Blog entry #5 - Technologies and methodological frameworks in environmental and/or land use planning

Technological advances, in particular mapping technologies, have allowed for more in-depth research to take place.

In addition to having real-time images available for land analysis, mapping technologies provide “record keeping” services which allow researchers to revert to older images in order to view land changes; help to provide land structure and composition comparisons, useful for regional planning purposes; and allow sample scenarios involving the manipulation of land or land changes to be examined, via layering or map overlapping technology without any disruptive changes to the land actually taking place.

One area in which mapping technologies is evolving is within aquatic ecosystems. When land is visible, it is quite easy to capture a spatial image; although specific maritime software exists, spatial photography of the sea floor is difficult due to the water surface being too dense to allow for photography. Nonetheless, the existing technology is being modified and manipulated, per se, in order to help with the limitation.

As part of the “Ocean GIS Initiative” specialized divers photograph the sea floor using tools –i.e. grids, GPS enabled underwater cameras--to specifically capture the images of a particular underwater section. This method will be useful in helping marine scientists determine coral bleaching, coral destruction and depletion, and sea floor changes. 

Those are just two brief examples in which mapping technologies are ever-evolving to ease its applicability in environmental research projects. With time, it is expected that the advances will become much greater and will provide even more in depth land analysis options.

Blog post #4 – Conservation initiative(s) and their relation to urban or rural planning

When it comes to a conservation initiative as it relates to urban or rural planning, a conservation initiative that comes to mind in urban planning is the incorporation of conservation projects within urban development for the preservation of (specialized) species.

Without a doubt, development, whether for transportation, commercial or residential purposes, is responsible for habitat fragmentation. One would think that fragmentation wouldn’t affect a species much, or at all, but fragmentation actually affects species much more than anticipated. Sometimes the fragmentation does result in the species adaptability to its new surroundings; but other times, the fragmentation leads to the decreased population, and even possible extinction, of a species due to its specialized environment being tampered with. Studies in the Netherlands have proven both the former and the latter.

The studies in the Netherlands created artificial habitat in business areas in which large butterfly species populations were found to be present. Habitat patches promoting butterfly influx were developed as part of the business’ landscape—either as a part of the external “garden” scenery or as part of the roof structure. Opinions of the people that used or lived in the development were also a part of the study. The results found that the artificial habitat patches, created to supplement the habitat that was fragmented, positively affected the species population. Furthermore, even though individuals were most concerned about the visual appearance of the business being affected, the conservation project(s) were fully supported.  This study proved that with proper management and allocation of land resources, conservation and development can co-exist hand-in-hand. Yet studies have not just been limited to the creation of habitat patches for species conservation.

Other studies have involved the examination of commercial (i.e. logging) and transportation activities (e.g. creation of roadways) to determine how to minimize impacts on non-human species habitat and their populations. Although they too have found negative impacts on species and their habitats, the overall objective of the results was to relate to the reader the methods in which minimal impact can be made by having a collaborative development that benefits both the non-human species and people. So again, conservation and development can co-exist hand-in-hand. It is just a matter of collaborative efforts being applied to regional planning projects.

Of possible interest to the reader:

Fu, Wei, Liu, Shiliang, Dong, Shikui. (2010) Landscape pattern changes under the disturbance of road networks. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 2, 859–86.

Girvetz, Evan H., Thorne, James H., Berry, Alison M., Jaeger, Jochen A.G. (2008) Integration of landscape fragmentation analysis into regional planning:A statewide multi-scale case study from California, USA. Landscape and Urban Planning, 86, 205–218.

Kareiva, Peter. (2008) Roads and ecology TRENDS in Ecology & Evolution, 16 (8), 430.

Kareiva, Peter. (2008) Integrating the Natural and the Social Sciences. TRENDS in Ecology & Evolution, 16 (8), 430.

Pywell, R.F., Warman, E.A., Sparks, T.H., Greatorex-Davies, J.N., Walker, K.J., Meek, W.R., Carvell, C., Petit, S., Firbank, L.G. (2004) Assessing habitat quality for butterflies on intensively managed arable farmland. Biological Conservation, 118, 313–325.

Smallidge, Peter J., Leopold, Donald J. (1997) Vegetation management for the maintenance and conservation of butterfly habitats in temperate human-dominated landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 38, 259-280.

Snep, Robert P.H., WallisDeVries, Michiel, Opdam, Paul. (2011) Conservation Where People Work. Landscape and Urban Planning, 103, 94-101.

Snep; Robert, Van Ireland, Ekko, Opdam, Paul. Enhancing biodiversity at business sites: What are the options, and which of these do stakeholders prefer? Enhancing Biodiversity Landscape and Urban Planning, 91, 26-35.

Blog post #3 - Environmental equity and protection against environmental stressors and hazards in the community

The emphasis of this entry was to address the ways in which the state of city planning is protecting against environmental stressors and hazards in the area I am familiar with. Unfortunately, in the area I am familiar with, the area known in the City of Chicago as the Southeast section of the city, I cannot state that there is environmental equity and protection against environmental stressors and hazards. On the contrary, it seems that the area is constantly being threatened with environmental stressors and hazards.

The Southeast section of the city, the area that is the furthest area away from what people think of as being part of the city, is very socioeconomically diverse. Just like there are economically upper and middle-class areas, there are also areas that would be considered economically lower-class. The areas within the lower-class section of the city are impoverished due to the loss of industry that was once booming. Crime often takes place in those areas.

Perhaps because of poverty, crime and its proximity to the downtown center, the Southeast section of the city, is an easy target to environmental stressors and hazards. Not only is the Southeast section “forgotten”, but it would almost seem that in an effort to curtail the violence that abounds in some of the neighborhoods in that area, the city or its planners are constantly looking for ways to get rid of the malady by overlooking environmental stressors and hazards or trying to implement new ones. Unfortunately, when employing that tactic, all the residents that live anywhere within the Southeast section are the ones that are affected by the decisions of those in positions of authority.

Some examples of ways in which environmental stressors and hazards were almost implemented or are an issue in this present day in the Southeast section of the city:

--Supported by then Mayor Daley in the 1980’s, a third airport threatened to displace residents of the area. Had the project been approved and executed, a third airport in the Chicago metropolitan area would have caused additional pollution issues to the city.

--Steel mills and other factories that have closed remained on site for years without any remediation efforts. In the neighborhood of South Deering, one site was supposedly found to be highly contaminated. To this day, many people that worked in those factories and local residents, are suffering from ill-effects which are believed to be directly related to the nearby factories.

--The wetland in Hegewisch was threatened to be demolished due to urbanization efforts. (See “Blog entry #1” for more detail.)

--Two years ago, a proposed landfill ordinance would have lifted a landfill moratorium. The local Alderman and residents gathered in unison to curtail the projected plans by speak out and protesting against its development.

--CURRENT ISSUE: residents are being exposed to airborne toxins and particulate matter from a Pet Coke mound that is being kept nearby. Exposure to the toxin result in symptoms ranging from allergies and asthma to cancer.

Supporting articles of potential interest to reader:

Lake Calumet area to benefit from federal, state conservation support -http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/illinois/chicago/lake-calumet-area-to-benefit-from-federal-state-conservation-support/article_a2ce7351-520e-50b3-afbe-c0726f991658.html

Chicago alderman encourages residents' opposition to landfill ordinance

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/illinois/chicago/chicago-alderman-encourages-residents-opposition-to-landfill-ordinance/article_5f62b3e6-a27b-5896-9913-8ea50b75cb28.html

Petcoke Piles on the Calumet: Chicago's newest tar sands blight

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/hhenderson/petcoke_calumet.html

Blog post #2 – Spatial planning objectives: is a project "out of place" or "in place"?

A few years ago, I was able to study abroad in Costa Rica at a remotely located privately-owned field station. En route to the field station, you could view the landscape change---from city, to some houses, to great areas of tropical forestation, to empty spaces; paved roads turned to gravely or dirt roads; from beautifully tree-dominated landscape to palm trees and pineapples??? …bananas too?!?

It turns out that a large number of acres near the field station had been turned into pineapple and banana crops. The crops, used for exportation purposes, were owned by Dole. Allegedly, Dole used aggressive tactics to buy land that was once part of the rainforest landscape at a very cheap price then razed it to establish a pineapple and banana farm.

Even though the banana and pineapple crops are seemingly in a right place – remote, somewhat faraway location – their presence went against what Costa Rica is known for: conservation efforts that include maintaining specialized habitats “intact.” (Could it be that since the land became privately owned by Dole, they can do what they want with it and don’t need to adhere to the unwritten mission of the country?) Also, the crops are located in an area that lies in-between areas that have conservation programs instituted – e.g. a nationally known cloud forest and the privately-owned field station.  Thus, the banana and pineapple crops could be deemed “out of place.”

At the same time, because of human demand for pineapples and bananas, and given that the rainforest landscape no longer exists in the area that is being used for the banana and pineapple crops, it could be said that the crops are “in place” since the land is being adequately used as it exists at the present time to fulfill a consumptive need. 

Blog Post #1 - How urban planning collides with environmental discourses: A true case narrative

In Hegewisch, the neighborhood I grew up in which is located in Chicago, IL, an issue that is near and dear to my heart took place several years ago and may have a possibility of resurfacing.

In the Fall of 2007, during my return to the University of Illinois to finish my undergraduate degree, the professor of the Fish and Wildlife course I was enrolled in stated during a class lecture that Illinois is lucky because of the number of Forest Preserve areas that it has. He further stated that because of the forest preserves, Chicago is considered to be "green" and that in terms of "green" areas; other places would like to be like Chicago or have what Chicago has. Unfortunately, the lecture was ended with a grim comment, "there's no way that the Forest Preserves would be possible today." I often think of that lecture and the professor's ending comment when I think of Hegewisch and what it has been going through for the past several years.

In Hegewisch, my family and I live on 135th and Avenue "K," the last block of houses in the City of Illinois; and the last block of houses in that part of the State of Illinois. Other than a small mobile home park, the only thing that literally separates the city of Chicago from the cities of Gary and Hammond, Indiana is a forest preserve and the wetlands that are located in-between.

The wetland area is located behind the block of houses where I live--behind the alley--and is home to various wildlife species such as, owls, turtles, swans, geese and even deer. There is no other alley unique like it in the area. The residents have deep appreciation for what they have and have learned to live with the land, taking a great deal of care for it.

In 2007, the wetland area behind the houses became completely surrounded with a plastic-lined metal chain link fence that was at least 6-feet high in length. Apparently, a Peoria-based company had bought the mobile park that was located on the other side of the wetland area to build condominium-type dwelling in its place. Representatives of the company in charge of construction reassured the residents that the area would remain the same and was fenced off because it would be undergoing "beautification" however, building the condominiums truly meant that the wetland area would be razed or would serve as the sewer draining area for the condominiums, especially since the wetlands are not an extension or a part of the Powderhorn Forest Preserves that is found adjacent to it.

Residents of the area came to believe that the land was sold and bought "under the table" through a deal that was struck between the Peoria-based company, then-Mayor Daley, the ward's Alderman and other politicians that were in office at the time. To save the land from destruction, the residents banded together and scrambled for help in order to save the wetland area; doing everything possible, including but not limited to setting up town hall meetings, writing letters, visiting the mayor's and alderman's office. Unfortunately, construction vehicles eventually moved into the area and started to dig up the land. It seemed that we were all at a loss and would have to face the inevitable.

Soon after the situation which threatened the "Avenue K wetlands" began, the housing market crashed and all construction and de-construction ceased. About two years ago the plastic-lined, chain link fence was taken down; nonetheless, a construction crane or two remain in the mobile park area and the damage to the wetland is highly noticeable.

Even if for the moment, development has ceased in the "Avenue K wetlands," the current threat to Hegewisch is a proposed landfill expansion. In May, a cook county judge ruled that 86-acres of land found on the edge of the city limits would no longer considered as being a part of Chicago and could therefore be used to build, reopen and/or expand existing landfills in the Lake Calumet Area—the area in which Hegewisch and other neighborhoods in the Southeast area of the city are located.

Whereas destroying the "Avenue K wetlands" would tamper an ecosystem and affect a segment of the community, the landfill threatens to impact the whole neighborhood and its surrounding areas being detrimental to both wildlife and humans by being a hazard to the land, the water supply and more significantly, harmful to the health and well-being of all in the area.

Like before, the residents banded together to fight for the land and through everyone’s collaborative efforts and applied pressure to the state’s legislators, a bill aimed at prohibiting any new landfills or expansions of already existing ones in Cook County, HB 3881, was presented before the Illinois State House and passed in May of 2012. Then on July 22, 2012, Governor Pat Quinn signed the bill into law. However, by no means does this mean that the landfill fight is necessarily over, since prior to HB 3881 being signed into law, the landfill companies were lobbying to reverse a landfill moratorium which had been enacted in 1983 and that had been recently extended until the year 2025.

As the landfill issue occurs in the present time, the final outcome remains to be foreseen. As for the “Avenue K wetlands,” one can only hope that the Millennium Reserve Initiative, which is a part of President Obama’s “America’s Great Outdoors Initiative,” and as announced by Governor Pat Quinn in December 2011, is designated to increase the amount of “green” space in Chicago and will include over 15,000 acres of land in the Lake Calumet area, can serve of great benefit to the “Avenue K wetlands.”

Keeping in mind what my professor stated several years ago, perhaps forest preserves may not be possible today, but there may be hope yet for the unique ecosystem that has finally been recognized to be home to various wildlife, as well as exotic flora species.