owners, business owners, property management companies, real estate developers, institutions, neighborhood organizations, non-profit organizations, elected officials), so it is important to mention the role and responsibilities of each stakeholder. These groups can be categorized into four groups: property owners and managers, developers, community organizations, and government officials. Property owners and managers – their charge is to incorporate green infrastructure strategies to improve the function and value of their properties. Many property owners also gain a sense of satisfaction by working towards the greater good of the environment. Developers – their charge is to incorporate green infrastructure strategies to increase the value and appeal of their investment, market environmental sustainable features, adhere to the stormwater ordinance, and improve aesthetics through site design techniques. Community Organizations – their charge is to improve the overall quality of life of their neighborhood by incorporating green infrastructure strategies into their larger vision of environmental sustainability. One of the key attractions to living in a quality neighborhood is the presence of organizations that constantly seek to improve livability and attractiveness. Next Steps (complete within one year) 1. Formally adopt incentives for green infrastructure for the WPB District through the proper political approval process starting with the Guide Development Committee and ending with the WPB Commission. 2. Seek expert advice to create a place-specific and expansive plant guide to educate property owners and gardeners about the best trees, shrubs, and perennials for stormwater absorption and pollution filtration that are best for different types of bioinfiltration strategies (bioswales, rain gardens, WPB - Special Service Area #33

Section 2 Endnotes filter strips) in different urban situations (parkways, front-yards, backyards, roofs). WPB should expand the WPB GIG Stormwater Plant Matrix (section 3.3). Partnering with CNT or a landscape architecture firm would be a likely first step. Use this guide to select plants for the bulk purchasing event (incentive 2.3.3)

36. Quoted in METRO Portland (2002)

3. Seek third-party verification of engineering calculations and review of baseline condition and new targets for reducing peak flow discharge and increasing the amount of pervious surface. CNT would be a very strong partner.

40. Center for Neighborhood Technology (2010)

4. Implement Educate and Spread the Word recommendation objectives. Set up the education sessions for different groups during the winter of 2011, and then host the sessions in early spring when home improvements / outdoor work is likely to begin. Distribute a press release and post this guide on the website to kick-start the initiative.

43. Sustainable Infrastructure (2010)

5. Establish incentives that the WPB Guide Development Committee and WPB Commission approve, and implement those incentives through established communication channels to the WPB district.

47. New York City Department of Environmental Protection (2007)

6. Evaluate program after one year is complete to see if WPB constituents and other user groups are implementing green infrastructure effectively (see recommendation 2.4). Variables to evaluate include the number of participants in the incentive program, the number of people attending educational programs, and the number of developers and property owners that use the development checklist.

50. Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (2010)

37. Center for Neighborhood Technology (2010) 38. City of Chicago Department of Environment (2010) 39. Wicker Park Bucktown Special Service Area #33 (2009)

41. Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (2010) 42. U.S. EPA (2010)

44. U.S. EPA (2008) 45. Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (2010) 46. U.S. EPA (2003)

48. New York City Department of Environmental Protection (2010) 49. City of Ann Arbor (2010)

51. Chicago Gateway Green (2010) 52. Strom, N., Nathan, K., Woland, J., (2009) 53. Metropolitan Planning Council (2010) 54. ibid 55. City of Chicago Bureau of Forestry (2010) 56. Alberti, M. (2009)

Green Infrastructure Guide

3.0 Toolbox

â&#x20AC;&#x153;It cannot be stressed enough that all stormwater management practices be site, region, and climate specific.â&#x20AC;? - from Site Engineering for Landscape Architects, 5th Ed.57

3.1 Built Typologies Overview The following typologies illustrate how building typologies common to the Wicker Park Bucktown neighborhood might apply green infrastructure strategies. A typology is a common building form and lot size or a type of outdoor space that is commonly found and identifiable in a particular place. A typology can be very generic or quite specific. Courtyard buildings are one built typology found in Chicago, Loop skyscrapers are another. The strength of illustrating typologies is that one generic drawing can be applied to a multitude of similar situations. These drawings apply specific best practices and quantify the costs and benefits of implementing green infrastructure. As a visual tool, they are meant to inform and spark creative thinking. They can lead developers, property owners, architects, engineers, and policy makers towards implementing alternative stormwater management practices on a micro-scale. The typologies are a core component of the ‘toolbox’ portion of the guide because they help apply general green infrastructure strategies to a very distinct urban situation. Seven Wicker Park Bucktown typologies: 1. Narrow Lot Single / Multi Family Building

strategies, this guide utilizes the Center for Neighborhood Technology’s Green Values Stormwater Calculator®. This online calculator can be used by property owners and developers to insert different “green intervention” variables and site statistics for a particular site and building to generate different costs and benefits pertaining to hydrology and financial benefits. The tool is free and easy to use. For the purposes of this guide, the hydrological data is very crucial, especially the total percent reduction in stormwater peak flow discharge statistic. This metric, which measures the amount of runoff leaving a site, is the determining factor when it comes to assessing green infrastructure and it is a measurement that can be used to compare different types and sizes of buildings situated on different sites. (calculations used for the typologies can be found in Appendix 5.8). The calculator can be found online at http://logan.cnt.org/ calculator/calculator.php. In addition, information on calculating rain barrel and cistern size and percent pervious surface are also factors.

Comparison Baselines and New Targets This guide uses baseline stormwater calculations based on the typologies without any consideration for green infrastructure, and then sets targets for increasing site perviousness and reducing total peak flow discharge by using the development checklist.

2. Worker’s Cottage

The Importance of Building Footprint 3. Large Mixed Use Building 4. Strip Commercial Development with Parking Lot 5. Commercial Corridor Street 6. Residential Street 7. Public Park / Plaza In order to calculate benefits gained from particular green infrastructure Green Infrastructure Guide

A particular site’s “footprint” is the total area of all the buildings on a site that touch the ground. Building footprint is an important measure of the relative size of the building compared to the rest of the site. It usually indicates the total amount of roof area, and, using conventional building standards, is one indicator of the total amount of impervious area (the other indicator is the amount of impervious pavement on a site). Green infrastructure seeks to minimize the impact of a building’s footprint by applying strategies to reduce the amount of impervious surface.

Typology 1: Narrow Lot Single/Multi Family Building Zoning Classification: RS-3, RT-4, RM-5 Floor-to-Area Ratio: 2.0 up to 5.0

Physical Description, Site Challenges and Opportunities Chicago’s dense urban fabric is largely comprised of narrow rectangular lots that extend from the street to the alley. These lots and the buildings on them are tightly packed together. The typical lot size is 25’ by 125’ or 3,125 sq. ft.. Most buildings are separated by only a few feet, and many buildings maximize their size based on the zoning code. Most of the built area is consumed by the main building, garage, and some sort of outdoor space such as a patio, deck, or fire-escape stairwell. The opportunities for green infrastructure elements are limited to the front and back yards and the roofs. The main objective is to convert conventional impervious surfaces such as the roof, paved gangway, and yards into porous surfaces that absorb stormwater or collect the stormwater in a rain barrel for irrigation use. It is strongly recommended that the property owner adopt the front parkway to maximize the sponge-like qualities of native vegetation. Challenges for this typology include a limited desire for a backyard on the part of developers and buyers alike and the unwillingness to invest in green elements in the case of absentee rental property landowners. 34

Fact Box Basic Site Information Area of site (25’x 125’) Footprint of all buildings Area of all paved surfaces Area of pervious surfaces

Area (sq. ft.)

Size (gallon)

3,125 2,019 448 2,374

Green Infrastructure Elements Rain Barrel Green roof Intensive Extensive Permeable pavement Porous concrete Permeable precast pavers Bioinfiltration Bioswale Parkway Native Plant Garden Rain Garden

55 1,316 402 48 150 210 250

Leading Green Infrastructure Metrics Percent pervious surface Total reduction in peak flow discharge*

Percent (%) 76 71

*CNT Green Values Stormwater Calculator® Figure 11: Three-story Single Family Greystone Home in Wicker Park Bucktown

WPB - Special Service Area #33

GREEN ROOF (extensive)

PERVIOUS PAVERS RAIN GARDEN

RAIN GARDEN (flow-through planter box)

RAIN BARREL RE

SID

TIA

LS TR

BIOSWALE PARKWAY (3:1 slope)

0 ft

12.5

PERVIOUS CONCRETE GANGWAY*

* note: pervious concrete is shown for the gangway, which connects the alley to the street. This is advantageous because the cost of installing pervious concrete is slightly lower than installing pervious pavers, which are shown in the service walkway between the garage and rear entrance. Special construction detailing is required for the gangway to ensure that water doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t leak into the basement.

Figure 12: Narrow Lot Single / Multi Family Building Isometic Drawing

Green Infrastructure Guide

Typology 2: Worker’s Cottage Zoning Classification: RS-3 Floor-to-Area Ratio: 1.0 up to 3.0

Physical Description, Site Challenges and Opportunities Worker’s Cottages are iconic reminders of Chicago’s blue-collar, industrial past. Characteristics such as a gabled roof, one-floor profile, long rectangular volume, a raised first-floor entrance, and a sense of craftsmanship typify a worker’s cottage. Many of these historic buildings were constructed before 1900 and are found in Bucktown. Opportunities for green infrastructure exist in the backyard, which is usually larger than the previous typology. A rain barrel can collect rainwater from the pitched roof, and a rain garden and vegetable/flower garden can soak up stormwater in the backyard. Many worker’s cottages have significant side and front yards that can also provide pervious vegetated surfaces. Also, renovated or newly-constructed garages provide an opportunity for green roofs.

Fact Box Basic Site Information Area of site^ Footprint of all buildings Area of all paved surfaces Area of pervious surfaces

Area (sq. ft.)

Size (gallon)

2,310 1,490 325 1,181

Green Infrastructure Elements Rain Barrel Green roof Intensive Extensive Permeable pavement Porous concrete Permeable precast pavers Bioinfiltration Bioswale Parkway Native Plant Garden Native Plant / Veg. Garden

55 274 260 65 112 88 382

Leading Green Infrastructure Metrics Percent pervious surface Total reduction in peak flow discharge*

Percent (%) 51 69

^ Total area of site includes adopted parkway *CNT Green Values Stormwater Calculator®

Figure 13: Worker’s Cottages in Bucktown

WPB - Special Service Area #33

general note: this drawing shows a single family residential worker’s cottage. Often times worker’s cottages are divided into duplexes where the first floor is one unit and the lower floor is another unit, which is oftern entered from the front. This would change the size of the rain garden near the front entrance

GREEN ROOF (extensive)

RAIN / VEGETABLE GARDEN

RAIN GARDEN (flow-through planter box)

PERVIOUS PAVERS

BIOSWALE PARKWAY (3:1 slope)

RAIN GARDEN

SID

TIA

RAIN BARREL

LS TR

0 ft

12.5

PERVIOUS CONCRETE GANGWAY*

Figure 14: Worker’s Cottage Isometic Drawing

Green Infrastructure Guide

Typology 3: Large Mixed Use Building Zoning Classification: RM-5, PD Floor-to-Area Ratio: 2.0 to unlimited

Physical Description, Site Challenges and Opportunities Large mixed use buildings are found along commercial corridors like Milwaukee Avenue and Ashland Avenue. They typically have retail commercial uses on the first floor and a mix between office and residential uses on the upper floors. There is a wide range between new construction and adaptive re-use of historic buildings, such as warehouses. Opportunities for green infrastructure exist primarily on the roof and some small, paved surface areas at street level. The larger building size makes green roofs more advantageous from a cost effectiveness standpoint, and the ability to include a greywater system that utilizes harvested rainwater collected in a basement cistern is a great asset to the size of the building.

Fact Box Basic Site Information Area of site^ Footprint of all buildings Area of all paved surfaces Area of pervious surfaces

Area (sq. ft.)

Size (gallon)

13,024 9,029 1,761 5,431

Green Infrastructure Elements Rain Cistern Green roof Intensive Extensive Permeable pavement Porous concrete Permeable brick pavers Bioinfiltration Bioswale Parkway Vegetated Bioswale Rain Garden

250+ 3,067 1,502 836 1,330

Leading Green Infrastructure Metrics

Percent (%)

Percent pervious surface Total reduction in peak flow discharge*

54 78

^ Site area includes adopted parkway along perimeter *CNT Green Values Stormwater Calculator速

Figure 15: Converted Warehouse Loft

WPB - Special Service Area #33

GREEN ROOF (extensive)

RAIN GARDEN

POROUS CONCRETE GANGWAY

PERVIOUS PAVERS TREE WELLS (lowered 8â&#x20AC;? from sidwalk edge) BIOSWALE PARKWAY (see Typology 6: Residential Street for more detail)

0 ft

12.5

ST R

RAIN CISTERN IN BASEMENT (Type C potential future option as part of greywater system)

Figure 16: Large Mixed Use Building Isometic Drawing

Green Infrastructure Guide

Typology 4: Strip Commercial Building with Parking Lot Zoning Classification: C1, C2 Floor-to-Area Ratio: varies based on code

Physical Description, Site Challenges and Opportunities Commercial strip buildings , while not too common in Wicker Park Bucktown, are addressed as a typology because they have a distinct set of issues regarding stormwater management and opportunities for green infrastructure. Conventional design strategies that maximize parking area and building square footage while still meeting municipal ordinances often result in a high amount of impervious surface area. The parking lot is a common feature that typifies this problem, but it also provides a lot of surface area for the application of green infrastructure interventions to mitigate the negative effects of impervious pavement. Also, the wide roof area of most strip developments create opportunities for accessible green roofs. Please note: this typology has a large parking lot (exceeds minimum required by code) in order to illustrate different applications of green infrastructure elements . Normally, it is best practice to minimize the size of the parking lot.

Fact Box Basic Site Information Area of site Footprint of all buildings Area of all paved surfaces Area of pervious surfaces

Area (sq. ft.)

Size (gallon)

28,664 9,749 14,898 15,500

Green Infrastructure Elements Rain Cistern Green roof Intensive Extensive Permeable pavement Permeable brick pavers Permeable concrete pavers Bioinfiltration Vegetated Bioswales Filter Strip

250+ 475 3,428 882 6,385 3,663 667

Leading Green Infrastructure Metrics Percent pervious surface Total reduction in peak flow discharge* *CNT Green Values Stormwater Calculator®

Percent (%) 54 59

Parking Space Calculation

Figure 17: Commercial Strip Development on Ashland Avenue

(Parking Group ‘M’ of Chicago Municipal Ordinance, Chapter 17-10) Total Number of Parking Spaces Required: 23 (13,500 gsf. retail) Total Number of Parking Spaces in Typology: 32 (2 accessible)

WPB - Special Service Area #33

RAIN CISTERN (Type B) VEGETATED SWALE BIOSWALE PARKING MEDIAN (slotted curb) INTERLOCKING CONCRETE PAVERS IN PARKING STALLS AND SIDEWALKS GREEN ROOF (extensive)

GREEN ROOF (intensive)

PERMEABLE PAVERS

ST R

0 ft

12.5

25 VEGETATED FILTER STRIP

Figure 18: Strip Commercial Building with Parking Lot Isometic Drawing Green Infrastructure Guide

Typology 5: Commercial Corridor Street Examples: Western Ave., Damen Ave., Ashland Ave., Milwaukee Ave., North Ave., Armitage Ave., Division St., Fullerton Ave.

Physical Description, Site Challenges and Opportunities Commercial corridors are the arteries of Wicker Park Bucktown. They are vital components of the neighborhood’s function and feel. They are also very important green infrastructure components that link different elements together, and they form a synergistic network capable of dealing with stormwater before it enters the sewer. The major challenges posed by commercial streets are jurisdictional power and funding. Many of the streets are under the control of the Illinois Department of Transportation. However, because commercial streets are public spaces, the possibility of incorporating green infrastructure at the scale of an entire street exist. The potential to form a synergistic green infrastructure system that links streets to streets is a powerful way to mitigate the negative effects of stormwater runoff. Figure 20: Linked Green Sidewalk System. A sketch from METRO Portland’s Green Streets Guide that shows how a linked system of tree wells and a central trough (covered with a grate) can relay stormwater to a curb-side bioswale. One of the main objective of the ‘green streets’ movement is to convey and filter stormwater along a street while minimizing the amount of runoff that enters a conventional storm drain.

Figure 19: Ashland Avenue. Looking south from the middle of the Avenue.

Figure 21(opposite): Commercial Corridor Plan and Section Drawings

WPB - Special Service Area #33

RAIN GARDEN BOULEVARD

CONVENTIONAL ASPHALT DRIVELANES (impervious) INTERLOCKING POROUS CONCRETE PAVERS IN PARKING LANE

TREE WELL WITH FILTRATION TRENCH

RAIN GARDEN BOULEVARD

EXISTING SEWER LINE

A TREE WELL

Section A: Commercial Street

CONNECTING TROUGH WITH GRATE PERMEABLE PAVERS BIKE LANE VEGETATED BIOSWALE CURB BUMP-OUT

0 ft

Green Infrastructure Guide

Typology 6: Residential Street Examples: Wabansia Ave., Leavitt St., Schiller St., Wood St.

Physical Description, Site Challenges and Opportunities Residential streets, while smaller in size compared to commercial streets, are far greater in number. These streets feature large tree canopies, shorter roadwidths and sidewalks, and a variety of parkway conditions. The scale is often more intimate and enclosed compared to commercial streets. Parkways, the area between the street and the sidewalk, provide the greatest opportunity for green infrastructure elements on residential streets. Small bioswales with slotted curbs can form a series of bioinfiltration areas along the perimeter of the street. Curb-side bump-outs also provide a space for bioinfiltration techniques. Also, these elements often accomplish other goals such as calming traffic and mitigating the effects of urban heat island. For example, cities like New York City and Portland are incorporating green infrastructure on residential streets.

Figures 23 and 24: A bioswale parkway in Brooklyn, New York, (top) features two slotted curb section to permit the flow of water through the planted system (bottom detail). Brooklyn has a combined sewer system, and suffers many of the same problems as Chicago.

Figure 22: Moffat Street. A view looking west down Moffat Street.

Figure 25(opposite): Residential Street Plan and Section Drawings WPB - Special Service Area #33

END-OF-BLOC BIOSWALE PARKWAY*

CONVENTIONAL ASPHALT DRIVELANES (IMPERVIOUS)

EXISTING SEWER LINE

INTERLOCKING POROUS CONCRETE PAVERS IN PARKING AISLES VEGETATED BIOSWALE CURB BUMP-OUT^

Section A: Residential Street

* note: the end-of-block bioswale parkway is designed differently than a normal parkway so it can account of an increased amount of runoff as the parkway is nearest the storm sewer drain( also called a “catchbasin”). The parkway is terraced from one side to the other to promote bioinfiltration through the bioswale.

EXISTING STORM SEWER DRAIN TREE WELL

CARRIAGE STRIP WITH SLOTTED CURB END-OF-BLOCK BIOSWALE PARKWAY* A PERVIOUS BRICK PAVERS 0 ft

Green Infrastructure Guide

^note: the vegetated bioswale is larger for residential streets because the required turning radius at the intersection is tighter than commercial streets. This creates more area and a greater capacity for bioinfiltration for the bioswale.

Typology 7: Public Park / Plaza This typology uses an existing park at the corner of Wabansia Ave. and Leavitt St. to apply green infrastructure strategies to illustrate the potential positive effects of placing high importance on green infrastructure elements in every landscape type. The intent of this example is not to propose a park re-design, but rather apply green infrastructure strategies on the existing situation. For example, while all of the existing trees would remain, a bioswale is added around a storm drain. This typology shows the 110% solution. All of the strategies arenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t needed at once, but the purpose of the drawing is to illustrate all the possible strategies.

Physical Description, Site Challenges and Opportunities Public parks and plazas provide a canvas rich with opportunities to apply green infrastructure. Elements such as vegetated swales and porous pavers have a high aesthetic and functional value in parks. Also, landscape site design can be created to emphasize alternative stormwater management practices.

Figure 27: Aerial Photograph of Existing Corner Park. An aerial view of the existing park at the corner of Wabansia Avenue and Leavitt Street.

Figure 26: View of Existing Corner Park. A view of the existing park at the corner of Wabansia Avenue and Leavitt Street. An existing storm drain is visible just to the lower right of the center of the image.

WPB - Special Service Area #33

LARGE VEGETATED BIOSWALE SURROUNDING EXISTING STORM DRAIN

WABANSIA AVE.

VEGETATED BIOSWALE CURB BUMP-OUT

CT A

BL UE

LIN

LO O

P-

LEAVITT ST.

END-OF-BLOCK BIOSWALE PARKWAY (DEMONSTRATION)

O’

EXISTING BUILDING

)

RECREATED NATIVE PRARIE WITH WALKING PATH

IST

PERVIOUS BRICK PAVERS

AG O

BIOSWALE PARKWAY

EXISTING CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE WITH BRICK WALL

Park Plan

0 ft

Figure 28: Park Plan Drawing

Green Infrastructure Guide

3.2 Green Infrastructure Development Checklist The green infrastructure development checklist is a research-supported tool for developers and property owners to use in conjunction with alderman offices, community organizations, and WPB to establish a framework and baseline metric for the inclusion of green infrastructure elements in a building project. The checklist, which is designed to be simple yet informative, can be used for new construction or existing renovation. The checklist highlights two primary measures for rating the success of green infrastructure strategies on a particular project (see green box in upper right corner of checklist, next page). The measures, listed below, are measured in percentages so that projects of different types and sizes can be compared to one another. 1. Percent of total pervious area

Another purpose of the checklist is to serve as a primary documentation tool for national environmental sustainability ranking systems that incorporate site design and water use management credits. Additionally, the checklist can be used as a pre-cursor to the Illinois Green Infrastructure Grant Program for Stormwater Management (IGIG), which is an annual statewide direct grant program for green infrastructure projects. The IGIG application requires information that builds off of the checklist. Finally, the checklist is based on the City of Seattle’s Green Factor Score Sheet, which seeks to quantify the positive effect green infrastructure strategies have on a site by converting individual measures into a common impact factor, which is added up to a final ‘score’ for the purposes of ranking.59 The score sheet is currently used in new commercial zones outside of downtown Seattle, and it is proposed to be used for multifamily residential districts and special overlay districts throughout the city.60

This metric is a simple ratio that takes the total pervious area on a site (green roofs, vegetated gardens, permeable pavers, etc.) and divides by the total area of the parcel. As mentioned earlier in the guide, the total area of the WPB district is 79.4% impervious.58 2. Percent total reduction in peak discharge This metric utilizes the Center for Neighborhood Technology’s Green Values Stormwater Calculator® to determine the net amount and rate of stormwater run-off from a particular site. This statistic directly determines the impact a site has on the municipal combined sewer system. The higher the percent of pervious surface, the less impact the site has on engineered infrastructure and natural systems. In order to calculate this statistic, the checklist applicant will use the Green Values Stormwater Calculator® online and fill out the checklist with the outputs from the calculator. The checklist also has a section dedicated to native trees, shrubs, and perennials that play an important part in stormwater management. The checklist refers to WPB GIG Stormwater Plant Matrix (section 3.3). The recommended trees are approved by the City of Chicago, 48

WPB - Special Service Area #33

3.2 Green Infrastructure Development Checklist ǣ ǣ ǣ

Green Infrastructure Metrics ȋΨȌ ȋΨȌ Area (sq ft)

Quantity

Related LEED –ND Rating System Credits:61

Total Size (cu ft)

Green Infrastructure and Buildings Section

Basic Site Information

- Prerequisite 3: Minimum Building Water Efficiency

Ȁ ͳ

- Credit 3: Building Water Efficiency

- Credit 4: Water-Efficient Landscaping Green Infrastructure Elements

- Credit 8: Stormwater Management

Ͷ Ȁ Ȁ Total area of pervious surface

Percent Pervious Surface Percent pervious surface (%)*

Green Infrastructure Guide

ȗ Ǥ

3.2 Green Infrastructure Development Checklist Area (sq ft)

Quantity

Size (cu ft)

Related Sustainable Sites Initiative (SITES) Rating System Credits:62

Plant and Tree Inventory5

Â?Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2022;Â&#x160;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2014;Â&#x201E;Â&#x2022; Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2020; Â&#x2019;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â?Â?Â&#x2039;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2013;Â&#x160;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D; Â&#x2022;Â&#x160;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2014;Â&#x201E;Â&#x2022; Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2020; Â&#x2019;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â?Â?Â&#x2039;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2022;

Section 3: Site Design â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Water

Â&#x2013;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2018;Â? Â&#x2022;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2013;Â&#x160;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D; Â&#x2013;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2018;Â? Â&#x2022;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;

- Credit 3.2 Reduce potable water use for landscape irrigation by 75 percent - Credit 3.5 Manage stormwater on-site

CNT Green Values Calculator Results6 Amount/Rate Hydrologic Results Â&#x2018;Â&#x2013; Â&#x2021;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x17D; Â?Â&#x2019;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2018;Â&#x2013; Â&#x2039;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2026;Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2021; Č&#x2039;Â&#x2026;Â&#x2014; Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2013;Č&#x152; Â&#x2018;Â&#x2013; Â&#x2021;Â&#x192;Â? Â&#x2039;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2026;Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2021; Č&#x2039;Â&#x2026;Â&#x2014; Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2013; Â&#x2022;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2026;Č&#x152; Â&#x2018;Â&#x2013;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D; Â&#x2039;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021; Â?Â&#x2019;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2018;Â&#x2013;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D; Â&#x2021;Â&#x192;Â? Â&#x2039;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2026;Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2021; Č&#x2039;Â&#x2026;Â&#x2014; Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2013; Â&#x2022;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2026;Č&#x152;

- Credit 3.7 Design rainwater/stormwater features to provide a landscape amenity - Credit 3.8 Maintain water feature to conserve water and other resources - Credit 4.7 Use native plants

Â&#x2021;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â? Â&#x2039;Â&#x153;Â&#x2021; Â?Â&#x2019;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2018;Â&#x2013;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D; Â&#x2021;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â? Â&#x2021;Â&#x201C;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2039;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020; Č&#x2039;Â&#x2026;Â&#x2014; Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2013;Č&#x152; Â?Â?Â&#x2014;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D; Â&#x2039;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2026;Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2021; Â?Â&#x2019;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2021; Â?Â?Â&#x2014;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D; Â&#x2039;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2026;Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2021; Č&#x2039;Â&#x192;Â&#x2026;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2013;Č&#x152; Total reduction in peak discharge (%)

Notes ÍłÇ¤ Â?Â&#x2026;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2030; Â&#x2030;Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2021; Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2020; Â&#x2018;Â&#x2013;Â&#x160;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D; Â&#x192;Â&#x2014;Â&#x161;Â&#x2039;Â&#x17D;Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x203A; Â&#x201E;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2039;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2030;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2018;Â? Â&#x2022;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021; Í´Ç¤ Ěś Â&#x192;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020;Ěś Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2013;Â&#x2018; Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x17D; Â?Â&#x2018;Â?ÇŚÂ&#x201E;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2039;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2030;ÇĄ Â?Â&#x2018;Â?ÇŚÂ&#x2019;Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020; Â&#x2022;Â&#x2014;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2C6;Â&#x192;Â&#x2026;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2022;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2026;Â&#x160; Â&#x192;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2026;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x2026;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;ÇĄ Â&#x192;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2019;Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2013;ÇĄ Â&#x201E;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2026;Â?Ç¤ ÍľÇ¤ Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2022;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2030;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2021;Â? Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2022; Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021; Â?Â&#x2018;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2013;Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â? ÍśÇł Â&#x2018;Â&#x2C6; Â&#x2030;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2122;Â&#x2013;Â&#x160; Â?Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2014;Â?Č&#x152; ÍśÇ¤ Â&#x161;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2022;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2030;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2021;Â? Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2022; Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021; Í´Çł Â&#x2013;Â&#x2018; ÍśÇł Â&#x2018;Â&#x2C6; Â&#x2030;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2122;Â&#x2013;Â&#x160; Â?Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2014;Â? ÍˇÇ¤ Â&#x17D;Â&#x17D;

Â&#x192;Â&#x2019;Â&#x2019;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020; Â&#x2022;Â&#x160;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2014;Â&#x201E;Â&#x2022;ÇĄ Â&#x2019;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â?Â?Â&#x2039;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2022;ÇĄ Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2020; Â&#x2013;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2022; Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021; Â&#x17D;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020; Â&#x2039;Â? Â&#x2021;Â&#x2026;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â? ÍľÇ¤Íś Â&#x2018;Â&#x2C6; Â&#x2013;Â&#x160;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2030;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2021;Ç¤ Í¸Ç¤ Â&#x2022;Â&#x2021; ĚľÂ&#x2022; Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2021;Â? Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2013;Â&#x2018;Â&#x201D;Â?Â&#x2122;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D; Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x192;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2013; Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2026;Â&#x2014;Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2018;Â&#x201D; Č&#x2039;Â&#x160;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2019;ÇŁČ&#x20AC;Č&#x20AC;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2030;Â&#x192;Â?Ç¤Â&#x2026;Â?Â&#x2013;Ç¤Â&#x2018;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2030;Č&#x20AC;Â&#x2026;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2026;Â&#x2014;Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2018;Â&#x201D;Č&#x20AC;Â&#x2026;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2026;Â&#x2014;Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2018;Â&#x201D;Ç¤Â&#x2019;Â&#x160;Â&#x2019;Č&#x152;

WPB - Special Service Area #33

3.3 Green Infrastructure Strategies in Detail A already illustrated in this guide, there is a multitude of ways to implement green infrastructure strategies on a variety of sites. Flexibility is a hallmark of green infrastructure. However, not all elements are created equally, nor are they applicable for all conditions. This section explains the different elements, examines pros and cons, and highlights other considerations that are important to designing green infrastructure.

Bioinfiltration What is it? Bioinfiltration areas, such as vegetated swales or rain gardens, are landscape areas that are designed to accept, filter, Figure 29: Roadside Bioswale in use. and sometimes retain stormwater. They can be used in residential and commercial settings. They are typically planted with shrubs, perennials, and trees.63 Selecting specific types of plants that are resilient to urban conditions and are able to have ‘wet-feet’ is very important. Examples of bioinfiltration strategies include rain gardens, bioswales, dry wells, as well as specialized tree wells, Figure 30: Vegetated Bioswale in Parkplanter boxes, and median strips.64

Figure 31: Section Drawing through Bioswale. The slight slope inward enables bioretention and bioinfiltration. The native planting and growing medium soil depth are especially important. They must be designed properly in order to function. The gravel storage bed and underdrain are extra features that ensure proper drainage.

ing Lot Median at the Morton Arboretum Parking Lot.14

Pros The benefits of bioinfiltration areas include decreased surface runoff, increased groundwater recharge, and pollutant treatment.65 Also, additional research from Norway found that bioretention areas continue to function during winter months especially when the area uses organic, highly porous media.66

Figure 32: Section Drawing through Rain Garden Flow-Through Planter Box. The vegetated surface permits bioinfiltration. This design is best for rain gardens adjacent to a building because it is designed with an overflow drain, which would allow access water to enter the stormwater system without backing up into the basement. Proper water membrane protection would be required along the building’s foundation wall.68 WPB - Special Service Area #33

3.3 Green Infrastructure Strategies in Detail Cons It is hard to find guidelines for constructing small-scale bioinfiltration areas. WPB recommends small bioinfiltration areas in pockets and boulevards throughout the neighborhood. Also, larger bioinfiltration elements need to be installed properly to prevent clogging. Finally, bioinfiltration areas to be linked to a surface drainage area in order to function. The Problem of Conventional Turf Grass Usually turf grass is considered to be pervious, but recent research suggests that the composition of turf grass with its short root structure and density of blades actually makes it more impervious.69 In this regard, turf grass is really less bad rather than good for promoting bioinfiltration.

roof technology has grown over the past decade, so there are a lot of different options available for different situations. As with all building systems, carefully reviewing the technical specifications is very important before installing a green roof system. Selecting a growing media and plant type that requires low maintenance and minimal irrigation is also important. Pros Green roofs retain a large portion of rainfall â&#x20AC;&#x201D; 63% on average.70 In a recent study, the amount of stormwater retained by intensive systems was found to be only slightly higher than extensive systems.71 Additionally, because of their thermal mass, green roofs improve energy efficient by diminishing heat

Green Roof What is it? Green roofs are vegetated roofs consisting of soil and plants that retain precipitation and lower the ambient air temperature. There are two types of green roofs. Intensive systems, which involve a thick layer of soil and intense vegetation like shrubs and trees, and extensive systems, which have thinner, lighter media. Extensive systems usually consist of a series of vegetated trays that are placed on top of traditional roof. Plants should be selected that are native and require no fertilization. Green Green Infrastructure Guide

Figure 33: Intensive Green Roof. An intensive green roof system planted with native wildflowers. Designed by Feldman Architects.

Figure 34: Green roof Tear-away Section Perspective. The multi-layered roof design consists of conventional construction detailing up to the insulation layer, but after that the green roof changes the design. Proper detailing and construction techniques are important when installing an intensive system to ensure proper filtration, drainage and roof water membrane integrity.72

3.3 Green Infrastructure Strategies in Detail loss through the roof and lowering the temperature of the roof during the summer. Green roofs also mitigate the negative effects of urban heat island, which is the rise in ambient air temperature caused by the existence of hardsurfaced materials that retain heat. Finally, Green roofs provide a positive aesthetic value. When properly selected, green roofs can last a very long time. Cons Intensive systems require additional structural support and require higher installation costs and maintenance. The same is true, but to a lesser extent, with extensive systems. There is some concern that green roofs leach total phosphates (TP) and total nitrates (TN), but data is inconclusive at this point.73

Rain Barrel / Cistern What is it? A rain barrel or rain cistern collects and stores stormwater on site, and uses the retained water for irrigation, and, in some cases, in a greywater system. Rain barrels are usually smaller than cisterns and are intended for domestic use usually involving the irrigation of gardens. Cisterns are usually larger tanks that work for larger facilities, and can be Figure 35: Rain Barrel Section Sketch incorporated into a greywater system. Cisterns may also be located on top of roofs, at grade, or below-grade. In both cases, the stormwater runoff amount is reduced. The Chicago Center for Green Technology uses large outdoor rain cisterns.

Pros Rain barrels are simple to install and they are available at most hardware / home garden stores. Cisterns are more complicated, but they are timetested devices that effectively reduce stormwater runoff. Cisterns are more versatile as they can be integrated into a greywater system and collect more water. Barrels and cisterns are very useful for on-site irrigation. Some barrels and cisterns can be connected to the conventional stormwater drain in case they overflow. Cons Rain barrels and cistern need space to sit and a landscape to water. Despite the simple premise, they are not maintenance free. They require monitoring to ensure that they arenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t overflowing, Also, selecting the proper size for a particular use is very important. Currently in Illinois, interior rain barrels and cisterns are not enabled in the Stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s building and plumbing code. This legislation is attempting to be changed (see recommendation 2.5, suggestion nine).74 See CDOEâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rain cistern guide for more info: http://www. cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/doe/supp_info/conserving_water.html

Figure 36: Section-perspective of Pervious Pavement. They permit the flow of water through the surface and into the gravel storage base.

WPB - Special Service Area #33

3.3 Green Infrastructure Strategies in Detail Cons

Table 1: Pervious Pavement Matrix Type

Description

Concrete Blocks

Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2026;Â&#x192;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2013;ÇĄ Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2020;ÇŚÂ&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2020; Â&#x2019;Â&#x192;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2030; Â&#x201E;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2026;Â?Â&#x2022; Â&#x2122;Â&#x160;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2013;Â&#x160;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2020; Â&#x2022;Â&#x2019;Â&#x192;Â&#x2026;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2039;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2039;Â&#x17D;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020; Â&#x2122;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2013;Â&#x160; Â&#x2026;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2022;Â&#x160;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020; Â&#x2022;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x2021; Â&#x2018;Â&#x201D; Â&#x2019;Â&#x2021;Â&#x192; Â&#x2030;Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x17D;Ç¤ Â&#x17D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2026;Â?Â&#x2022; Â&#x2013;Â&#x160;Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2022;Â&#x2021;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2022; Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2019;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2022;

Plastic Grids

Â&#x2013;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2026;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2014;Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D; Â&#x2030;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2022; Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021; Â?Â&#x2018;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2013;Â&#x17D;Â&#x203A; Â&#x2019;Â&#x2018;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2022; Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2020; Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2039;Â&#x17D;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020; Â&#x2122;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2013;Â&#x160; Â&#x2019;Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020; Â&#x2013;Â&#x2014;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2C6; Â&#x2018;Â&#x201D; Â&#x2026;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2022;Â&#x160;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020; Â&#x2022;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x2021;

Pervious Asphalt

Â&#x2DC;Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2039;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â? Â&#x2018;Â&#x2C6; Â&#x2013;Â&#x203A;Â&#x2019;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2026;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D; Â&#x160;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2013; Â?Â&#x2039;Â&#x161; Â&#x192;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2019;Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2013; Â&#x2013;Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013; Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2026;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2022; Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D; Â&#x192;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2030;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2030;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2019;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2026;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2022;Ç¤

Pervious Concrete

Â&#x2DC;Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2039;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â? Â&#x2018;Â&#x2C6; Â&#x2013;Â&#x203A;Â&#x2019;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2026;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D; Â&#x2026;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x2026;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2013;Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013; Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2026;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2021; Â&#x2022;Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2020;Â&#x2022; Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2020; Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D; Â&#x192;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2030;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2030;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;

Source: Dietz, 2007

Pervious Paving

Pros

Â&#x2026;Â&#x2018;ÇŚ Â&#x2013;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x2021;ÇĄ Â?Â&#x2039;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2026;Â?ÇĄ Â&#x2014;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x2021;

Other Concerns Surface clogging - the top layer of pervious asphalt and concrete and the gaps of blocks and grids often become clogged with dirt and sand. It is recommended that these surfaces be maintained through vacuuming or replacing the in-fill material periodically.75 The high maintenance costs are a significant hurdle to the use of permeable pavement.

Pervious paving, an alternative to traditional asphalt and concrete, is more porous and permits the filtration of stormwater into the soil subsurface. There are several different types of pervious paving including concrete, asphalt, brick pavers, and plastic nets, all of which produce slightly different results. Figure 37: Permeable concrete (right)and traditional concrete (left).

Pervious paving permits on-site filtration. There are many different types of paving for different applications (see Table 1). The wide variety of types is an advantage for the use of pervious pavement on different sites.

Green Infrastructure Guide

Examples

The main drawbacks with pervious pavement are durability and maintenance. There is also some additional installation costs and Â?Â&#x2039;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x17D;Â&#x203A; Â&#x2019;Â&#x2018;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2122;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2013;Â&#x160; Â&#x160;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2030;Â&#x160; Â&#x17D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2018;Â&#x2C6; Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2039;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2013;Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â? Â&#x192;Â&#x2026;Â? Â&#x2018;Â&#x2C6; Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2019;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2026;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D; Â&#x2022;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2013;Â&#x2018;

Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2019;Â&#x192;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;ÇĄ pervious pavers are more Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2020; Â?Â&#x2018;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2026;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2013; Â&#x2026;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x17D; Â&#x201E;Â&#x192;Â&#x2026;Â? Â&#x2019;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2018;Â&#x201D;Â?Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2026;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2026;Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2022;

Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2019;Â&#x192;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021; labor intensive than sitepoured pervious concrete or Â&#x2021;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2019;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020; Â&#x2039;Â? Â&#x2013;Â&#x160;Â&#x2021; ÍłÍťÍšÍ˛Â&#x2022; Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2020; Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2019;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020; Â&#x2022;Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2026;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2021;Â&#x201C;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2039;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2021;Â&#x161;Â&#x2019;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2013; Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2022;Â&#x2013;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â?ÇĄ Â&#x2013;Â&#x160;Â&#x2021;Â?Ç¤ Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x203A; Â&#x160;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2030;Â&#x160; Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2039;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2013;Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â? Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021; ÇŚ ÍťÍ¸Ç¤ÍšÎ¨ Č&#x2039; Â&#x2021;Â&#x2030;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2013; Â&#x160;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2030;Â&#x160;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D; Â&#x2026;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2013; asphalt. These need to be fully Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2020; Â&#x2018;Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2020;Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2039;ÇĄ ÍłÍťÍťÍťČ&#x152; considered and planned for Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x203A; Â&#x160;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2030;Â&#x160; Â&#x17D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x17D; Â&#x2018;Â&#x2C6; Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2039;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2013;Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â?ÇĄ Â?Â&#x2018;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2021;Â&#x201C;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2039;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2022; Â&#x2021;Â&#x161;Â&#x2019;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2013; Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2022;Â&#x2013;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â?ÇĄ before construction in order Â&#x2026;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2013; Â&#x2026;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x17D; Â&#x160;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2030;Â&#x160;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D; Â&#x2026;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2013; to optimize effectiveness and costs, which are often higher per square foot than conventional options. Most pervious pavements arenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t as strong as conventional pavement options

Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x203A; Â&#x160;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2030;Â&#x160; Â&#x17D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x17D; Â&#x2018;Â&#x2C6; Â&#x2039;Â?ÇŚÂ&#x2030;Â&#x192;Â&#x2019; Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2039;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2013;Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â? Č&#x2039;ÍšÍ´ Î¨ Â&#x201E;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D; Â&#x2039;Â&#x2030;Â&#x160; Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2022;Â&#x2013;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â? Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2020; Â&#x2013;Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â? Â&#x2026;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x17D; Â&#x192;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2019;Â&#x160;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2013;Č&#x152; Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2020; Â?Â&#x2018;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021; Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2019;Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2026;Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2013; Â&#x2026;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2022;ÇĄ Â&#x2022;Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2022;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2026;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2013; Â&#x2026;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x17D; Â&#x2013;Â&#x2018; Â&#x2022;Â?Â&#x2018;Â&#x2122; Â&#x2019;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2122;Â&#x2022;

What is it?

Pros

Cons

Winter performance - contrary to some expectations, numerous studies on pervious pavement in northern climates have shown that systems will continue to function in winter if they are properly installed and maintained.75 Some care should be taken when plowing on top of these surfaces, and applying sand and salt should not be excessive. Again, permeable pavement isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t as durable and resilient as conventional pavement. Groundwater contamination - stormwater runoff is known to contain a variety of pollutants.76 This is no exception for stormwater filtration through 55

3.3 Green Infrastructure Strategies in Detail permeable pavement. However, the distributed (non-centralized) approach mitigates the affect of stormwater on groundwater quality. Conventional stormwater management practice concentrates water pollutants.76

native plants require less water overall. The use of native vegetation also offers different aesthetic options. Cons

Urban heat island effect - The rise in ambient air temperature as a result of the proliferation of high-heat absorbing materials such as black asphalt and tar roofs is referred to as urban heat island effect. One consideration when selecting pavement types is to consider its color and solar reflectance capacity to reduce the ambient air temperature in dense urban settings. High-albedo (white) material is preferred over low-albedo (black) materials. There is a small, but growing cool roofs and cool pavement campaign across the nation that seeks to reduce urban heat island effect by painting roofs white and using white concrete or light colored brick pavers for parking lots and streets.

Native vegetation can be perceived as not beautiful and can be more expensive up-front. It also requires high quality soils and attentive care. Finally, native plants arenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t always better than exotic plants. For example, native plants are more susceptible to road salt, and arenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t as durable in intense urban settings. Plant Characteristics There are several things to consider when selecting plants for various green infrastructure elements. Here are some things to consider when selecting plants:

Stormwater Plants durability - plants in tight urban conditions need to be durable to human (and pet) interference

What is it? Vegetation is very important for stormwater absorption, pollution filtration, and peak flow speed reduction. Native vegetation consists of shrubs, perennials, and trees that are found in local climatic settings. They are well-adapted to their region. However, in urban settings non-native vegetation should be considered for situations that demand hardy, salt-tolerant plants.

salt tolerance - plants along roadsides need to be tolerant to road salt root structure - deep roots provide waterways for bioinfiltration

Figure 38: Buttonbush. Buttonbush is a native wildflower in the Chicago region that is appropriately scaled for urban landscaping.

Pros Vegetation is important because it cleanses stormwater runoff and helps balance the water cycle.77 Native vegetation, in particular, is resilient within the climate and requires less fertilization and irrigation. Once established, 56

ability to assimilate toxins - some plants absorb and process pollutants such as phosphates and nitrates maintenance requirement - some plants require pruning or extra protection irrigation requirement - different plants require different amounts of water to sustain themselves. Some plants are hydric, they like their feet wet, thus they need lots of water. They are often found in low-lying wetlands. In some cases, these types of plants are well suited for the low portion of bioswales and other bioinfiltration elements like constructed wetlands. On the other side of the spectrum are plants that require very little water â&#x20AC;&#x201D; they are xeric. WPB - Special Service Area #33

3.3 Green Infrastructure Strategies in Detail

Â&#x201D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2021;Â? Â&#x2018;Â&#x2014;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x192;Â&#x2039;Â? Â&#x2014;Â&#x2030;Â&#x192;Â&#x201D; Â&#x192;Â&#x2019;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2021; Â?Â&#x2039;Â?Â?Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;ĚľÂ&#x2022; Â&#x2014;Â&#x2013;ÇŚÂ&#x17D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x192;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2020; Â&#x2039;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D; Â&#x192;Â&#x2019;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2018;Â&#x201D;Â?Â&#x2021;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2039;Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2026;Â&#x160;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x201D;Â&#x203A; Â&#x2018;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2122;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2020; Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â?Â&#x2018; Â&#x192;Â&#x2019;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2014;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2019;Â&#x2021;Â&#x192;Â? Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2026;Â? Â&#x17D;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D; Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2013;Â&#x192;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2021; Â&#x2039;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D; Â&#x2039;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2026;Â&#x160; Â&#x2014;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2019;Â&#x2021;Â&#x192;Â? Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2026;Â&#x160; Â&#x2122;Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2019; Â&#x160;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021; Â&#x192;Â? Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2026;Â&#x203A;Â&#x2019;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2022; Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x203A; Â&#x2018;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2030;Â&#x2021; Â&#x17D;Â? Â&#x2021;Â&#x2030;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D; Â&#x17D;Â?

Acer Acer Cornus Acer Alnus Betula Larix Quercus Taxodium Ulmus Ulmus

saccharum saccharinum mas x freemanii glutinosa nigra decidua bicolor distichum americana carpinifolia

Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161;

Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x201E;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x201D;Â&#x203A; Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x2026;Â? Â&#x160;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x2021;Â&#x201E;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x201D;Â&#x203A; Â&#x2014;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2018;Â?Â&#x201E;Â&#x2014;Â&#x2022;Â&#x160; Â&#x2122;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2021;Â&#x2013; Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â?

Ilex Aronia Cephalanthus Comptonia

verticillata melanccarpa occidentalis peregrina

Â&#x161; Â&#x161;

Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161;

Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161;

Â&#x2013;Â&#x2018;Â&#x201D;Â?Â&#x2122;Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D; Â&#x2021;Â?Â&#x2021;Â&#x2C6;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2013;Í´

Species

Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2013; Â&#x2018;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2021;Â&#x201D;Â&#x192;Â?Â&#x2013;Íľ

Genus

Â&#x2DC;Â&#x192;Â&#x2039;Â&#x17D;Â&#x192;Â&#x201E;Â&#x2039;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2013;Â&#x203A;Íł

Name

Suitability

Â&#x192;Â&#x2013;Â&#x2039;Â&#x2DC;Â&#x2021;Íľ

Site

Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2039;Â?Â&#x2021;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2022;Íł

Identification

Â&#x192;Â&#x2039;Â? Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â&#x2020;Â&#x2021;Â?Č&#x20AC; Â&#x2039;Â&#x2018;Â&#x2022;Â&#x2122;Â&#x192;Â&#x17D;Â&#x2021;Í´

The WPG GIG Stormwater Plant Matrix (Table 2 at right) suggests trees and shrubs that are known to be good at absorbing stormwater and are appropriate for urban settings. Some of the plants listed are good for urban parkways, bioswale and rain gardens. Some of the trees are salt tolerant and some of them are native to the region. This matrix is a snapshot of hundreds of different plant types that can be used for bioinfiltration, and the list may be expanded with additional technical support. This matrix can be used by all type of gardeners in the neighborhood.

Table 2: WPB GIG Stormwater Plant Matrix

Â&#x2039;Â&#x2013;Â&#x203A; Â&#x192;Â&#x201D;Â?Â&#x2122;Â&#x192;Â&#x203A;Íł

These plants are usually found in more arid-climates, but can be appropriate for some types of green roofs in Chicago. In the middle are mesic plants, which require a moderately moist soils. Most mesic plants wonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t be found along wetlands, but upland a bit. These plants are good for rain gardens.

Trees 1

Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161;

Â&#x161;

Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161;

Shrubs 3

Â&#x161;

Â&#x161; Â&#x161; Â&#x161;

AV = average GD = good NA = not available NA = not available M = Plants with a moderate degree of salt tolerance; use in low salt areas T = Plants with highest degree of salt tolerance; use in most exposed areas 1. according to the City of Chicago Urban Tree Planting List (doesn't include shrubs or perennials) 2. recommendation according to Plants for Stormwater Design: species selection for the Upper Midwest (see section 4.0 for full citation) or Morton Arboreteum's online tree and shrub guide (see below)

Green Infrastructure Guide

3.4 Case Studies - Built in Chicago St. Margaret Mary’s Bioswale

Costs

Roger’s Park Neighborhood, Chicago, IL In 2007, CNT, in partnership with the City of Chicago and St. Margaret Mary’s Church in Rogers Park, constructed a large parking lot bioswale, two rain gardens, and pervious concrete pavement in another parking lot at the Church’s far Northside campus. The Church, located at 2324 W. Chase Ave., was hampered by flooding problems as result of a very high amount of impervious surface areas. Funding was obtained through the U.S. EPA to install green infrastructure elements and then measure their performance over time. The goal of the project is to re-establish the natural drainage process and, thus, reduce the flooding problem. The project was made possible by a large amount of volunteer effort including City of Chicago’s Green Corps, students from St. Margaret Mary’s School, and other community members. Results

The total landscape costs was $15,400 and the engineering costs were $7,500. More info: http://www.cnt.org/natural-resources/demonstration-projects/ st-margaret-mary-church-case-study

Maxwell Street Market Permeable Pavers West Loop Neighborhood, Chicago, IL In 2008, CDOT installed pervious pavers and parking lot bioswales for the Maxwell Street Market located at 640 W. Roosevelt Rd. The market hosts over 500 flea market vendors every Sunday year round. CDOT led the effort to install 89 acres of pervious pavers and 19 acres of bioswales to make a huge dent the amount of stormwater runoff generated from the site. The pavers are high-albedo, which means they are lightly colored to reflect sunlight and reduce ambient air temperature.

Figure 39: Building a Bioswale. Students from St. Margaret Mary’s School help plant shrubs in the parking lot bioswale with help from the City of Chicago Green Corps.

The bioswale measures 18’ by 60’ (1,080 sq. ft.), and it absorbs 160,000 gallons of stormwater per year from the adjacenet parking lot. The bioswale has a 3:1 slope, contains 500 total plants (seven varietes of native plants), and has a 27” deep soil bed. The rain gardens are 12’ by 8’ (96 sq. ft.), and they drain 600 sq. ft. of roof area each. These gardens are comparable in size to the backyard rain gardens in typologies 1 and 2 in this guide. Figure 40: Bioswale Pervious Paver Plaza at Maxwell Street Market.

WPB - Special Service Area #33

3.4 Case Studies - Built in Chicago Chicago Center for Green Technology

Chicago’s “Blue Town” 48th Ward

West Town Neighborhood, Chicago, IL

48th Ward, Alderwomen Mary Anne Smith, Chicago, IL

Located in a renovated former industrial building, CCGT is Chicago’s first LEED platinum® building, CCGT is a comprehensive ‘green’ education and design resource. CCGT features a large landscaped area including several green infrastructure elements. Large rain cisterns, a green roof, large bioswale, and native plants complement the renovated industrial building. CCGT hosts ‘green’ education courses, keeps a material sample library, and has computer softwares to model energy efficiency.

Green infrastructure planning and implementation is a highlight of Alderwomen Smith’s environmental sustainability efforts in her northside ward. Her “Blue Town” campaign seeks innovative stormwater best management practies by installing pilot projects, testing new material applications, and implementing green infrastructure projects on neighborhood infrastructure. In November, pervious asphalt collars were paved along curb corners at street crossings on Clark Street in Andersonville. This was added-on to the scheduled curb improvements. Other green infrastructure elements found in her ward include:

More info: http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/doe/provdrs/ccgt. html

- rain gardens (part of a 2002 CDOE pilot program) - green alleys (2003) - parkway bioswales for bioinfiltration - pervious brick paver installation at several parking lots that serve neighborhood institutions - green space reclamation projects, which seek to increase permeable ground cover - traffic calming street design with increased curb bump-outs - helping to create community gardens In addition to the “Blue Town” campaign, the 48th Ward also has a neighborhood recycling program and is interested in mitigating the effects of urban heat island, and is involved with ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability.

More info: http://www.masmith48.org Figure 41: Rain garden with native plants and a large cistern at CCGT.

Green Infrastructure Guide

3.5 Chicago Resources City of Chicago Sustainable Development Policy City of Chicago Design Review Committee The Sustainable Development Policy is an incentive (both financial and non-financial) matrix to encourage different building types to pursue different sustainability measures including green roofs, LEED Certification®, exceeding the Stormwater Ordinance (Appendix 5.5), and improving energy efficiency. The program is administered by the City of Chicago Department of Zoning and Land Use Planning (DPZ).

Chicago-specific green building program intended for residential housing. The purpose isn’t regulatory, but “is to encourage residential builders, developers and homeowners to use technologies, products and practices” that will: - Provide greater energy efficiency - Provide healthier indoor air - Reduce water usage - Preserve natural resources - Reduce waste and pollution79

Green Permit Program City of Chicago Department of Building One of Chicago’s most talked about green initiatives is the green permit program. Building projects that are pursuing ‘green’ design elements are eligible for expedited permitting, which speeds the total building permit process to less than 30 days.78 The permit may be even faster if the project applies more green standards. There is an additional incentive of a partial permit fee waiver for projects that incorporate a high number of green elements. The program uses LEED and the Chicago Green Homes Program as rating system benchmarks. There is also a ‘Green Menu,’ which adds emphasis and incentives for increased energy efficiency and green roofs. The program is divided into a seven step process that incorporates technical project design review into the process. More info: http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/bldgs/provdrs/ green_permit.html

Green Homes Program City of Chicago Department of Building Revised in April 2009, the Green Homes Program Guide is a comprehensive, 60

More info: http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/doe/supp_info/ chicago_green_homesprogramoverview.html

Green Alley Program Chicago Department of Transportation The Chicago Department of Transportations has a nationally renowned Green Alleys Program, which seeks to implement water resource management strategies and stormwater infiltration on site in the City’s 1,900 miles worth of alleys.80 Historically, street flooding has occurred in many alleyways, so green alleys use pervious pavement and sediment troughs to mitigate that problem. This program is past the pilot stage, and is funded though the Aldermanic Menu Program. More info: http://www.cityofchicago. org/city/en/depts/cdot/provdrs/ alley.html

Figure 42: Green Alley in northern Bucktown. The central spine (about 4’ wide) is paved with pervious asphalt, which serves as a drain for the surrounding conventional asphalt pavement. WPB - Special Service Area #33

Section 3 Endnotes Green Infrastructure Grant Program (IGIG) Illinois Environmental Protection Agency The Illinois EPA recently announced a $5 million annual Green Infrastructure Grant for projects of all sizes created by the private, public, and non-profit sectors. There are three categories for different types of projects: combined sewer overflow and rehabilitation, stormwater retention and infiltration, and green infrastructure small projects category. All projects must submit an application detailing the green infrastructure strategies that are implemented.81

57. Quoted in Strom, N., Nathan, K., Woland, J., (2009) 58. Wicker Park Bucktown Masterplan (2009) 59. City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development (2009) 60. ibid 61. United States Green Building Council (2010) 62. Sustainable Sites Initiative (2010) 63. Dietz (2007) 64. Patchett, J., Price, T., Simone, J. (2007) 65. Dietz (2007)

More info: http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/financial-assistance/igig.html 66. ibid 67. City of Chicago Department of Water Management (2010)

Center for Neighborhood Technology (CNT) Chicago, IL

68. ibid 69. Shuster, W.D. et. al. (2005)

CNT is a local NGO dedicated to environmental sustainability planning and design for community improvement. Located in the Wicker Park Bucktown neighborhood, CNT is a nationally-recognized resource working to equip communities with the tools and expert advice for making decisions that promote livability, diversity, and wellness. One tool of note is their Green Values Stormwater Calculator速, which is a tool this guide uses extensively.

70. Dietz (2007) 71, Dietz (2007) 72. Kibert, C.J. (Ed). (2005) 73. Dietz (2007) 74. Metropolitan Planning Council (2010)

More info: www.cnt.org

75. Dietz (2007) 76. Makepeace et al. (1995) 77. Shaw, D., & Schmidt, M. (2003) 78. City of Chicago Department of Building (2010) 79. Chicago Department of Building (2009) 80. Chicago Department of Transportation (2010) 81. Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (2010)

Green Infrastructure Guide

4.0 Sources â&#x20AC;&#x153;Because change is an inherent property of ecological systems, the capacity of urban ecosystems to respond and adapt to these changes is an important factor in making cities sustainable over the long term.â&#x20AC;? - Marina Alberti, in Advances in Urban Ecology56

Sources Alberti, M. (2008). Advances in Urban Ecology: Integrating Humans and Ecological Processes in Urban Ecosystems (1 ed.). New York: Springer.

City of Chicago. (2010). City of Chicago Municipal Ordinance, Chapter 11. Retrieved September 22, 2010 from www.amlegal.com

Birkeland, J. (2008). Positive Development: From Vicious Circles to Virtuous Cycles Through Built Environment Design (illustrated edition ed.). London: Earthscan Publications Ltd..

City of Chicago. (2010). City of Chicago Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Ordinance, Chapters 16, 17. Retrieved September 22, 2010 from www. amlegal.com

Brabec, E., Schulte, S., Richards. P. (2002). Impervious Surfaces and Water Quality: A Review of Current Literature and Its Implications for Watershed Planning. Journal of Planning Literature, Vol 16, No. 4. Sage Publications.

City of Chicago (2009). Chicago Green Homes Program Guide. Retrieved September 18, 2010 from http://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/ city/depts/doe/general/GreenHomesRoofsBldgs_pdfs/ChicagoGreenHomesGuidev20.pdf

Center for Neighborhood Technology. (2010). Green Values Calculator. Retrieved September 28, 2010 from www.cnt.org

City of Chicago Bureau of Forestry. (2010). City of Chicago Urban Tree Planting List. Chicago: author.

Center for Neighborhood Technology. (2010, Sept. 17). Apply Now! Illinois EPA Initiates Green Infrastructure Grant Program. Retrieved September 28, 2010 from www.cnt.org

City of Chicago Department of Building. (2010). Combined Sewers. Online website. Retrieved December 3, 2010 from http://www.cityofchicago. org/city/en/depts/bldgs/supp_info/combined_sewers.html

Chicago Gateway Green (2010). Frontpage. Online website. Retrieved December 9, 2010 from http://www.gatewaygreen.org/

City of Chicago Department of Building. (2010). Chicago Green Permit Program. Retrieved October 8, 2010 from http://www.cityofchicago.org/ content/dam/city/depts/bldgs/general/GreenPermit/Green_Permit_ Brochure_2010.pdf

Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning. (2010). Go To 2040 Plan. Retrieved online October 24, 2010 from http://www.cmap.illinois. gov/2040/main City of Ann Arbor. (2010). Stormwater Rates and Credits. Online website. Retrieved December 3, 2010 from http://www.a2gov.org/government/ publicservices/systems_planning/waterresources/Pages/StormWaterRates.aspx City of Chicago Climate Change Taskforce (2007). Chicago Climate Action Plan.

City of Chicago Department of Building. (2009). Chicago Green Homes Program Guide. Retrieved September 18, 2010 from http://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/doe/general/GreenHomesRoofsBldgs_pdfs/ChicagoGreenHomesGuidev20.pdf City of Chicago Department of Environment. (2010). Natural Resources and Water Quality. Online website. Retrieved December 8, 2010 from http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/doe/provdrs/nat_res. html

WPB - Special Service Area #33

City of Chicago Department of Transportation. (2010). Green Alley Program. Online website. Retrieved October 8, 2010 from http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/cdot/provdrs/alley/svcs/green_alleys.html

New York City Department of Environmental Protection. (2007). Volume 2: Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan. Retrieved online December 4, 2010 from http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/dep_projects/jamaica_ bay.shtml

City of Chicago Department of Water Management.(2010). Stormwater Management Ordinance Manual. Retrieved September 15, 2010 from http:// www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/water/general/Engineering/SewerConstStormReq/2010StrmWtrMnul.pdf

New York City Department of Environmental Protection. (2010). NYC Green Infrastructure Plan. Retrieved December 3, 2010 from http://www.nyc. gov/html/dep/html/stormwater/nyc_green_infrastructure_plan.shtml

City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development (2009). Seattle Green Factor. Online website. Retrieved September 14, 2010 from http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/permits/greenfactor/Overview/

Patchett, J., Price, T., & Simone, J. (2007). Stormwater Systems. In D. Farr (Ed.) Sustainable Urbanism: Urban Design With Nature (pp. 175-178). New York, NY: Wiley.

Dietz, M. (2007). Low Impact Development Practices: A Review of Current Research and Recommendations for Future Directions. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, Vol. 186, No. 1-4, (pp 351-363).

Pelletier, M. R. (2009). Green Infrastructures for Blue Urban Watersheds. Green Community (pp. 96-103). Chicago: Apa Planners Press.

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (2010). Illinois Green Infrastructure Study. Chicago: author. Kibert, C.J. (Ed). (2005). Sustainable Construction: Green Building Design and Delivery. New York, NY: Wiley. Mailhot, A., Duchesne, S. (2010). Design Criteria of Urban Drainage Infrastructures under Climate Change. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management. ASCE Publishing. Metro Portland (2002). Green Streets: Innovative Solutions for Stormwater and Stream Crossings, (1 ed.). Portland: author. Metropolitan Planning Council. (2010). Rainwater Harvesting for Non-Potable Uses. Retrieved online December 7, 2010 from http://www.metroplanning.org/multimedia/publication/381

Green Infrastructure Guide

Sarte, S.B. (2010). Sustainable Infrastructure: The Guide to Green Engineering and Design. New York, NY: Wiley. Schueler, T. et. al (2007) Urban Stormwater Retrofit Practices, version 1. Center for Watershed Protection. Shaw, D., & Schmidt, M. (2003). Plants for Stormwater Design: Species Selection for the Upper Midwest. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Retrieved December 12, 2010 from http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index. php/view-document.html?gid=5651 Shuster, W.D. et. al. (2005). Impacts of Impervious Surface on Watershed Hydrology: A Review. Urban Water Journal. Vol. 2, No. 4, (pp 263-275). Taylor and Francis. Strom, S., Nathan, K., & Woland, J. (2009). Site Engineering for Landscape Architects, (5 ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.

Sources Sustainable Sites Initiative. (2010). Frontpage website. Retrieved September 18, 2010 from http://www.sustainablesites.org/ U.S. EPA. (2000). Low Impact Development: A Literature Review. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. U.S. EPA. (2003). Protecting Water Quality from Urban Runoff. Retrieved November 21, 2010 from http://www.epa.gov/owow/NPS/urban_facts. html U.S. EPA. (2008). Case Studies of Sustainable Water and Wastewater Pricing. Retrieved December 5, 2010 from http://www.epa.gov/safewater/ smallsystems/pdfs/guide_smallsystems_fullcost_pricing_case_studies. pdf U.S. EPA. (2010). Water and Wastewater Pricing. Online website. Retrieved December 5, 2010 from http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/ Water-and-Wastewater-Pricing-Introduction.cfm United States Green Building Council. (2010). LEED-ND Program. Online website. Retrieved October 8, 2010 from http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=148 Wicker Park Bucktown Special Service Area #33. (2009). Wicker Park Bucktown Masterplan. Retrieved June 8, 2010 from www.wickerparkbucktown.org Yudelson, J. (2010). Dry Run: Preventing the Next Urban Water Crisis. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.

WPB - Special Service Area #33

5.0 Appendix

5.1 List of Interviewee and Stakeholder Roundtable Participants Stakeholder Roundtable Meeting Contributors: Margie Isaacson, Center for Neighborhood Technology Courtney Owen, Chair of Zoning Committee, Bucktown Community Organization John Paige, WPB Guide Development Committee Member and Commission Member Scott Rappe, architect and member of East Village Association Paul Sajovek, 32nd Ward Chief of Staff for Alderman Waguespack Raymond Valadez, 1st Ward Chief of Staff for Alderman Moreno Meeting held on October 18th, 2010 at WPBâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office - 1414 N. Ashland Ave.

Interviewees Sarah Abu-Absi, WRD Environmental Consultant for the Chicago Department of the Environment Dave Baum, Baum Reality Dave Bier, Futurity Inc. Kalle Butler, Center for Neighborhood Technology James Cox, Project Manager, City of Chicago Department of Community Development Bill Eyring, Center for Neighborhood Technology Ben Helphand, Neighborspace Program Margie Isaacson, Center for Neighborhood Technology David Leopold, Chicago Department of Transportation Courtney Owen, Chair of Zoning Committee, Bucktown Community Organization Jason Navota, Conservation Design Forum John Paige, WPB SSA Guide Development Committee Member Dina Petrakis, Wicker Park Committee Scott Rappe, Architect and East Village Association Member Paul Sajovek, Chief of Staff to Alderman Scott Waguespack, 32nd Ward

WPB - Special Service Area #33

5.2 Maps of Reported Basement Flooding in Chicago

WIB = Water in Basement Source: City of Chicago Department of Environment Green Infrastructure Guide

5.3 Illinois Watersheds Map

WPB - Special Service Area #33

5.4 Wicker Park Bucktown SSA Map and Land Use Statistics Land Use Statistics 79.4% Impervious Surface 20.6% Pervious Surface (includes compacted soils) Total Number of Dwelling Units = 2,750

WPB Land Use, percent of total parcels 2.10%

8.80%

2.20%

11.60%

Residential Mixed Use

0.70%

4.60%

Commercial Institutional Industrial

14.80%

Green Space/ Park 33.30%

Parking/Pavement Vacant Building Vacant Land

21.90% Note: Total Parcels = 1,399 Source: WPB Field Survey, 2007

WPB Boundary Map WPB is the special service area in the Wicker Park and Bucktown neighborhoods. For more information about WPB, please visit www.wickerparkbucktown.org.

Green Infrastructure Guide

5.5 Municipal Ordinance Overview Stormwater Ordinance The City of Chicago is unique because of its age, density and combined sewer system; and the Chicago Stormwater Ordinance reflects these characteristics. The ordinance has been in place for over two years (took effect on January 1, 2008) and places an emphasis on impervious area reduction and implementation of green infrastructure techniques. The ordinance is a performance-based regulation that requires either the capture of 0.5 inch of 12 runoff from all impervious surfaces or a 15% reduction in impervious surfaces from existing conditions. The City also has an integrated process in which the Stormwater Reviewer has a seat on the Concept Review Committee. This allows stormwater requirements to be incorporated in the initial design process and review. The City of Chicago has only issued 1 variance since the ordinance has been in place and considers this is a sign of the success and feasibility of the requirements. The ordinance is a compliment to the Landscape Ordinance.

volume of runoff from a Regulated Development by one of the following measures: (A) capture one-half inch of runoff from all impervious surfaces in accordance with volume control BMPs; or (B) for Developments that do not directly discharge to waters or to a municipal separate storm sewer system, achieve a fifteen percent reduction in impervious surfaces from existing conditions.” 11-18-040 Stormwater management plan – Exceptions (a)

“A Plan shall not be required for Residential Development.”

- end of excerpt -

Excerpt from City of Chicago Municpal Code, Chapter 11:

City of Chicago Stormwater Mangement Ordinance Manual

11-18-030 Stormwater management plan – Required

The manual is a detailed 127-page report that explains the ordinance in plain language, suggests strategies for meeting the ordinance requirements, and shows illustrated case studies for typical building requirements. The manual is backed by empirical engineering-based research.

“Every Regulated Development shall at all times have in place a Plan approved by the City. In addition to such other requirements as the commissioner may set forth by regulation, the Plan shall include the following: (a)

Provisions for Stormwater Management:

(1) Rate Control. Stormwater Drainage Systems shall manage the peak rate of discharge from the Regulated Development, incorporating the maximum permissible release rate. Provided, however, that Developments that create an at-grade impervious surface of less than 7,500 substantially contiguous square feet and that directly discharge to waters shall not be subject to the rate control requirements of this subparagraph (a)(1). (2) 74

Volume Control. Stormwater drainage systems shall reduce the WPB - Special Service Area #33

5.5 Municipal Ordinance Overview Excerpt from Page 286 of the Wicker Park Bucktown Masterplan (2009)

Cheat Sheet for WPB Zoning Classifications B1 – Neighborhood Shopping District B1 districts are intended to accommodate a range of small-scale retail and service uses along storefront-style shopping streets that are oriented to pedestrians. B1 districts are typically concentrated at the intersection of two or more major streets or extended linearly along more narrow, minor streets. Residential dwelling units are permitted above the ground floor. •

Gross floor area of commercial establishments = 25,000 square feet.

•

B1-2 has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR)44 of 2.2 and a maximum building height of 47 – 50 feet depending on the width of the lot frontage. B1-3 has an FAR of 3.0 and a maximum building height of 50 – 65 feet depending on the width of the lot frontage.

•

B2 – Neighborhood Mixed Use District B2 districts serve the same purposes as B1 districts, but where the commercial market is not as strong, they can accommodate a greater range of land uses including ground floor residential units by-right. The B2 designation is intended to stimulate development along under-developed streets. This zoning designation accommodates artist live/work space in ground floor units as of right. •

Gross floor area of commercial establishments = 25,000 square feet.

•

B2-2 has an FAR of 2.2 and a maximum building height of 45 feet if there is no ground floor commercial space, or 47 – 50 feet if there is ground floor commercial space depending on the width of the lot frontage. B2-3 has an FAR of 3.0 and a maximum building height of 50 – 60 feet if there is no ground floor commercial space, or 50-65 feet if there is ground floor commercial space depending on the width of the lot frontage. B2-5 has an FAR of 5.0 and a maximum building height of 50 – 75 feet (or higher if reviewed and approved as a Planned Developments (PD)) depending on the lot frontage if there is no ground floor commercial, or 50 – 80 feet (or higher if reviewed and approved as a Planned Developments (PD)) depending on the lot frontage if there is ground floor commercial.

• •

Floor Area Ration (FAR) equals the Gross Floor Area of the Building / Total Parcel Area

Green Infrastructure Guide

B3 – Community Shopping District B3 districts accommodate a broad range of retail and service uses, sometimes taking the form of shopping centers or larger buildings than those found in the B1 and B2 districts. As many customers arrive by car at these destination-style shopping centers, the supply of off-street parking tends to be higher in B3 districts than in B1 or B2 districts. B3 allows residential units above the ground floor and often applies to large sites that have access to major streets. •

Commercial establishments are not subject to size limits, which can lead to the development of big-box or national chain retail.

• •

B3-1 has an FAR of 1.2 and a maximum building height of 38 feet. B3-2 has an FAR of 2.2 and a maximum building height of 47 – 50 feet depending on the width of the lot frontage. B3-3 has an FAR of 3.0 and a maximum building height of 50 – 65 feet depending on the width of the lot frontage. B3-5 has an FAR of 5.0 and a maximum building height of 50 – 80 feet (or higher if reviewed and approved as a Planned Developments (PD)) depending on the lot frontage.

• •

draft

286

Business Classifications

Commercial Classifications C1 – Neighborhood Commercial District C1 districts accommodate a broad range of small-scale business, service, and commercial uses. It permits auto-oriented commercial uses and well as taverns and liquor stores by right. Residential dwelling units are permitted above the ground floor as well. C1-1 maximum gross floor area of commercial establishments = 25,000 square feet. C1-2 maximum gross floor area of commercial establishments = 25,000 square feet. C1-3 commercial establishments are not subject to size limits. C2 – Motor Vehicle Related Commercial District C2 districts also accommodate a broad range of business, service, and commercial uses; it is the highest intensity business or commercial zoning district, and its uses are often auto-oriented requiring more off-street parking. The designation allows residential units on upper floors and generally applies to large sites with access to major streets. C2 commercial establishments are not subject to size limits. 75

5.5 Municipal Ordinance Overview Excerpt from Page 287 of the Wicker Park Bucktown Masterplan (2009)

Manufacturing Classifications M1 – Limited Manufacturing / Business Park District M1 districts accommodate low-impact, indoor, manufacturing, wholesaling, warehousing, and distribution activities, promoting high-quality new development and reuse of older industrial buildings. M2 – Light Industry District M2 districts accommodate moderate-impact manufacturing, wholesaling, warehousing, and distribution uses including storage and work-related activities that occur outside, suited to land-intensive industrial activities.

Residential Classifications Residential Single-Unit Detached RS-3 – Detached houses and two-flats on individual lots at least 2,500 square feet in size. Parcels with this zoning categorization and may accommodate structures up to 30 feet tall. Residential Two-Flat, Townhouse, Multi-Unit RT-4 – Detached houses, two-flats, townhouses, and low-density multi-unit residential buildings at a density and building scale that is compatible with RS districts. Parcels with this zoning categorization must have a minimum of 1,000 square feet per dwelling unit and may accommodate buildings up to 38 feet tall. Residential Multi-Unit District RM-5 – Multi-unit residential buildings of up to 3½ or 4 stories, maximum. Parcels with this zoning categorization must have a minimum of 400 square feet per dwelling unit and may accommodate structures up to 45 feet tall if the parcel is less than 32 feet wide or 47 feet tall if the parcel is 32 feet wide or wider.

WPB - Special Service Area #33

5.6 List of Alleys with Flooding Problems in Wicker Park Bucktown Within Wicker Park Bucktown Neighborhood Boundary: LeMoyne, Hoyne, Schiller, Leavitt (March 2009) Fullerton to the north Ashland to the east Division to the south Western to the west

McLean, Hoyne, Armitage, Leavitt (April 2009) Medill, Leavitt, Belden, Oakley (June 2009) Milwaukee, Wolcott, Ellen, Evergreen (March 2010; May 2010)

CDOT CSR reports made from January 1, 2009 to December 8, 2010 for alley flooding. Alleys bounded by street names beginning with northern most street and rotating clockwise

Moffat, Winchester, Willow, Damen (May 2009) North, Ashland, Piece, Paulina (June 2009) North, Hoyne, Pierce, Leavitt (October 2009)

Alley Name (Date of complaint)

North, Paulina, Pierce, Wood (October 2009)

Armitage, Damen, Homer, Hoyne (April 2010)

North, Wolcott, Elk Grove (April 2010)

Armitage, Winchester, Cortland, Damen (February 2009; May 2009; June 2009; October 2009; May 2010)

St. Paul, Damen, Wabansia, Hoyne (March 2009; April 2009; July 2009) Wabansia, Claremont, North, Western (June 2010)

Armitage, Wolcott, Cortland, Winchester (February 2009; March 2009) Wabansia, Hermitage, North, Wood (March 2009) Armitage, Wood, Cortland, Honore (March 2009) Wabansia, Honore, North, Wolcott (April 2010 3x) Avondale, Charleston, Winchester (November 2009) Webster, Hoyne, Shakespear, Leavitt (March 2010) Belden, Oakley, Lyndale, Western (June 2009; July 2010) Wabansia, Winchester, North, Damen (February 2009) Bloomingdale, Honore, Wabansia, Wolcott (September 2009) Bloomingdale, Wood, Wabansia, Honore (March 2009; August 2009) Charleston, Hoyne, Dickens, Leavitt (November 2009)

Wabansia, Wolcott, North, Winchester (February 2009; May 2009; June 2009; October 2009) Source: Chicago Department of Transportation. (December 8, 2010). Service Request Summary Report (FOIA response)

Crystal, Hoyne, Division, Leavitt (May 2009) Dickens, Damen, McLean, Hoyne (August 2009; October 2009) Ellen, Wood, Division, Honore (June 2009; August 2009; October 2009) Green Infrastructure Guide

5.7 What is LEED 3.0? Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) is the standard, internationally-recognized green building certification system administered by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). It is designed to certify that a building or neighborhood includes a specified list of green building best practices. LEED sets benchmarks for important design metrics including: energy savings, water efficiency, CO2 emissions reduction, indoor environmental quality, and the protection of natural resources and habitats. The LEED rating system applies to all types of construction ranging from commercial interiors to entire neighborhoods and can be applied to both new construction and retrofit projects. LEEDâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rating system is based on obtaining credits for certain criteria. If a project obtains a base amount of credits, it can become certified. If a project earns additional credits, it will be certified at one of several upper tiers: silver, gold, or platinum. Understanding the LEED certification process helps builders and other professionals in making design, construction, operations, and maintenance decisions. LEED assesses the green features included in a new construction (NC) project by applying the following categories: - Sustainable Sites (SS) - Water Efficiency (WE) - Energy & Atmosphere (EA) - Materials & Resources (MR) - Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) - Innovation in Design (ID) - Regional Priority (RP) Other similar categories exist for neighborhood development (ND) and other types of projects.

WPB - Special Service Area #33

5.8 Typology Calculation Worksheets Typology 1 Calculation Worksheet

Typology 1 Calculation Worksheet

WPB GIG

WPB GIG Green Infrastructure Metrics Total pervious surface area (%) Total reduction in peak discharge (%) Area (sq ft)

Quantity

Area (sq ft)

76% 71%

3125

Total footprint area of all buildings 1

2019

Total roof area of all buildings

Size (cu ft)

Native Plant and Tree Inventory5

Size (gal)

Basic Site Information Total area of site

Quantity

WPB GIG native shrubs and perennials Other shrubs and perennials

8 0

WPB GIG trees on site Other trees on site

2 0

CNT Green Values Calculator Results6

Total area of all paved2 areas

Amount/Rate

448

Hydrologic Results Lot Level Improvements Lot Discharge (cf) Lot Peak Discharge (cfs)

24 0.01

Total Site Improvements Total Peak Discharge (cfs)

0.06

1316

Detention Size Improvements Total Detention Required (cu ft)

100

Porous Concrete Porous Asphalt Precast Porous Pavers

402

Annual Discharge Improvements Average Annual Discharge (acre ft)

0.04

Total reduction in peak discharge (%)

71%

Bioswale Parkway Native Plant Garden Rain Garden

150 210 250

Total area of pervious surface

2374

Green Infrastructure Elements Rain Barrel/Cistern

Green Roof Intensive

Extensive

Permeable / Porous Pavement

Bioinfiltration

Green Infrastructure Guide

1. Including garage and other auxillary buildings on site 2. "Paved" refers to all nonͲbuilding, nonͲplanted surfaces such as concrete, asphalt, brick. 3. Intensive green roofs have more than 4” of growth medium) 4. Extensive green roofs have 2” to 4” of growth medium 5. All WPB GIG approved native shrubs, perennials, and trees are listed in guide in Appendix A 6. Use CNT's Green Values Stormwater Management Calculator (http://logan.cnt.org/calculator/calculator.php)

Percent Pervious Surface Total area of pervious surface Total area of site Percent pervious surface (%)

Notes

2374 3125 76%

5.8 Typology Calculation Worksheets Typology 2: Worker's Cottage Calculation Worksheet

Typology 2: Worker's Cottage Calculation Worksheet

WPB GIG

WPB GIG Green Infrastructure Metrics Total pervious surface area (%) Total reduction in peak discharge (%) Area (sq ft)

Quantity

Area (sq ft)

51% 69%

2310

Total footprint area of all buildings 1

1490

Total roof area of all buildings

Size (cu ft)

WPB GIG Plant and Tree Inventory5

Size (gal)

Basic Site Information Total area of site

Quantity

WPB GIG native shrubs and perennials Other shrubs and perennials

8 0

WPB GIG trees on site Other trees on site

2 0

CNT Green Values Calculator Results6

Total area of all paved2 areas

Amount/Rate

325

Hydrologic Results Lot Level Improvements Lot Discharge (cf) Lot Peak Discharge (cfs)

8 0

Total Site Improvements Total Peak Discharge (cfs)

0.04

274

Detention Size Improvements Total Detention Required (cu ft)

Porous Concrete Porous Asphalt Precast Porous Pavers

260

Annual Discharge Improvements Average Annual Discharge (acre ft)

0.02

Total reduction in peak discharge (%)

69%

Bioswale Parkway Native Plant Garden Native Plant / Vegetable Garden

112 88 382

Total area of pervious surface

1181

Green Infrastructure Elements Rain Barrel/Cistern

250

Green Roof Intensive

Extensive

Permeable / Porous Pavement

Bioinfiltration

Percent Pervious Surface Total area of pervious surface Total area of site Percent pervious surface (%)

Notes

1181 2310 51%

WPB - Special Service Area #33

5.8 Typology Calculation Worksheets Typology 3: Large Mixed Use Building Calculation Worksheet

Typology 3: Large Mixed Use Building Calculation Worksheet

WPB GIG

WPB GIG Green Infrastructure Metrics Total pervious surface area (%) Total reduction in peak discharge (%) Area (sq ft)

Quantity

Area (sq ft)

54% 78%

Size (gal)

WPB GIG native shrubs and perennials Other shrubs and perennials WPB GIG trees on site Other trees on site

13024

Total footprint area of all buildings 1 Total roof area of all buildings

Size (cu ft)

WPB GIG Plant and Tree Inventory5

Basic Site Information Total area of site

Quantity

16 8 8 0

9029

CNT Green Values Calculator Results6

Total area of all paved2 areas

Amount/Rate

1761

Hydrologic Results Lot Level Improvements Lot Discharge (cf) Lot Peak Discharge (cfs)

59 0.01

Total Site Improvements Total Peak Discharge (cfs)

0.15

3067

Detention Size Improvements Total Detention Required (cu ft)

231

Porous Concrete Porous Asphalt Precast Porous Pavers

1502

Annual Discharge Improvements Average Annual Discharge (acre ft)

Total reduction in peak discharge (%)

78%

Vegetated Bioswale Rain Garden Parkway

836 1,330

Total area of pervious surface

6994

Green Infrastructure Elements Rain Barrel/Cistern

2000

Green Roof Intensive

Extensive

Permeable / Porous Pavement

259

Infiltration

Notes 1. Including garage and other auxillary buildings on site 2. "Paved" refers to all nonͲbuilding, nonͲplanted surfaces such as concrete, asphalt, brick. 3. Intensive green roofs have more than 4” of growth medium) 4. Extensive green roofs have 2” to 4” of growth medium 5. All WPB GIG approved native shrubs, perennials, and trees are listed in guide in Appendix A

Percent Pervious Surface 6. Use CNT's Green Values Stormwater Management Calculator (http://logan.cnt.org/calculator/calculator.php) Total area of pervious surface Total area of site Percent pervious surface (%)

Green Infrastructure Guide

6994 13024 54%

5.8 Typology Calculation Worksheets Typology 4: Strip Commercial Building with Parking Lot Calculation Worksheet

Typology 4: Strip Commercial Building with Parking Lot Calculation Worksheet

WPB GIG

WPB GIG Green Infrastructure Metrics Total pervious surface area (%) Total reduction in peak discharge (%) Area (sq ft)

Quantity

Area (sq ft)

54% 59%

Size (gal)

28664

Total footprint area of all buildings 1 Total roof area of all buildings

Size (cu ft)

Native Plant and Tree Inventory5

Basic Site Information Total area of site

Quantity

WPB GIG native shrubs and perennials Other shrubs and perennials

8 0

WPB GIG trees on site Other trees on site

2 0

9749

CNT Green Values Calculator Results6

Total area of all paved2 areas

Amount/Rate

14898

Hydrologic Results Lot Level Improvements

Green Infrastructure Elements Rain Barrel/Cistern

2000

Green Roof Intensive

Extensive

475 3428

Permeable / Porous Pavement Porous Concrete Permeable Brick Pavers Permeable Concrete Pavers

882 6385

Vegetated Bioswale Filter Strip

3663 667

Total area of pervious surface

15500

Lot Discharge (cf) Lot Peak Discharge (cfs)

23 0.01

Total Site Improvements Total Peak Discharge (cfs)

0.71

Detention Size Improvements Total Detention Required (cu ft)

1787

Annual Discharge Improvements Average Annual Discharge (acre ft)

0.56

Total reduction in peak discharge (%)

59%

Bioinfiltration

15500 28664 54%

WPB - Special Service Area #33