This document discusses green infrastructure and its role in creating sustainable communities. It defines green infrastructure as strategically planned and managed networks of natural lands, working landscapes and other open spaces that conserve ecosystem values and functions while providing benefits to human populations. These networks help guide development, protect important natural areas, and maintain ecological processes at a landscape scale. The green infrastructure approach provides a framework that considers both environmental and human needs and can help integrate conservation and growth.

1. Green Infrastructure:
A Foundation for Creating
Sustainable Communities
Bill Jenkins
U.S. EPA, Mid-Atlantic Region
(215) 814-2911
jenkins.bill@epa.gov

2. Presentation Overview
History and
background on “Green
Infrastructure”
What can it do for
you?
What Do Benjamin
Franklin and the
Cheshire Cat have to
do with this?
From: Common Ground, Vol. 14,
No. 1, 2003.

3. The One Constant…Change
• Since European settlement we have lost more
than 50% of our wetland acreage.
• Since 1992, we have lost approximately 80,000
acres of forest annually, for a total of 1.2 million
acres.
• From 1992, and projecting to 2020, we will have
lost over 2.3 million acres of forest and 150,000
acres of wetland.
• Developed land area is projected to increase
from 2.9 million acres to 5.2 million acres.

4. Ecological Impacts of
Landscape Change
Degradation of natural landscape features:
Loss and fragmentation of forests
Loss of riparian buffers and wetlands
Stream channel and aquatic habitat
impairment
Loss of ecosystem services:
Carbon and nutrient cycling
Sediment trapping
Biodiversity
Flood mitigation
Climate change adaptation, etc.

5. Economic and Social
Impacts of Landscape Change
Loss of Productive Farm and
Forest Land, Cultural
Resources, Tourism Revenue
Decreased Sense of
Community: “Anywhere USA”
Impacts to Human Physical and
Mental Health; Quality of Life
Loss of Services Provided by
Natural Systems = Increased
Costs for Services to Dispersed
Development & to Restore Lost
Ecosystem Function

6. Headline:
We are discovering polluted streams faster
than we can clean them!
Region III Rivers and Streams Trend Analysis
Miles
7000
28000
303(d)
6000
24000 impaired
waters TMDL's
Miles of Waters
20000
5000
Completed
4000
16000 and 303(d)
Delisted
3000
12000
G Waters
2000
8000 A
P 303(d)
1000
4000 Delisted
Waters
0
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Year

7. The High Societal Cost of Restoration
The estimated costs for pollutant cleanups ranges from
$4/lb for iron reduction from Acid Mine Drainage to $66/lb
for phosphorous reduction in the Chesapeake Bay ($29
billion for nutrient/sediment goals).
Impairment Miles Cost Avg Cost/mile
Corsica River, MD Nutrients 7.6 $17,500,000 $2,300,000
Little Laurel Run, PA Metals 3 $1,048,013 $349,338
Conewago Ck, PA Nutrients 17 $4,300,000 $252,941
Bear Ck, PA Metals 5 $964,000 $192,800
Catawissa Ck, PA Metals 57.9 $3,500,000 $60,440
Thumb Run, VA Bacteria 17 $2,450,000 $144,117
Willis River, VA Bacteria 30 $2,794,160 $93,138
Muddy Creek, VA Bacteria 9 $2,612,000 $290,222

8. The Issues
• Rapid loss and fragmentation of natural
lands/open space resulting in:
‣ Lost habitat, water quality and
economic benefits, social/cultural
heritage, and HUGE restoration costs
• Future projections show continuation or
acceleration of loss and degradation
• Many organizations have no information
that identifies the most ecologically,
economically or culturally valuable lands.
‣ Most that do haven’t considered the
role of these lands within a larger,
landscape context.

9. Haphazard Conservation
Conservation
activities that are:
Reactive
Site-Specific
Narrowly, “Content”
Focused
Not Technically
Defensible
Not Integrated with
Other Efforts

10. Haphazard Conservation…Not Getting
Us Where We Want to Go
“Insanity: Doing what you’ve
always done and expecting a
different result.”
Benjamin Franklin
“If you don’t know where
you are going, any road will
do.”
Cheshire Cat

11. Strategic Conservation
Conservation that promotes planning, protection,
restoration and long term management that is:
Proactive not Reactive
Systematic not Piecemeal
Multi-functional not Single
Purpose
Multiple Scales not Single
Scale (i.e. “Context” sensitive)
and
Science-based

12. Infrastructure: A National Priority…
And Source of Pride
“The substructure or
underlying foundation,
especially the basic
installations and
facilities, on which the
continuance and
growth of a community
or state depends”.
(Source: Webster’s
New World Dictionary)

13. Implications of Definition
of “Infrastructure”
A necessity, not an
amenity
A primary public
investment
Must be planned and
developed as a
network – a connected
system - not as
isolated parts
Must be constantly
maintained over time
to function

15. Green Infrastructure
“Strategically planned and
managed networks of natural
lands, working landscapes and
other open spaces that conserve
ecosystem values & functions and
provide associated
benefits to
human populations.”
(Benedict and McMahon, 2006)

16. Green Infrastructure
Conceptual Model
IDOR
CORR
Hub
Hub CORRI
DOR
OR
RID
COR R
I DO
RR
CO
Hub

17. A Healthy Body Needs
Healthy Parts, Linked, to
Support Healthy Systems
Wired Magazine, 11/08

22. What Does Green Infrastructure Do?

23. Green Infrastructure
was identified as
one of five keys to
community
sustainability in the
late 1990s.
The other four being:
• Land Use and Development
• Community Revitalization and
Reinvestment
• Rural Enterprise and Community
Development
• Materials Reuse and Resource
Efficiency

24. Built (“Gray”) Infrastructure
Social
Infrastructure
Green
Infrastructure
Source: Guide to Sustainable Community Indicators, Hart 1999

25. Brings Science to Planning and Implementation
Better Worse
Incorporates principles of:
landscape & aquatic ecology,
conservation biology,
Better Worse
restoration ecology, and
watershed management (e.g.
hydrology)
Better Worse
Key to all is connectivity and the
spatial pattern of landscape
features – even in developed Better Worse
areas
Pattern affects Processes which
World Conservation Strategy
affects Function (IUCN 1980)

27. Green “Urban” Infrastructure
Integrated networks or systems of built,
protected and managed urban ecosystems
that provide multiple, complementary
functions (i.e. abiotic, biotic and cultural) in
support of urban sustainability. (Ahern, 2007)

28. Abiotic Functions Biotic Functions Cultural/Social Functions
Maintenance of Habitat and movement Integral and supportive of economic and
surface/subsurface routes/corridors for recreational activity (employment,
hydrological regime(s) generalist and specialist property value, greenways…)
species
Air pollution remediation Bio/phyto - remediation Opportunity for physical recreation
of wastes and toxics
Waste: processing - Supports Supports alternative transportation
transformation - reuse metapopulation
dynamics for wildlife
Buffer/stabilize urban Maintenance of Provide a sense of solitude, quiet, and
climate (heat island disturbance and inspiration
effect) successional regime(s)
Nutrient Cycling - Biomass production Healthy context for social interactions
buffering - sequestration
Flood buffering - “Reservoir” of genetic Stimulus for artistic and abstract
protection diversity expression
Reduce Noise Control spread of vector- Supports Environmental education
borne diseases
(Ahern 1995, Ndubisi 2002)

29. Green “Urban” Infrastructure
Focus on the ecology of the built
environment, as a complement to
protecting the undisturbed environment.
Plan, design, manage at multiple
scales (regional - neighborhood - site -
construction details) and across the land
use spectrum.
Need to consider the spatial patterns
(e.g. connectivity) that support the
processes, which determine the
functions, of the urban landscape.
Allows for strategic, proactive,
technically defensible planning and
implementation.
(Ahern, 2007)

30. Water and Green “Urban” Infrastructure
Managing water in urbanized
areas has historically focused on
conveyance, treating water as a
waste product – not an asset.
This fails to recognize other
ecological or cultural functions:
stable streamflow, groundwater
recharge and infiltration – or
economic opportunities.
Other “function” examples: trail
connections, moderation of urban
climate, urban revitalization,
community-based agriculture,
wildlife corridors, etc. (Ahern, 2007)

31. Giving Context to Planning,
Design, and Implementation
Ecological
Economic
Recreation Local or Site Factors
(“Content”)
Historical
Cultural/Social
Regional/Landscape/Watershed
Vulnerability
Factors
(“Context”)

32. Green Infrastructure:
A Framework for Growth
The Green Infrastructure
approach helps shape
the pattern of
development by
providing a framework
for growth that first
identifies ecologically,
culturally and
economically significant
lands, and then suitable
areas for development.

33. Traditional Development
Source: Karen Firehock, Green
Infrastructure Center Charlottesville, VA

34. Cluster Development
Source: Karen Firehock, Green
Infrastructure Center Charlottesville, VA

35. “Haphazard” Cluster Development
Source: Karen Firehock, Green
Infrastructure Center Charlottesville, VA

36. Green Infrastructure Approach
Providing Strategic “Context”
Source: Karen Firehock, Green
Infrastructure Center Charlottesville, VA

37. The Green Infrastructure Approach
• Helps reduce opposition to
development AND conservation.
• Provides predictability and certainty
(land use planning, project siting,
mitigation and restoration, etc.).
• Guides/maximizes/leverages public
and private investments in protection,
restoration and management.
• Based on scientifically defensible
principles.

38. The Green Infrastructure Approach
Provides a unifying vision
that people with diverse
interests can support.
A framework for integrating
sustainability, growth
management & strategic
conservation at all scales &
across diverse landscapes.
Recognizes and integrates
both ecosystem & human
needs.

39. Green Infrastructure
Network
Landscape Features that
Provide Associated
Benefits for Human
Populations
+
Landscape Features
that Support Natural
Ecosystem Values and
Functions

40. Some Thoughts to Consider…
Committed people make
projects work, not money:
- look for people with fire in
their belly
- money will come if you have
committed people and a
technically defensible strategy.
Involve people who can help
you create and tell your story.

41. Pima County Arizona: Sonoran Desert
Multispecies Conservation Plan
Goal: to ensure the long-term survival of the full spectrum of
plants and animals indigenous to the county (607,700 acres).

42. “Make no small plans…for they have
no ability to stir men’s blood.”
Daniel Burnham (1846-1912)