# General plan documents — lake_county-illinois Assembled by OpenPublica from the documents it serves for this government. Each section below is a separate publication by the government; page anchors (``) refer to pages of that section's own source PDF, linked in its heading. **Contains 3 documents.** OpenPublica has pinned these slots for this government: circulation, housing, open_space. That is what we have looked for, not a statement that the government publishes nothing else — a plan element absent here may simply not have been reviewed yet. Last reviewed 2026-08-09. --- ## Circulation — Chapter 7, Transportation (PDF) - Source: https://www.lakecountyil.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2507/Chapter-7-Transportation-PDF - Pages: 26 - Covers: circulation # Chapter 7 # Transportation ### Vision In the year 2020, Lake County will have a development pattern and transportation system that provides a variety of living and transportation choices, meets the mobility needs of all residents, and minimizes adverse environmental impacts. ### Significance Traffic congestion on the highways and roads in Lake County poses a threat to the local economy and quality of life. Traffic congestion was amongst the issues most frequently mentioned by participants at the *Regional Framework Plan* Public Forums. “Less traffic congestion” was identified as the second most important quality of life factor in a Lake County Resident Transportation Survey conducted by the Department of Communications in 2000. The emphasis of this chapter is on the need to provide a land use pattern and other policies in order to provide more transportation options and ease existing traffic congestion. Transportation planning is a complex process involving federal, state, regional, county, and local agencies. The County Board has adopted a Lake County Year 2020 Tranportataion Priority Plan that includes county highway, transit, and bicycle options. The regional commuter rail service, Metra, is also planning several system expansions to help meet Lake County’s growing transportation needs. This chapter considers the following issues: land use and transportation, roadway system, transit services, bicycle and pedestrian transportation, air transportation, marine transportation, freight transportation, transportation services for the aging and disabled persons, and transportation funding. Roadway, transit, and bicycle improvements to serve existing and future populations are already planned for in the Lake County Year 2020 *Tranportataion Priority Plan*. This plan focuses on the need to provide a land use pattern and other policies in order to provide more transportation options. Decreasing dependency on automobiles will reduce the growth in traffic congestion, fuel consumption, and air pollution. These options will help break the cycle of road construction, inappropriately located low-density development, and traffic congestion. The need to improve the County’s roadway system is documented in the adopted *Year 2020 Tranportataion Priority Plan*. ### Issues and Opportunities * Increased traffic congestion on roadways throughout Lake County is having a negative impact on the local economy and quality of life. * Economic development, while necessary and desirable, causes increased travel and traffic congestion. * Commercial and residential development have regional transportation impacts that extend beyond municipal, County, and state boundaries. Lake County, Illinois * An opportunity exists to focus residential and retail development in areas accessible to transit and employment centers. * An opportunity exists to locate new employment near existing concentration of housing to reduce the need for long commutes. * An opportunity exists to coordinate bike paths, bike lanes, sidewalks, and parks to link communities, open space, and employment centers to encourage more bicycle and pedestrian travel. * Waukegan airport and harbor serve vital transportation needs, and provide substantial economic benefits, but the facilities are potentially inconsistent with existing and proposed uses of surrounding properties. * Limited transportation options (including transit infrastructure) may have negative impacts on the local economy, environment, and quality of life and poses additional problems for persons who do not own a car or who cannot drive. * Numerous municipalities, townships, and social service agencies provide transportation services for senior citizens and persons with disabilities, however, these services have many limitations and may be inefficient. * Funding is critical for improving the transportation system. * There is an opportunity for Pace and Metra to partner with municipalities to create satellite parking lots in communities that do not have commuter rail stations and to provide shuttle bus service to existing stations. * An opportunity exists to manage and operate transportation systems with in Lake County to reduce congestion and enhance emergency response by using Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). ### Analysis Traffic congestion on the highways and roads in Lake County poses a threat to the local economy, environment, and quality of life. A study by the Texas Transportation Institute reported that the Chicago region suffers from the third worst travel time delay in the nation (Shrank and Lomax, 2002:56). Locally, the vast majority of residents—80% of respondents to the *Lake County Resident Transportation Survey*—feel traffic has gotten worse in the last few years. Fifty-two percent of County residents report that traffic in Lake County limits their activities (Lake County Department of Communications, 2000:np). Despite the efforts of state, regional, County, and local transportation and transit agencies, the transportation and mobility needs of Lake County residents are not being met. Transportation improvements and alternatives are needed to serve Lake County’s existing residents and businesses, regardless of future population and employment forecasts. #### Environmental Impacts of Transportation Necessary transportation improvements should be designed to minimize environmental impacts. Lake County’s *Year 2020 Tranportataion Priority Plan* (*2020 TPP*), which was developed by the Regional Framework Plan Lake County Division of Transportation and was adopted by the Lake County Board on June 11, 2002, contains the following goal and objectives for minimizing negative environmental impacts and improving air quality: > “Environmental Impacts: Develop a transportation system that complements the natural and cultural environment. > > 1. Evaluate transportation projects based on their potential environmental impacts and positive contribution to the quality of life of Lake County residents. > > 2. Minimize housing or business displacement resulting from transportation improvements. > > 3. Promote improving air quality by developing a transportation system designed to minimize average travel times and congestion. > > 4. Proactively plan future stormwater runoff detention needs, and evaluate transportation projects based on the environmental impacts and engineering feasibility of proposed watershed management actions.” (LCDOT, 2002a:np). As documented in Chapter 4, Environmental Resources, Open Space, and Farmland, the Chicago Metropolitan Area, which includes Lake County, is classified as a “severe” non-attainment area for ozone. Mobile sources, including both on-road vehicles and off-road equipment, contribute 83% of the total anthropogenic ozone precursor emissions on a typical summer day, based on 1996 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Data. The Chicago Area Transportation Study (CATS), as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the northeastern Illinois region, is charged with the responsibilities of developing the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the annual and multiyear Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). CATS is required by federal regulations to demonstrate, through air quality conformity analysis, that through implementation of the RTP and the TIP the region is in compliance with the State Implementation Plan (SIP) to attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone by the year 2007. A determination issued in October of 2003 by the United States Department of Transportation found both the 2030 RTP and the 2004-2009 TIP to be in conformance with the SIP (Powell, 2003A, personal communications). Desirable land use patterns, as discussed in the next section, can reduce automobile travel and air pollution. In addition, Lake County residents and businesses should be encouraged to reduce their air pollution contributions by purchasing fuel-efficient and alternative fuel vehicles, car pooling, driving during off-peak hours, and reducing overall automobile travel. To address community and environmental concerns, state and local transportation agencies are increasingly engaging in the practice of “context sensitive design.” “Context sensitive design (CSD) is a collaborative, interdisciplinary approach that involves all stakeholders to develop a transportation facility that fits its physical setting and preserves scenic, aesthetic, historic, and environmental resources, while maintaining safety and mobility” (FHA, 2003:np). Context sensitive design encourages the implementation of creative transportation solutions to meet travel demand and community desires. Lake County Division of Transportation has employed these practices for the last few years (Powell, 2003B, personal communication). Examples include planted medians and parkways, Lake County, Illinois aesthetic bridge designs, and extensive public and property owner involvement in recent construction projects. The state of Illinois is also moving towards requiring context sensitive design for state projects. The Illinois Highway Code[^p4-1] requires that state transportation projects be designed to meet transportation needs, exist in harmony with their surroundings, and add lasting value to the communities they serve. The Department of Transportation is required to use principles of context sensitive design for the planning, design, construction, and operation of its projects for new construction, reconstruction, or major expansion of existing transportation facilities. ### Land Use and Transportation Land use is key to understanding Lake County’s transportation needs. Population and employment trends and forecasts, which will drive future development, are described in detail in Chapter 2, Population, and Chapter 3, Economy and Employment, of this *Plan*, respectively. In transportation planning terms, residential areas are “trip generators” or “origins”; employment centers are “trip attracters” or “destinations.” Population and employment forecasts will be represented spatially on the Future Land Use Map in Chapter 9, Land Use. To the greatest extent possible, the Future Land Use Map will be developed to present a transportation efficient regional land use pattern. In addition to residential and employment growth, land use patterns greatly influence transportation needs. The relationship of jobs to housing within a community and between communities determines travel patterns, particularly during morning and afternoon peak travel times. At the local level, the physical proximity, relationship, and design of residential and non-residential land uses affect trip lengths and choice in mode of travel. Just as land use decisions effect transportation, transportation projects can influence land use. Major transportation improvements, such as expressway interchanges, can spur growth by opening new areas to development. Such an improvement in the correct location could be utilized to encourage desirable business development. Major transportation projects must be carefully planned and coordinated with other infrastructure improvements and land use regulations to ensure they serve existing demand and desirable land uses. Lake County’s 2020 TPP contains the following goal and objectives for land use and transportation: > “Transportation and Land Use: Develop a transportation system that serves existing land use development and supports future land development consistently [sic] with County and municipal land use planning. > > 1. Promote connectivity between residential and employment developments and between major activity centers. > 2. Promote appropriate functional development of future arterial and collector roadways as adjacent land uses change and developments occur in developing sections of Lake County” (LCDOT, 2002a:np). The *Regional Framework Plan* builds on these recommendations by suggesting that land use and developments should be designed to make efficient use of existing and future transportation systems and to provide maximum transportation options. This will become increasingly relevant [^p4-1]: Public Act 93-0545, effective January 1, 2004 as traffic congestion in Lake County continues to worsen, despite major roadway improvements. (See the following section on the Roadway System.) A transportation efficient regional land use pattern will provide choices for housing, shopping, working, and modes of transportation and protect the environment. This land use pattern will channel development into desirable locations rather than promoting inappropriately located low-density development across the entire County. Desirable locations are those with good access to transit or jobs and limited priority for open space, as presented in Chapter 4, Environmental Resources, Open Space, and Farmland, and depicted on the Priority Open Space Map. To the extent possible, neighborhoods and communities should be designed to provide residents with options regarding where to live, work, and shop and to provide residents with choices regarding how to travel (walk, bicycle, transit, or automobile). “More intensive mixed-use development alone can allow an increase in walking and bicycling within the neighborhood; when a transit connection is added to the mix then auto-free travel to other parts of the metropolitan area becomes more feasible” (Belzer and Autler, 2002:1). In areas where transit is available, neighborhoods can be designed as Transit Oriented Developments (TOD), which “is a general term used to describe land uses that are designed and located to encourage the use of public transit.” (Chicago Area Regional Transit Authority, nd:np). In areas without transit stations, residences and retail can be designed around employment centers to provide mixed-use Employment Oriented Developments (EOD). Figure 7.1 designates areas within 1/2 mile of Lake County transit and employment centers, which may be appropriate for TOD or EOD development. The transit centers include existing and proposed Metra commuter rail stations, where transit center designation is supported by County and local officials. Transit centers also include the five multimodal transportation hubs included in Lake County’s *Year 2020 Transportation Priority Plan*. These hubs are located in Rondout, Prairie Crossing, Waukegan, South Mundelein-Vernon Hills, and Lake Zurich. The employment centers include quarter sections with 2,000 or more employees. Employment centers have been added and excluded based on input from County and local officials. Quarter-section employment is based on Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission data, which is presented in detail in Chapter 2, Population. This employment includes public and private sector jobs, domestic employees, and self-employed persons. It includes full and part-time jobs, as well as second jobs. The areas around many rail stations and existing employment centers are already developed. Consideration should be given to the potential for infill development, redevelopment, and new development, as appropriate, around rail stations and employment centers. While TOD and EOD are not appropriate for all areas of the County, it may be an attractive option in many places. Placing new homes near transit or jobs does not create Transit or Employment Oriented Developments. To achieve the benefits of these locations, neighborhoods must be carefully designed to encourage walking, bicycling, bus, and rail service, and use of local employment and shopping opportunities. Design standards and land use guidelines for transit and employment oriented developments will be further discussed in Chapter 9, Land Use, and Chapter 10, Community Character. A transportation efficient land use pattern is not a mandate that people live near work or ride the train. Some persons will take advantage of these opportunities; others will not. While not specifically tied to TOD or EOD developments, programs such as Location Efficient Mortgages (LEM) and Employer-Assisted Housing (EAH) may assist and encourage persons to live near work or transit. Large companies also have a responsibility to locate their facilities near appropriate workforce and transit to minimize the need for long automobile commutes. ### Figure 7.1 ### Transit and Employment Centers <
> Regional Framework Plan It is important to plan for a land use pattern that provides future transportation options to the automobile. If persons do not choose to take advantage of opportunities now, they may choose to do so in the future as traffic congestion in Lake County continues to increase. (See the following section on the Roadway System.) The land use pattern is established over a long time period and cannot be quickly changed in response to worsening congestion. ### Roadway System According to the 2000 Census, 86.5% of Lake County workers commuted to work by automobile. Of these persons, 88.3% drove alone and 11.7% carpooled. Nationally, 87.9% of persons commute to work by automobile, which has increased from 77.7% in 1970. In Lake County, the percent of persons commuting to work by automobile would be even higher except for the Great Lakes Naval Training Center, which contains a large number of persons who walk to work. Work trips, while only a portion of all trips, are the major cause of peak hour congestion on the roadway system. Regardless of efforts to create transportation efficient regional land use patterns and improve other transportation modes, the roadway system in Lake County still needs to be enhanced to serve existing and future development. Between 1990 and 2001, vehicle miles traveled on County Highways increased by 67% (LCDOT, 2002b:4-5). During the same time period, lane miles of County Highways increased by only 23% (LCDOT, 2002b:4-9). While comparable data is not available from the Illinois Department of Transportation, enhancements to state maintained roads have also lagged relative to the increasing use. State maintained roads, including state highways, U.S. highways, and interstate highways, are as congested as County maintained roads. Congestion of the roadways within Lake County is also influenced by trips originating and/or ending outside of the County. Presently, about 50% of the 1.73 million trips on the Lake County roadway network start and end within the County; the other one-half either leave, enter, or pass through the County (LCTIP, 2002:1-5). This volume of pass through traffic is indicative of Lake County’s important role in a large metropolitan economy. A large number of persons commute into and out of the County everyday for employment, shopping, entertainment, and other needs. Efforts to address traffic congestion solely within the County boundaries will be unsuccessful. Transportation planning and improvements need to be coordinated on a regional scale that also includes the states of Illinois and Wisconsin. If not addressed, congestion will continue to negatively impact Lake County’s economy, environment, and quality of life. Unchecked congestions will cause additional urban sprawl. “Congestion… causes urban development to spread more than it otherwise would because firms and workers try to reduce travel times by decentralizing jobs and housing” (Downs, 1992:2). Inappropriately located low-density development will consume additional land and, ultimately, trigger another phase of road extensions. The Illinois Department of Transportation and Illinois State Toll Highway Authority commissioned the *Lake County Transportation Improvement Program* (LCTIP) study to identify major transportation improvements that will address congestion and mobility problems on state maintained roads (LCTIP 2002:1). The LCTIP process resulted in two finalist roadway alternatives: 1) extending IL 53 as a Freeway or Tollway; or 2) improving IL 83/U.S. 45 and U.S. 12 along existing and new alignments. Both options incorporate east-west travel improvements by widening IL 120 and providing a Grayslake bypass. Some environmental groups, such as the Sierra Club and the Environmental Law and Policy Center, have criticized the LCTIP. The Environmental Law and Policy Center commissioned a Lake County, Illinois two volume alternative transportation study known as “Crossroads: Smart Transportation For Lake County” (Resource Systems Group, 1999). Because the roadways under consideration in the LCTIP are state responsibilities, the Lake County Board has determined that it will not take a position on the roadway alternatives. Instead, the County developed a *Year 2020 Tranportataion Priority Plan* (2020 TPP). The 2020 TPP includes roadways, transit, and bicycle transportation options to coordinate with either LCTIP alternative. Regardless of which LCTIP alternative is implemented, the improvements for County Highways do not change (LCDOT, 2002a:np). The 2020 TPP does not include recommendations for improving local (municipal or township) streets. The complete transportation recommendations contained in the 2020 TPP are not included in this *Regional Framework Plan*, as they represent adopted County policy. Copies of the plan can be obtained from the Lake County Division of Transportation located in Libertyville. The Street and Highway Transportation Goal and Objectives from the County’s 2020 TPP are listed below: > “Street and Highway Transportation: Maximize the efficiency and safety of existing and planned roadway corridors and facilities. > > 1. Maintain Level of Service D[^p8-2] as the desired optimal roadway and intersection performance where possible. For locations operating below Level of Service D, pursue options to improve performance or prevent further service degradation. > 2. Consider roadway and intersection improvements that increase capacity and reduce peak traffic congestion in order to preserve the existing roadway network. Once improvements to existing facilities have been exhausted, promote the development of new roadway and transportation facilities. > 3. Promote projects that mitigate circuitous travel, reduce trip travel times, and manage the desire to use local roadways as “short-cuts”. > 4. For planned roadway improvements, coordinate roadway classification among state, County, and municipal jurisdictions to maintain consistency of the arterial and major collector roadway network. > 5. Promote the development of projects that can improve safety at critical accident locations and can minimize overall accidents per vehicle miles of travel (VMT)” (LCDOT, 2002a:np). Additional goals to improve the safety and efficiency of the County Highway system are included in the Transportation System Management (TSM) section. Having many County highways operating at Level of Service D indicates that traffic congestion will be worsening in Lake County despite road improvements. This fact demonstrates the need to start developing a land use pattern that provides alternatives to the single passenger vehicle. There is a noticeable difference in the arterial and local street patterns between the older developed areas and the newer developed areas of the County. “The [County’s] existing roadway network east of the Tri-State Tollway corresponds to a more traditional, well-defined grid system. *** [^p8-2]: As used in transportation engineering, Level of Service (LOS) is a measure of the service or operation of a transportation facility from the perspective of the user of the facility. For signalized intersections, at Level of Service D, vehicles may be delayed for more than one signal cycle. For arterial roadways, Level of Service D is characterized as having average travel speeds of about 40% of free-flow travel speed. However, west of the Tri-State Tollway, the network is less orderly…” (LCTIP, 2001:2-21). Older communities such as Highland Park, Lake Bluff, North Chicago, Zion, and the eastern portions of Waukegan have well defined local grid-patterned street networks. West of the Tri-State Tollway, older portions of communities, such as Libertyville and Mundelein, also have well defined local grid-patterned street networks. In newer developed areas, streets tend to be organized in branching patterns, where many local streets end in cul-de-sacs and collector streets do not extend for long distances. The interconnected street network east of the Tri-State Tollway provides many travel options for making an automobile trip. “By nature of the roadway network, west of the Tri-State Tollway, travel tends to be more circuitous with limited travel route choices” (LCTIP, 2001:2-21). All travel is forced onto arterial streets thereby worsening congestion and increasing travel distances. The County and municipalities should require appropriate street interconnections between adjacent neighborhoods through the subdivision and site plan approval processes. These street interconnections should be designed so as to not facilitate traffic cutting through residential neighborhoods. Development along arterial roadways also influences their capacity and level of service. Driveways and building entrances create conflicting vehicle movements that reduce average travel speeds along a route segment. The County and municipalities should carefully plan for driveway and entrance points to minimize disruptions to traffic flow along arterial roadways. Where appropriate, access roads and interconnected parking areas should be provided to minimize entrances and allow vehicles to move between adjacent businesses without utilizing the arterial roadway. ### Transit Services According to the 2000 Census, in Lake County, just 4.4% of workers commuted to work using transit services. This is comparable to the national average of 4.6%, which is down from 8.5% in 1970. The low intensity of land uses throughout much of Lake County makes it difficult to provide efficient transit services to many areas of the County. Transit services in Lake County are provided by Metra and Pace. Metra is the commuter rail division of the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA). Metra operates three commuter rail lines that serve Lake County. These lines are the: 1) Union Pacific (UP) North Line; 2) North Central Services; and 3) Milwaukee District North Line, as shown in Figure 7-2. To help meet Lake County’s growing transportation needs Metra is planning several system expansions. Metra is upgrading service on the North Central Service from Chicago to Antioch. Metra is also analyzing the feasibility of establishing two additional commuter rail services including: 1) an outer circumferential commuter rail service along the Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern (EJ&E) railway corridor; and 2) an extension of the Milwaukee District North Line from Roundout through the Village of Wadsworth. The Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC) is considering the extension Metra’s Union Pacific North Line from Kenosha to Milwaukee. Metra’s North Central Service Upgrade will approximately double the number of scheduled trains from the current 10 trains per weekday to 19 to 22 trains per weekday. The service upgrade requires installation of additional track (double-tracking) along segments of the line and expansion of the operating capacity of existing track. The project is expected to cost $226 million. Sixty percent of the funding is being provided by federal New Start transportation funding. Construction is in progress and scheduled to be completed by the end of 2005. The Lake County, Illinois expanded schedule will allow one additional peak hour train in each direction; one reverse train departing Chicago around 7:00 a.m. with the return inbound train arriving in Chicago after 6:00 p.m.; and enhanced midday service operating approximately every two hours. The service upgrade is expected to increase passenger boardings from 5,000 per day to 8,000 per day by 2008. The service upgrade will not provide for weekend service. Additional ridership demand would be required to justify weekend service (Ciavarella, 2003, personal communication). The *Outer Circumferential Commuter Rail Feasibility Study* evaluated the potential for using the Elgin Joliet and Eastern (EJ&E) railway corridor for future commuter rail service (T-Y-Lin International-Bascor, 1999:ES-1). The EJ&E corridor, which passes through portions of Cook, Will, DuPage, and Lake counties, extends around the Chicago region in an arc approximately 106 miles long and located approximately 35 miles from the Center of Chicago (T-Y-Lin International-Bascor, 1999:ES-1). Within Lake County, the corridor extends southwest from its origin in Waukegan. From Lake County, the corridor continues south to Joilet and then west to Lynwood. The *Wadsworth Extension Commuter Rail Feasibility Study* examined the potential for establishing commuter rail service using the existing Canadian Pacific corridor. The proposed service would extend north from Metra’s existing Milwaukee District-North Line from Roundout through the Village of Wadsworth (T-Y-Lin International, 2001:ES-1). This service would include a potential new station near Roundout just north of Rockland Road. This station would serve the existing Milwaukee District North line, as well as the Wadsworth extension. Based on the available data, both studies recommended that further analysis be conducted regarding the potential establishment of commuter rail service using the EJ&E and Canadian Pacific corridors (T-Y-Lin International-Bascor, 1999:ES-5; T-Y-Lin International, 2001:ES-7). This recommendation is based on the conclusion that in both cases commuter service appears to be physically feasible and that there is substantial local support, but also recognizing that there are significant capital costs involved (T-Y-Lin International-Bascor, 1999:ES-55; T-Y-Lin International, 2001:ES-59). Potential station locations along the Wadsworth extension and the EJ&E are shown in Figure 7.2. The Lake County 2020 TPP incorporates commuter rail service on the Wadsworth extension and EJ&E as baseline transit priorities (LCDOT, 2002a:np). This *Regional Framework Plan* recommends that these commuter rail extensions continue to be studied and implemented, if feasible. In 1998, the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC) conducted a feasibility study for providing commuter rail service in the Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee (KRM) corridor (SEWRPC, 2003:5). This service would be an extension of the Metra’s Union Pacific North Line from its current terminus in Kenosha with stations located in Somers, Racine, Caledonia, Oak Creek, South Milwaukee, Cudahy-St. Francis, and Milwaukee. SEWRPC has proceeded with analyzing transit alternative for the corridor and selection of a “locally preferred alternative.” “The purpose of this study effort was to evaluate alternative commuter rail and bus services which would better connect the Kenosha, Racine, and Milwaukee areas to each other and to northeastern Illinois” SEWRPC, 2003:1). SEWRPC ’s Advisory Committee has recommendation that the commuter rail alternative with a medium level of service be implemented (SEWRPC, 2003:102 and 107). This alternative would provide seven inbound trains and seven outbound trains daily on weekdays and provide lesser service on weekends and holidays (SEWRPC, 2003:10). With the recommended level of service, the commuter rail could provide 1.1 million passenger trips per year (SEWRPC, 2003:44). Regional Framework Plan ### Figure 7.2 ### Current Metra Service and Proposed Expansions <
> 7-11 November 9, 2004 Lake County, Illinois Beyond these major system expansions, transit usage can be increased by smaller improvements. The LCTIP study found that nearly 50% of Lake County’s rail stations have insufficient parking (LCTIP, 1999:1-4). The study recommends that 5,500 parking stations be added at current rail stations (LCTIP, 1999:3-5). In situations where additional station parking will be disruptive to the local community, Lake Regional Forum participants suggested that satellite parking should be constructed in communities without commuter rail stations and that shuttle buses should be used to transport passengers to existing rail stations. Metra has plans to add 2,570 spaces at Lake County commuter rail stations. Nearly all of the parking enhancements are planned to accommodate increased usage associated with the North Central Service upgrade (Zingle, 2003:np). Additional parking upgrades are required to encourage full utilization of rail transit. Bus service within Lake County is provided by Pace, which is the suburban bus division of the RTA. Pace provides fixed-route, dial-a-ride, paratransit, shuttle bus, and vanpool services (LCTIP:1999:4-14). Within the LCTIP study area, which includes Lake County and small adjacent portions of Cook and McHenry counties, Pace operates 36 fixed-route bus services and contracts for 14 dial-a-ride services (LCTIP:1999:4-14). Dial-a-ride services are further discussed in the “Transportation Services for the Aging and Disabled Persons” section of this chapter. In addition, Pace contracts with the City of Highland Park to provide fixed-route bus services along three routes (LCTIP:1999:4-14). Pace operates 33 vanpools in Lake County, with an assumed weekday ridership of 485 persons (LCTIP:1999:4-18). Pace, in cooperation with the Lake Cook Transportation Management Association (TMA), Metra, and local businesses, also operates shuttle buses, known as “Shuttle Bugs” (LCTIP:1999:4-14). The Shuttle Bug system provides weekday rush-hour trips from four Metra stations to companies along the major corridors of Lake Cook Road, Half Day Road, Kennedy Road, and Willow Road. Employees of participating businesses get free access to the Shuttle Bugs. Other passengers pay cash fare. The TMA, Metra, and Pace are studying opportunities to add shuttle bus lines. These lines would serve additional employment centers from train stations on Metra’s North Central Line (Scales, 2002:1). Additional shuttle bus lines should also be considered for other high-volume traffic corridors. The Transit Services Goal and Objectives from the 2020 TPP are listed below: > “Transit Service: Promote the use of public transit and other travel means as viable alternatives to single-occupant travel. > > 1. Identify transit demands throughout Lake County and coordinate the prioritization of needed transit service improvements consistent with the Regional Transportation Authority and its Metra rail and Pace suburban bus systems. > 2. Promote transit projects that provide the greatest reduction in traffic congestion. > 3. Promote transit projects that improve connections between major employment and residential areas. Promote transit projects that improve travel within the region, including commutes to Chicago and reverse commuting into Lake County. > 4. Where possible, develop logical connections between all travel modes that include accessibility, transfer, and parking conveniences.” (LCDOT, 2002a:np). Municipal and township representatives believe that flexible transportation systems are more appropriate for Lake County than new fixed route bus systems. Local representatives expressed support for expanding van pool, dial-a-ride, and shuttle bus services. The 2020 TPP indicates that, “An essential ingredient is to redirect [transit] efforts from fixed route bus transit service to providing interconnection throughout the County between Metra rail stations” (LCDOT, 2002a:np). The plan calls for establishing multimodal transportation hubs where current and future commuter rail lines will cross at Waukegan, Rondout, South Mundelein-Vernon Hills, Prairie Crossing, and the EJ&E Lake Zurich Station (LCDOT, 2002a:np). The five multimodal hubs are shown in Figure 7.1. The changing demographics of Lake County (see Chapter 2, Population) may also create a greater demand for public transit. This growing transit demand will be primarily for transportation within and around a community (for shopping or to local employment centers) as opposed to regional transportation to jobs located in Chicago. Transit use is strongly influenced by development patterns and neighborhood design. Encouraging compact development and appropriate neighborhood design in areas that are served by bus or commuter rail will encourage transit use. Encouraging development to occur in the area of potential new train stations, as opposed to elsewhere in Lake County, will help ensure the future viability of commuter rail service. ### Bicycle And Pedestrian Transportation A very small percentage of persons bicycle or walk to work or for other trips. According to the 2000 Census, 2.9% of workers walked to work, both nationally and in Lake County. The percentage of persons who walk to work in Lake County is greatly influenced by the presence of the Great Lakes Naval Training Center. Fifty-seven percent of all the persons who walk to work in Lake County reside in North Chicago. In Lake County, 0.14% of workers commuted to work via bicycle. Nationally, 0.38% of workers commuted to work via bicycle. The 1990 Nationwide Personal Transportation Study found that 7.2% of all travel trips (as opposed to just work trips) are made by walking and 0.7% by bicycling (Federal Highway Administration, 1994:VII). The 2020 TPP includes a proposed countywide trunk system of bicycle paths that builds on the existing system of paths (LCDOT, 2002a:np). The bicycle and pedestrian network is intended to coordinate with the multimodal transportation hubs (LCDOT, 2002a:np). Chapter 4, Environmental Resources, Open Space, and Farmland, also contains goals and policies for developing an interconnected network of pedestrian and bicycle trails across the County. These trails should be connected across municipal, County, and state boundaries. To be useful for commuters (as opposed to recreational users), these paths need to be available for use during early mornings and late evenings, which may require addressing trail lighting and security. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Goal and Objectives from the 2020 TPP are listed below: > “Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation: Maintain and develop pedestrian facilities and a continuous trunk system of bicycle facilities as an important means of transportation and recreational travel, thereby promoting their positive contribution to the quality of life in Lake County. > > 1. Where possible, include bicycle and pedestrian facilities as a system component of all transportation projects. > 2. Develop a County trunk system utilizing both existing and proposed bicycle facilities to link major commercial, residential, recreational, cultural/historical and transit activity areas. > 3. Use the County bicycle trunk system to provide inter-connection of existing municipal, County, and state bicycle routes. Lake County, Illinois 4. Incorporate more “bicycle-friendly” facilities designed to reduce bicyclists’ stress levels by limiting the bicycle interaction and conflicts with vehicular traffic.” (LCDOT, 2002a:np). Developers of residential and non-residential projects should be required to put in sidewalks and bicycle trails, as appropriate, during the development approval process. Sidewalks and trails should be provided along routes with bus service. To be useful for commuting year-round, sidewalks, bike paths, and bicycle lanes should be maintained free of snow and ice during winter months, as funding priorities permit. Transit and Employment Oriented Developments (TOD and EOD) provide the best opportunities for facilitating bicycle and pedestrian transportation. Utilizing appropriate neighborhood design, such as networked street patterns, reduced building setbacks, and mixed-use, can promote walking and cycling in all areas of the County. The use of bicycles can also be promoted by allowing cyclists to transport their bicycles on transit. Pace should expand on its bike rack program to include all busses operating in Lake County. Metra should expand its bikes on trains programs to include all lines. To be useful for commuters (as opposed to recreational cyclists), this program needs to be available during peak travel times and not only on weekends. ### Air Transportation/Airports Lake County residents and businesses have access to two international airports with scheduled airline service. Chicago O’Hare International Airport is located 35 miles southwest from Waukegan. Milwaukee’s General Mitchell Field is located 45 miles north from Waukegan. Both airports are accessible via expressways, although often traffic congestion creates significant delays in reaching O’Hare. This makes Mitchell Field an increasingly attractive option for business and personal travelers, particularly from northern Lake County. Lake County residents and businesses can also reach O’Hare via commuter train service. Metra’s North Central Service, which extends from Antioch to Chicago’s Union Station with eight stations in Lake County, has a stop at O’Hare on weekdays. O’Hare airport is owned and operated by the City of Chicago. Air traffic congestion at O’Hare has begun to limit the number of daily flights in and out of O’Hare and also causes substantial delays for many scheduled flights. The possibility of expanding O’Hare, developing a new airport in south suburban Will County or Kankakee County, or both is being considered at the federal, state, and local levels. The Illinois Governor and Mayor of Chicago have developed an O’Hare modernization plan. The proposal includes constructing one new runway, relocating and extending several existing runways, expansion of the terminal, and providing a new western access highway to the airport. The modernization is estimated to serve airport demand possibly beyond 2030 (FAA, 2002:6). Modernization of O’Hare will have the following effects on Lake County compared to the alternative of constructing a new airport in the south suburbs: * Modernization of O’Hare would serve Lake County’s existing population and businesses; a new airport in the south suburbs would be inaccessible to Lake County residents and business, particularly given existing road congestion. * A new south suburban airport would encourage new commercial development, which provides desirable job opportunities and a desirable tax base for communities and schools, to locate in the southern suburbs instead of locating near existing employment centers in the northwest suburbs and Lake County. * A new south suburban airport would cause Lake County to receive less employment growth, without a similar decrease in Lake County’s residential population growth. The City of Chicago should complete an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to determine if it is possible to expand and modernize O’Hare airport. Lake County contains two general aviation airports: Campbell Airport and Waukegan Regional Airport. The County is served by a third general aviation airport, Palwaukee Municipal Airport, which is located approximately 3 miles south of Lake County. Campbell Airport is a small, privately owned facility, located in unincorporated Lake County, south of Route 120. Over the years various villages and the County have considered the possibility of expanding the airport, however, there are no current plans for enlarging or increasing the use facility, which is bordered by environmentally sensitive wetlands. The Waukegan Regional Airport, along with the Waukegan Harbor, is managed by the Waukegan Port District. The airport, which is located on the northwest side of the City, is categorized by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as a “reliever airport” for Chicago's O'Hare International. In this role, the airport handles general aviation, airtaxi, and military aircraft operations. Scheduled airline service is not offered at the airport. The airport has two runways and features an air traffic control tower and instrument landing system for improved operation in inclement weather. The airport also has a U.S. Customs Service Inspector, which allows arriving international flights. The Waukegan Regional Airport is a significant economic generator for the region. It is a prominent base of operations for corporate aviation. The airport has 200 based aircraft, including 56 corporate jets. Some major employers rely exclusively on corporate jets located at Waukegan Regional Airport to meet their air transportation needs. The airport handles approximately 100,000 aircraft takeoffs and landings annually. The airport has existing capacity to double its aircraft operations. The primary runway (5-23) is 6,000 feet in length. The FAA has granted a waiver to allow the full use of the runway, despite the proximity of Green Bay Road and Wadsworth Road to the end of the runway. If the FAA waivers are removed, the usable portion of the runway at the northeast end will be shortened by 650 feet and the southwest end will be shortened by 820 feet (Waukegan Port District, 2002). Shortening the usable length of the runway will negatively impact existing and future flight operations. The Waukegan Port District would like to extend Runway 5-23, which would require removing several existing homes and businesses; relocating or tunneling Green Bay Road; and relocating or burying Commonwealth Edison power lines for an extended runway safety zone. A portion of the runway safety zone would be located in the Lake County Forest Preserve Waukegan Savannah. Lake County supports the Port District’s request for Federal Administration Funding to cover 90% of the estimated $3 million cost for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) study. Since the EIS has not been conducted, the County reserves judgment on the runway extension. Palwaukee Municipal Airport is located at Milwaukee Avenue and Willow Road, approximately three miles south of Lake County. Given its proximity, the airport also serves the general aviation needs of Lake County residents and businesses. Palwaukee Municipal Airport is owned by the City of Prospect Heights and the Village of Wheeling. The airport consists of more than 412 acres of land with three runways. The Airport handles over 180,000 annual operations and has 360 based aircraft, including 54 corporate jet aircraft. It is the third busiest airport in Illinois. The Airport operates 24 hours a day. The airport has a control tower that is attended during day and evening hours. The airport also offers U.S. Custom Services, with a two hours advanced Lake County, Illinois notice. The airport is currently involved in a modernization project, which includes improving runways, taxiways, aprons, and building (www.palwaukee.org). ### Freight Transportation Freight refers to the commercial transportation of goods as cargo. The freight transportation modes considered in this chapter include: 1) truck, 2) rail, and 3) ship. The freight industry is important to the Chicago regional economy. Nearly one-third of the nation’s total rail shipments pass through the Chicago region (McCarron and LaBelle, 2002:1) and more than one-half of the nation’s container traffic passes through the Chicago area (McCarron and LaBelle, 2002:7). However the regional road and freight rail systems are in need of improvement (McCarron, 2002:1). Average travel speeds across the Chicago region for freight trains is 6.8 to 12 miles per hour; average cross-regional truck speeds are 10 to 15 miles per hour (McCarron and LaBelle, 2002:1). The current status of the regional freight transportation infrastructure has widespread implications. Trucks and trains contribute to the region’s traffic congestion by using roads and blocking the region’s 1,953 at-grade railroad crossings. Truck traffic accounts for 28% of the trips on interstate highways and 16% of trips on other marked routes in the region (McCarron and LaBelle, 2002:7). Freight transportation also contributes to regional air pollution (McCarron and LaBelle, 2002:1). Freight volume is projected to increase by approximately 80% over the next 20 years (McCarron and LaBelle, 2002:6). Failure to improve the region’s freight transportation infrastructure could result in extra congestion for all roadway users. The number of trucks on the roadway will increase and freight trains will block road crossings with greater frequency. Failure to improve the region’s freight transportation infrastructure may also result in freight companies developing and selecting rail and truck routes that avoid the Chicago region, which would result in a large loss to the regional economy. The shipping industry in the Chicago region generates $8 billion in annual economic activity and employs 117,000 persons with an annual payroll of $3.2 billion (McCarron and LaBelle, 2002:1). Most of the freight transportation railroad infrastructure and associated intermodal freight transfer activity is located in the southern portion of the Chicago region. Only one of the “problem grade crossings” identified by the Chicago Area Transportation study is located in Lake County. This is the CP railroad crossing on Half Day Road in Bannockburn (McCarron, 2001:22). None of the “Chicago area railroad bottlenecks” identified by the Illinois Department of Transportation are located in Lake County (McCarron, 2001:23). Nevertheless, Lake County does have at grade rail crossings and truck traffic, which contribute to traffic congestion for other roadway users. Within Lake County, “heavy commercial vehicle equivalencies” account for more than 20% of the traffic on specific segments of IL 12, IL 41, IL 83, IL 120, IL 131, IL 173, IL 176, U.S. 41, and U.S. 45 (CATS, 1997:Appendix A). “Heavy commercial vehicle equivalencies” considers the larger influence of trucks on highway lane capacity (CATS, 1997:5). As opportunities for expanding commuter rail services along existing freight railroad corridors continue to be explored, adequate consideration needs to be given to maintaining capacity for freight trains. Within Lake County, this is particularly relevant for the proposed EJ&E and Wadsworth Extensions. Metra’s studies consider this issue. Ideally, by building new infrastructure, such as located grade separations, track-over-track fly-overs, and parallel tracking new transit service can actually enhance freight transportation and reduce vehicle conflicts (McCarron, 2001:8). Regional Framework Plan The Waukegan harbor is currently of local importance for freight transportation. Cement and gypsum are provided to a multistate area through the port (Waukegan Port District, 2002:np). Over 500,000 tons of cargo (which is equivalent to 12,500 trucks or 5,000 rail cars) are shipped through the deepwater harbor annually (Waukegan Port District, 2002:np). The depth of the harbor channel limits the size and cargo-loads of ships that can use the harbor. Dredging of Slip 1 (which is the working freight slip) was completed during 2002. Studies are presently underway to determine the best way to obtain a desirable harbor depth and concurrently remove remaining contamination from the inner harbor (Waukegan Port District, 2002:np). The continued existence of viable economic uses is critical to retaining the involvement of the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers in dredging the Federal Channel. The Federal Channel should continue to be dredged in order to maximize flexibility regarding future transportation and land use options on the lakefront. An important secondary benefit of dredging is the removal and proper disposal of contaminated soil from the harbor. If the channel is allowed to deteriorate, it would be very difficult to reestablish a working harbor anywhere in Lake County. The harbor should be dredged in order to retain the existing viable businesses located on the Waukegan waterfront. Around the region and the nation, there are many examples of lakefront redevelopments that successfully combine residential, commercial, tourist, and recreational uses with working harbors. ### Transportation Services for Senior Citizens and Persons with Disabilities Municipalities, townships, and social service agencies are struggling to meet the transportation needs of senior citizens and persons with disabilities in a safe, reliable, and economical manner. An informal survey of townships revealed that most townships offer some type of transportation service for seniors. These services, commonly referred to as “paratransit”, ranged from the Pace Dial-a-Ride program and subsidized taxi services to contracts with Pace for bus service on specific days. Services vary by cost, minimum age for participation, and allowable destinations. Residents with disabilities also face services with various restrictions when seeking transportation. The North-NorthWest Cook County and Lake County Work Group of service providers, parents, and advocates for persons with disabilities would like to improve residents’ mobility by eliminating the geographic boundaries imposed by existing services. To assist local communities in improving access to transportation for the transportation disadvantaged, the state of Illinois has created an Interagency Coordinating Committee.[^p17-3] The Interagency Coordinating Committee will encourage the coordination of public and private transportation services with priority given to services directed towards underserved populations. The Committee will facilitate a coordinated state process for requesting federal funds such as the Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) Grant programs. The Ride DuPage program may serve as a model for coordinating paratransit services. A 1996 DuPage County study found that 40 agencies provided 500,000 trips to special needs persons at a cost of $4.2 million. In response to these findings, the County created the Inter Agency Paratransit Coordinating Council. With the DuPage County program one central agency will coordinate the activities of the sponsors that subsidize transportation with the transportation service providers. Under this system, a resident needing a ride calls one number and is matched with an appropriate provider. Providers may serve multiple residents at one time since all requests go through one dispatch center. With the Ride DuPage program, the sponsoring agencies that provide the transportation subsidy are responsible for qualifying persons for service [^p17-3]: Public Act 093-0185, effective July 11, 2003 Lake County, Illinois based on agency’s own criteria, which can include consideration of income, disability, and transportation needs. Local leaders should encourage Pace to assume the lead role in coordinating paratransit services in Lake County. Pace should partner with local social service providers and major employers, who would benefit from increased workforce accessibility, to conduct a thorough, countywide study to identify paratransit providers and sponsors, the types of services provided, the number of clients served, the cost of the services, and the source of funding. With this information, a coordinated paratransit system could be developed. ### Transportation Funding Funding is critical for improving transportation networks and options. The Lake County 2020 TPP contains the following goals and objectives for transportation funding: > “Financial Planning: Provide a fiscally responsible transportation system supported by available revenues. > 1. Develop a fiscally-constrained program of prioritizing transportation projects reflecting the likely availability of forecast capital and maintenance funding from all available funding sources. > 2. Determine the level of capital funding necessary for needed, but unfunded, transportation improvements, and identify potential funding mechanisms for meeting these unfunded needs. > 3. Coordinate transportation project development and programming among various state, regional, and local agencies to encourage cooperative funding efforts” (LCDOT, 2002a:np). Currently available revenues do not allow Lake County Division of Transportation to keep pace with the demand for roadway expansions and improvements. The Illinois County Motor Fuel Tax Law (55 ILCS 5/5-1035.1) does not allow Lake County to implement the same motor fuel tax as DuPage, Kane, and McHenry counties. The majority of Lake County residents support increased funding for road improvements (Lake County Department of Communications, 2000:np). The *Lake County Resident Transportation Survey* found that 61.3% of survey respondents indicate that they would support a referendum to give the County authority to increase taxes in order to raise money for road improvements. Given a choice on which type of tax to utilize, 43% favor a general sales tax; 35% favor a motor vehicle fuel tax; and 15% favor property tax (Lake County Department of Communications, 2000:np). In 1992, the Lake County Board approved a *Comprehensive Road Improvement Plan For Impact Fees* and a road impact fee ordinance. The ordinance was never implemented because the County does not have a funding source to pay for the portion of road improvements that would not be covered by developer impact fees. If the County obtains a dedicated transportation funding source, the County should consider the feasibility of updating and implementing the road impact fee plan and ordinance. ### Transportation System Management and Transportation Demand Management Transportation System Management (TSM) refers to attempts to increase the capacity and efficiency of the existing transportation infrastructure (Moore and Thorsnes, 1994:72). Transportation Demand Management (TDM) refers to attempts to reduce the demand for automobile travel. One TSM strategy is implementation of Intelligent Transportation Systems. The goal of ITS, for metropolitan areas, is to manage and operate transportation systems to reduce congestion and enhance emergency response by using advanced computer technology and implementing new institutional arrangements (USDOT, 1998:np). The Lake County Year 2020 Tranportataion Priority Plan contains the following goal and objectives for promoting an Intelligent Transportation System: > “Intelligent Transportation System: Promote the use of Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) technologies as a viable means to reduce traffic congestion. > > 1. Consider the development of ITS projects, such as signal systems, transit or emergency vehicle preemption, and other technologies, as alternatives to roadway widening. > 2. Promote ITS projects that can utilize alternative funding sources and improve system management and coordination between local agencies” (LCDOT, 2002a:np). Over the last several years, the County has been successful in obtaining federal funds for ITS projects, such as traffic signal systems with fiber optic connections, video detection, and priority preemption for buses. The County has also been successful in receiving direct federal grants for a feasibility study and implementation plan for a Lake County Traffic Management Center. If built, this center will put controls for all state, County, and local traffic signals in one location allowing better integration and management of signals countywide. While Transportation System Management (TSM) focuses on ways to utilize the existing “supply” of transportation infrastructure more efficiently, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) focuses on ways to reduce automobile travel demand. The recommendations contained within this *Regional Framework Plan* to facilitate use of transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options all serve to reduce demand for automobile transportation. Price is another way to reduce transportation demand. Some economists believe the current situation of traffic congestion is based on a market failure because automobile drivers fail to pay the full cost of their travel (Moore and Thorsnes, 1994; Downs, 1992). The Illinois State Toll Highway Authority (ISTHA) has authorized a “value pricing” study to evaluate the impacts of establishing reduced tolls during off-peak travel times and higher prices during peak travel times. Delays at tollbooths dropped significantly after a similar plan was implemented in New Jersey (Groark, 2002:1). The ISTHA study will determine if the same result is possible in Illinois. Individual firms or a group of firms located within an employment center can work to reduce travel demand. Within Lake County, there is one active TDM Organization: the Lake Cook Transportation Management Association (TMA). As described in the Transit Section, the Lake Cook TMA, along with Pace, Metra, and local businesses fund a shuttle bus system. The TMA, Metra, and Pace are studying opportunities to add shuttle bus lines. These lines would serve additional employment centers from train stations on Metra’s North Central Line. Shuttle buses should be considered for additional high-volume corridors. Lake County, Illinois ### Conclusion This chapter is intended to augment Lake County’s *Year 2020 Tranportataion Priority Plan*. Beyond supporting the Goals and Strategies contained in that plan, this chapter identifies additional transportation issues and opportunities and recommends policies for addressing these needs. This chapter emphasizes the need to provide a transportation efficient land use pattern and other policies in order to provide more transportation options and ease existing traffic congestion. Transit Oriented Development and Employment Oriented Development, which are key to a transportation efficient land use pattern, are further described in Chapter 9, Land Use, and Chapter 10, Community Character. These chapters provide policy recommendations that encourage land use developments that facilitate pedestrian, bicycle, and transit usages. ### Goals and Policies[^p20-4] **7.1 Goal:** Future neighborhood and community land use patterns will be transportation efficient offering transportation choices. > 7.1.1 Policy: Develop a Future Land Use Map that presents a transportation efficient regional land use pattern, in a manner consistent with local planning objectives and this *Regional Framework Plan*. > > 7.1.2 Policy: In cooperation with interested municipal officials and transportation agencies, establish Transit Oriented Design plans around train stations and Employment Oriented Design plans around major employment centers, in a manner consistent with local planning objectives and this *Regional Framework Plan*. > > 7.1.3 Policy: Consider priority funding for transportation system improvements that serve Transit and Employment Oriented Developments. > > 7.1.4 Policy: Encourage employers to locate near existing housing of appropriate workforce. > > 7.1.5 Policy: Promote new state “Concurrency Management” Legislation that will allow the County greater authority to ensure roads and other public infrastructure are in place and have capacity before new development occurs. **7.2 Goal:** Coordinate an interconnected street system of local, collector, and arterial streets adequate to serve the current and desired future land use identified in this *Regional Framework Plan*. > 7.2.1 Policy: The County and municipalities should require appropriate street interconnections, which do not encourage cut-through traffic, between adjacent neighborhoods through the subdivision and site plan approval processes. > > 7.2.2 Policy: The County and municipalities should properly control driveway entrances onto arterial streets. [^p20-4]: As stated in Chapter 1, Introduction, a Goal is defined as “the desired result to be achieved by implementing the *Plan*;” and a Policy is defined as “a general method or action designed to achieve a goal.” 7.2.3 Policy: The County and municipalities should require internal access roads and interconnected parking areas in order to maintain the roadway capacity. 7.2.4 Policy: The County and municipalities should cooperatively identify future key transportation rights-of-way and incorporate such alignments and proposed improvements into the Lake County Regional Framework Plan map and local comprehensive plan maps. 7.2.5 Policy: Transportation agencies should develop creative transportation solutions that meet traffic needs as well as community desires. 7.2.6 Policy: Encourage transportation agencies to continue to monitor innovations in road construction techniques and materials and to implement road construction methods that are cost-effective, prolong roadway life, and minimize construction disruptions. 7.2.7 Policy: The County, municipalities, and townships should develop a coordinated effort to lobby the state to improve the existing state roadway network within Lake County. 7.2.8 Policy: Consider roadway and intersection improvements that increase capacity and reduce peak traffic congestion in order to preserve the existing roadway network. Once improvements to existing facilities have been exhausted, promote the development of new roadway and transportation facilities. ### 7.3 Goal: Facilitate the use of bicycles, walking, and transit service as alternatives to all automobile work and non-work trips. 7.3.1 Policy: Support continued planning by Metra, other transportation planning agencies, and local communities for the establishment of commuter rail service on the EJ&E corridor and the Wadsworth extension. 7.3.2 Policy: Encourage Metra, other transportation planning agencies, and local communities to aggressively pursue state and federal funding for projects, such as bridges and tunnels, to minimize the negative impacts of commuter rail improvements on local communities and automobile travel. 7.3.3 Policy: Encourage Pace, Metra, and the Transportation Management Associations to study and implement shuttle bus and other creative transportation services within Lake County. 7.3.4 Policy: The County, municipalities, and Metra should work together to increase parking at existing commuter rail stations and explore opportunities to establish satellite parking lots with shuttle buses to commuter rail stations. 7.3.5 Policy: Encourage concentrated development to be located near transit or employment centers, as opposed to elsewhere in Lake County, and to be appropriately designed to encourage bicycling, walking, and transit use. 7.3.6 Policy: Encourage financial institutions to support “transportation efficient mortgages” for homes in locations with lower transportation costs. Lake County, Illinois 7.3.7 Policy: The County and municipalities should require developers to provide sidewalks and bicycle paths within and between residential and non-residential developments, as appropriate based on density and surrounding existing and planned future land uses, such as schools, public parks, and retail centers. 7.3.8 Policy: Encourage the connection of sidewalks and trails between communities, townships, and the Forest Preserve, within and beyond the County boundaries. 7.3.9 Policy: Encourage multimodal trips that combine bicycle and transit usage by providing appropriate bicycle parking facilities at transit stations and encouraging Metra to continue to seek a feasible manner to accommodate bicycles on all trains. 7.3.10 Policy: Review opportunities to incorporate bicycle paths and bicycle lanes into state, County, and local roadway projects. 7.3.11 Policy: Encourage the agencies responsible for maintaining sidewalks, bicycle paths, and bicycle lanes to keep their facilities clear of snow and ice, as funding priorities permit. ### 7.4 Goal: Improve the availability of scheduled commercial, charter, and general aviation flights to international and general aviation airports serving Lake County businesses and residents. 7.4.1 Policy: Support completion of an Environmental Impact Statement to determine the social, economic, and environmental impacts of modernization and expansion of O’Hare Airport, in accordance with all applicable state and federal laws. 7.4.2 Policy: Support completion of an Environmental Impact Statement to determine the social, economic, and environmental impacts of extending the runway at the Waukegan Regional Airport, in accordance with all applicable state and federal laws. 7.4.3 Policy: The Waukegan Port District should coordinate cooperative efforts to protect existing airport capacity at Waukegan Regional Airport to ensure corporate aircraft needs for hanger space and runway length are met. 7.4.4 Policy: Encourage the continued use of Waukegan Regional Airport as a significant economic generator for the region by serving as an international point of entry and prominent base for corporate aviation. ### 7.5 Goal: Maintain and enhance the Waukegan harbor as a transportation center, as part of a vibrant mixed land use on the Waukegan lakefront. 7.5.1 Policy: Support creation of a Waukegan intermodal transit center in the vicinity of the existing train station that links Metra, Pace, automobile parking, and pedestrian access to downtown and the lakefront. 7.5.2 Policy: Support implementation of ferry service from Waukegan to Chicago, Michigan, Wisconsin and/or Indiana. **7.6 Goal:** Provide for the safe and efficient movement of freight by truck, ship, and rail within and through Lake County in a manner that minimizes conflicts with automobile traffic. 7.6.1 Policy: Ensure that the addition of commuter rail services on existing freight rail corridors maintains and, where possible, enhances rail freight services and reduces vehicle traffic delays. 7.6.2 Policy: Support continued dredging and maintenance of the Waukegan Harbor Federal Channel in order to retain maximum flexibility regarding future transportation and land use options on the lakefront. 7.6.3 Policy: Enhance existing roads to accommodate freight transportation throughout Lake County. 7.6.4 Policy: Address delays at at-grade railroad crossings by seeking state and federal funding for improvements. 7.6.5 Policy: Develop strategies to encourage truck through-traffic to utilize the tollway instead of Route 41 and other state and County highways. **7.7 Goal:** Ensure flexible, safe, reliable, and affordable transportation services are available to meet the needs of senior citizens and persons with disabilities throughout Lake County. 7.7.1 Policy: The County, municipalities, townships, and local social service agencies should encourage Pace to conduct a thorough countywide study of paratransit services for the purpose of identifying how to coordinate and improve services. **7.8 Goal:** Obtain new funding sources for transportation improvements. 7.8.1 Policy: Lake County should identify new funding sources to raise money to be dedicated for road improvements. 7.8.2 Policy: When the County has a dedicated transportation funding source, the County should consider implementing an impact fee on new developments for transportation improvements. 7.8.3 Policy: Lake County should participate in the State Interagency Coordinating Committee for transportation and attempt to obtain federal funding for special transit programs, including paratransit. 7.8.4 Policy: Continue to explore transportation funding options and pursue implementation as determined appropriate. **7.9 Goal:** Maximize the efficient utilization of the County’s limited transportation infrastructure and improve air quality. 7.9.1 Policy: Lake County Division of Transportation should pursue implementation of a Traffic Management Center to coordinate traffic signal timing countywide. 7.9.2 Policy: Lake County Division of Transportation should continue to monitor innovations in Intelligent Transportation Systems and to implement strategies Lake County, Illinois that maximize the efficient use of the existing transportation system in a cost-effective manner. 7.9.3 Policy: Encourage Lake County residents to share rides, consolidate trips, travel at times other than rush hour, and purchase fuel efficient and alternative fuel vehicles. ### Sources Belzer, Dena and Autler, Gerald, June 2002, *Transit Oriented Development: Moving From Rhetoric To Reality*, The Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy and The Great American Station Foundation CH2Mhill, 2000 (November), *Review of Crossroads Proposal*, prepared for the Illinois Department of Transportation and Illinois State Toll Highway Authority Chicago Area Regional Transit Authority, no date, “Planning” www.rtachicago.com/business/planning.asp Ciavarella, Lynnette H., 2003 (June 18) Email from Lynnette Ciavarella, Principal Planner, Metra Office of Planning and Analysis Downs, Anthony, 1992, *Stuck In Traffic: Coping With Peak-Hour Traffic Congestion*, The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, and the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA FannieMae, no date, *Employer-Assisted Housing: Improving the Bottom Line and Unlocking Doors to Homeownership for your Employees*, FannieMae, Washington DC Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), 2002 (August), *O’Hare Modernization Program, Chicago O’Hare International Airport, Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Document*, Des Plains, IL Federal Highway Administration, 1994, *The National Bicycling and Walking Study*. Federal Highway Administration, no date, *Context Sensitive Design: Thinking Beyond the Pavement*, website printed June 20, 2003 Lake County Department of Communications, 2000, *Lake County Resident Transportation Survey*, Waukegan, IL Lake County Division of Transportation (LCDOT), 1992, *Comprehensive Road Improvement Plan For Impact Fees*, Libertyville, IL Lake County Division of Transportation (LCDOT), 2002A, *Year 2020 Tranportataion Priority Plan* (2020 TPP), Libertyville, IL Lake County Division of Transportation (LCDOT), 2002B, *Highway Improvement Program 2002-2007*, Libertyville, IL Regional Framework Plan Lake County Transportation Improvement Program (LCTIP), 1999, *Transportation System Performance Report*, prepared for the Illinois Department of Transportation and Illinois State Toll Highway Authority Lake County Transportation Improvement Program (LCTIP), 2002, *Draft Environmental Impact Statement Lake County Transportation Improvement Program*, prepared for the Illinois Department of Transportation and Illinois State Toll Highway Authority Groark, Virginia, 2002 (November 1), “Off-peak road tolls may be studied; Concept cuts fees for certain travel” *Chicago Tribune* McCarron, John and LaBelle, Jim, 2002 (April), *Critical Cargo: A Regional Freight Action Agenda*, prepared by Business Leaders for Transportation, Chicago, IL Metra and Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission (NIPC), 1991, *Land Use In Commuter Rail Station Areas: Guidelines For Communities*, Chicago, IL Metropolitan Planning Council and Chicago Metropolis 2020, no date, *Make employees feel at home, and they stay with you*, Chicago, IL Moore, Terry and Thorsnes, Paul, January 1994, *The Transportation Land Use Connection*, Planning Advisory Service Report Number 448/449, American Planning Association, Chicago, IL Natural Resource Defense Council, no date, “Cities & Green Living: Smart Growth: Sprawl: In Brief: FAQ”, www nrdc.org/cities/smartGrowth/qlem.asp Powell, Dusty, 2003A (October 4), Email from Dusty Powell, Lake County Division of Transportation Powell, Dusty, 2003B (June 18), Email from Dusty Powell, Lake County Division of Transportation Resource Systems Group, Inc. 1999, *Crossroads: Smart Transportation Options for Lake County*, prepared for the Environmental Law and Policy Center, Chicago IL S.B. Friedman & Company, 2000A, *Metra Rail Service and Residential Development Study Summary of Findings*, prepared for Metra S.B. Friedman & Company, 2000B, *Residential Development Near Commuter Rail Station*, prepared for Metra Scales, Jason, 2002 (December 15), “Shuttles are eyed as Metra expands”, *Chicago Tribune* Shrank, David and Lomax, Tim, 2002, *The 2002 Urban Mobility Report*, Texas Transportation Institute, The Texas A&M University System T-Y-Lin International, 2001, *Wadsworth Extension Commuter Rail Feasibility Study*, prepared for Metra, Chicago, IL T-Y-Lin International-Bascor, 1999, *Outer Circumferential Commuter Rail Feasibility Study*, prepared for Metra Lake County, Illinois U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) ITS Joint Program Office, 1998, *Intelligent Transportation Systems*, publication # FHWA-JPO-98-008 Waukegan Port District, 2002 (May 20), *Lake County Partners Transportation Conference Position of the Waukegan Port District*, 3580 North McAree Road, Waukegan, IL 60087 Zingle, Susan, 2003 (October 29), Printed paper labeled “Metra Parking Compared to boardings 2002” --- ## Housing — Chapter 8, Housing (PDF) - Source: https://www.lakecountyil.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2508/Chapter-8-Housing-PDF - Pages: 26 - Covers: housing # Chapter 8 # Housing ### Vision In the year 2020, Lake County will have an appropriate range of housing types and prices to accommodate all demographic groups and the anticipated population growth. ### Significance Providing appropriately priced housing for all demographic groups is a major challenge in Lake County. The median housing value in Lake County increased from $136,700 in 1990 to $198,200 in 2000 (U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1990 and 2000). This is a 45% increase over ten years. The housing market is complicated by the distribution of housing by value, which varies widely from community to community. Some communities have a large percentage of moderately priced housing; other communities have a large percentage of more expensive housing. Housing is the single largest land use in Lake County. As the County continues to grow in population, more housing units will be built in the future. Instead of covering “every bit of countryside with improvement” (Arendt, 1996 pp xvii), alternative residential approaches, such as Transit Oriented Development (TOD), Employment Oriented Development (EOD), Conservation Residential Development, and Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) should be considered for new residential developments in Lake County. This chapter will evaluate housing trends and analyze the availability, distribution, and cost of housing in Lake County. It will also provide forecasts for future housing needs. The relationship between housing and employment locations will be examined. Housing goals and policies begin with ensuring an adequate supply of housing units to accommodate the anticipated population growth. They also include providing for the appropriate housing mix of types and prices to ensure continued economic vitality, especially in areas near employment centers. This chapter also contains recommendations regarding the appropriate location of housing development. ### Issues and Opportunities * Housing supply is not meeting demand leading to a shortage of housing in every price category, except the highest end. * Housing is becoming increasingly expensive in the County. * Affordable housing often faces local opposition. * The increase in the elderly population is creating the need for more senior housing with better access to transit, shopping, and medical facilities. * There is a shortage of multifamily and rental housing units needed by the workforce of Lake County businesses. Lake County, Illinois * Existing and new transit stations present an opportunity to promote more mixed-use, pedestrian friendly Transit Oriented Development (TOD) near the stations. * Employment and population growth present an opportunity to promote more mixed-use, pedestrian friendly Employment Oriented Development (EOD) near existing and future employment centers. * Real estate taxes collected from residential uses are generally not enough to support schools. * Public housing and private housing using federal vouchers are concentrated in a few communities. * There is an opportunity to help create a job-housing balance by encouraging businesses to locate in communities with existing affordable housing. ### Analysis #### Housing Units Growth Trends Consistent with the population growth, Lake County has experienced a significant increase in its housing stock during the last 50 years. As shown in Figure 8.1, the population was just over 179,000, and the number of households and housing units were only 47,024 and 53,475 in 1950. With population reaching more than 644,000 in 2000, the number of housing units more than quadrupled over the last 50 years reaching 226,000 in 2000. **Figure 8.1** **Housing Units Trends and Comparison with Population** **and Household Trends, 1950-2000** | Lake County | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990 | 2000 | | :--- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | | Population | 179,097 | 293,656 | 382,638 | 440,372 | 516,418 | 644,356 | | Households | 47,024 | 76,544 | 102,947 | 139,700 | 173,966 | 216,297 | | Average Household Size | 3.41 | 3.52 | 3.39 | 2.98 | 2.85 | 2.88 | | Housing Units | 53,475 | 85,627 | 110,448 | 150,496 | 183,283 | 225,919 | | Vacancy Rate | 12.1% | 10.6% | 6.8% | 7.2% | 5.1% | 4.3% | Source: U. S. Census Bureau The housing boom in Lake County started in the 1950s with an average net increase of 3,200 units per year. Housing construction slowed somewhat in the 1960s (average net increase of 2,500 units per year) and sped up again in the 1970s (average net increase of 4,000 units per year). During the 1980s, Lake County gained a similar number of housing units as it did in the 1950s. The largest increase in housing units occurred in the 1990s with an average net increase of nearly 4,300 units per year. The number of new housing units constructed is slightly higher because the replacement for teardowns does not contribute to the net increase in housing units. Lake County’s housing units are relatively new. Figure 8.2 shows the decades in which the current housing units were built. Nearly 60% of them were built after 1970. There were approximately 55,000 new housing units built between 1990 and 2000, accounting for one in every four existing units in Lake County. Even with this tremendous growth, Lake County faces a housing shortage. In 1950, the percentage of vacant housing units was 12.1%; by 2000, it dropped to 4.3%. According to the Census Bureau’s definition, vacant housing units also include units for seasonal, recreational, or occasional use. If these housing units were excluded, the housing vacancy rate for 2000 drops even further to 3.2%. Two other housing indicators—homeowner vacancy rate and rental vacancy rate, also show that Lake County is experiencing a tight housing condition. Homeowner vacancy rate is the proportion of the homeowner—housing inventory that is vacant for sale. Rental vacancy rate is the proportion of the rental inventory that is vacant for rent. According to the 2000 Census, the homeowner vacancy rate for Lake County was only 1.1% compared to 1.3% for the Chicago Metropolitan area and 1.7% for the United States. Rental vacancy rate for Lake County was only 5% in 2000. This was well below the threshold for a “tight” rental housing market, which is 6% according to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The whole Chicago Metropolitan area has a tight housing market with a 5.3% rental vacancy rate compared to 6.8% for the United States. ### Figure 8.2 ### Age of Housing Units in Lake County <
> Source: U. S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 ### Housing Types Figure 8.3 shows housing types based on the number of housing units in different structures from 1980 to 2000. The number of housing units in 1-unit detached structures and 5 or more unit structures increased over the last 20 years, but their proportions in the total number of housing units remained approximately the same. The housing units in the 1-unit attached structures, which are typically townhouses with separate entrances, increased dramatically both in terms of the number of units as well as its share in the total number of housing units. The number of housing units in the 2-unit structures and other structures showed a trend of declining. The number of housing units in the 3 or 4-unit structures remained at the same level. Lake County, Illinois Lake County’s housing stock is predominately single-family accounting for 77.8% of the total housing units, according to the 2000 Census. This is higher than DuPage (72.1%) and Kane counties (72.2%), but lower than Will (84.3%) and McHenry counties (86.5%). As an urban county, Cook County has a much lower percentage of single-family housing units, only 44.8%. For the United States as a whole, single-family housing units account for 65.9% of the total. ### Figure 8.3 ### Housing Types in Lake County 1980-2000 | Housing Types | 1980 Number of Housing Units | 1980 % Of Total | 1990 Number of Housing Units | 1990 % Of Total | 2000 Number of Housing Units | 2000 % Of Total | | :--- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | | **Single-Family** | **108,334** | **72.0** | **136,767** | **74.7** | **175,765** | **77.8** | | 1-unit, detached | 102,585 | 68.2 | 123,630 | 67.5 | 155,336 | 68.8 | | 1-unit, attached | 5,749 | 3.8 | 13,137 | 7.2 | 20,429 | 9.0 | | **Multifamily** | **37,474** | **24.9** | **41,790** | **22.8** | **45,789** | **20.3** | | 2 units | 9,125 | 6.1 | 7,726 | 4.2 | 7,268 | 3.2 | | 3 or 4 units | 7,274 | 4.8 | 7,061 | 3.9 | 7,645 | 3.4 | | 5 or more units | 21,075 | 14.0 | 27,003 | 14.7 | 30,876 | 13.7 | | **Other*** | **4,688** | **3.1** | **4,726** | **2.5** | **4,365** | **1.9** | Source: Lake County Department of Planning, Zoning & Environmental Quality, 1994, *Framework Plan*, Page 6-10, Lake County, Illinois U. S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table DP-4 *Includes mobile home, trailer, boat, RV, Van, etc. ### New Housing Units Figure 8.4 shows the residential construction activities by municipalities in recent years. Continuing the growth trend of housing units in Lake County, the residential units permitted from 1998 to 2002 range from 4,001 to 4,933 units per year. These new housing permits are predominantly for single-family units, which account for 81% of the total units. For the five years between 1998 and 2002, the City of Waukegan issued the largest number of residential building permits with a total of 1,605 housing units, followed by Round Lake (1,533), Gurnee (1,490), Vernon Hills (1,416), Lindenhurst (1,333), Grayslake (1,321), Lake Villa (1,126) and Round Lake Beach (1,083). The City of Waukegan also issued the largest number of multifamily building permits 816 from 1998 to 2002, followed by Gurnee (537), Lindenhurst (455), Hainesville (278), Libertyville (259), Lake Villa (256), Round Lake Beach (254), and Lake Zurich (208). During the same time period, the Village of Round Lake led all municipalities in terms of single-family building permits issued (1,501), followed by Vernon Hills (1,416), and Grayslake (1,170). The number of new housing units completed each year may be higher than what the table shows for those communities with new manufactured homes. Figure 8.4 is compiled from surveys the Census Bureau conducted which do not require the report of manufactured homes. The Village of Round Lake Park added several hundred housing units in Saddlebrook Farms, which are not reflected in the table. Manufactured homes are further discussed in the Manufactured/Mobile Homes section of this chapter. Regional Framework Plan ### Figure 8.4 ### Residential Building Permits, 1998-2002 | Municipality | 1998 Single-Family Units | 1998 Multi-family Units | 1998 Total | 1999 Single-Family Units | 1999 Multi-family Units | 1999 Total | 2000 Single-Family Units | 2000 Multi-family Units | 2000 Total | 2001 Single-Family Units | 2001 Multi-family Units | 2001 Total | 2002 Single-Family Units | 2002 Multi-family Units | 2002 Total | | :--- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | | Antioch | 110 | 0 | 110 | 149 | 0 | 149 | 129 | 40 | 169 | 180 | 0 | 180 | 239 | 13 | 252 | | Bannockburn | 3 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | | Beach Park | 20 | 0 | 20 | 22 | 0 | 22 | 21 | 0 | 21 | 21 | 0 | 21 | 163 | 139 | 302 | | Buffalo Grove | 89 | 0 | 89 | 20 | 40 | 60 | 18 | 32 | 50 | 27 | 0 | 27 | 59 | 0 | 59 | | Deer Park | 9 | 0 | 9 | 12 | 0 | 12 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 5 | | Deerfield | 29 | 0 | 29 | 29 | 0 | 29 | 79 | 61 | 140 | 22 | 0 | 22 | 36 | 40 | 76 | | Fox Lake | 48 | 0 | 48 | 69 | 0 | 69 | 56 | 0 | 56 | 110 | 21 | 131 | 159 | 0 | 159 | | Grayslake | 160 | 0 | 160 | 270 | 0 | 270 | 237 | 148 | 385 | 327 | 0 | 327 | 176 | 3 | 179 | | Green Oaks | 53 | 0 | 53 | 53 | 0 | 53 | 42 | 0 | 42 | 9 | 0 | 9 | 17 | 0 | 17 | | Gurnee | 317 | 199 | 516 | 226 | 260 | 486 | 150 | 9 | 159 | 135 | 60 | 195 | 125 | 9 | 134 | | Hainesville | 49 | 38 | 87 | 58 | 66 | 124 | 73 | 31 | 104 | 38 | 67 | 105 | 154 | 76 | 230 | | Hawthorn Woods | 66 | 0 | 66 | 35 | 0 | 35 | 48 | 0 | 48 | 48 | 0 | 48 | 58 | 0 | 58 | | Highland Park | 56 | 15 | 71 | 58 | 15 | 73 | 54 | 10 | 64 | 56 | 20 | 76 | 59 | 40 | 99 | | Highwood | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | | Indian Creek | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 61 | 0 | 61 | | Kildeer | 37 | 0 | 37 | 43 | 0 | 43 | 42 | 0 | 42 | 38 | 0 | 38 | 43 | 0 | 43 | | Lake Barrington | 10 | 0 | 10 | 35 | 0 | 35 | 25 | 0 | 25 | 60 | 0 | 60 | 16 | 0 | 16 | | Lake Bluff | 11 | 0 | 11 | 17 | 0 | 17 | 12 | 0 | 12 | 12 | 0 | 12 | 12 | 0 | 12 | | Lake Forest | 209 | 0 | 209 | 118 | 0 | 118 | 113 | 0 | 113 | 76 | 0 | 76 | 84 | 0 | 84 | | Lake Villa | 204 | 0 | 204 | 191 | 0 | 191 | 220 | 171 | 391 | 185 | 0 | 185 | 70 | 85 | 155 | | Lake Zurich | 28 | 0 | 28 | 30 | 176 | 206 | 34 | 0 | 34 | 111 | 26 | 137 | 69 | 6 | 75 | | Libertyville | 59 | 2 | 61 | 65 | 222 | 287 | 25 | 3 | 28 | 19 | 28 | 47 | 29 | 4 | 33 | | Lincolnshire | 10 | 0 | 10 | 12 | 31 | 43 | 13 | 0 | 13 | 6 | 52 | 58 | 20 | 0 | 20 | | Lindenhurst | 297 | 190 | 487 | 288 | 65 | 353 | 125 | 130 | 255 | 85 | 70 | 155 | 83 | 0 | 83 | | Long Grove | 57 | 0 | 57 | 79 | 0 | 79 | 80 | 0 | 80 | 82 | 0 | 82 | 48 | 0 | 48 | | Mettawa | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 9 | 0 | 9 | 12 | 0 | 12 | 3 | 0 | 3 | | Mundelein | 82 | 0 | 82 | 130 | 0 | 130 | 111 | 0 | 111 | 118 | 0 | 118 | 124 | 0 | 124 | | North Barrington | 38 | 0 | 38 | 41 | 0 | 41 | 42 | 0 | 42 | 21 | 0 | 21 | 13 | 0 | 13 | | North Chicago | 27 | 42 | 69 | 30 | 5 | 35 | 39 | 7 | 46 | 24 | 2 | 26 | 33 | 5 | 38 | | Old Mill Creek | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Park City | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 7 | | Riverwoods | 12 | 0 | 12 | 7 | 0 | 7 | 11 | 0 | 11 | 40 | 0 | 40 | 11 | 0 | 11 | | Round Lake Beach | 177 | 0 | 177 | 263 | 80 | 343 | 200 | 99 | 299 | 126 | 75 | 201 | 63 | 0 | 63 | | Round Lake Heights | 18 | 0 | 18 | 40 | 0 | 40 | 33 | 0 | 33 | 150 | 0 | 150 | 163 | 0 | 163 | | Round Lake Park | 6 | 0 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 7 | 0 | 7 | 11 | 0 | 11 | | Round Lake | 77 | 0 | 77 | 235 | 0 | 235 | 194 | 0 | 194 | 368 | 0 | 368 | 627 | 32 | 659 | | Tower Lakes | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | | Vernon Hills | 271 | 0 | 271 | 424 | 0 | 424 | 296 | 0 | 296 | 218 | 0 | 218 | 207 | 0 | 207 | | Wadsworth | 21 | 0 | 21 | 21 | 0 | 21 | 24 | 0 | 24 | 32 | 0 | 32 | 36 | 0 | 36 | | Wauconda | 41 | 0 | 41 | 54 | 0 | 54 | 47 | 12 | 59 | 38 | 17 | 55 | 41 | 5 | 46 | | Waukegan | 218 | 58 | 276 | 142 | 162 | 304 | 162 | 211 | 373 | 121 | 365 | 486 | 146 | 20 | 166 | | Winthrop Harbor | 17 | 0 | 17 | 28 | 0 | 28 | 19 | 0 | 19 | 16 | 0 | 16 | 20 | 0 | 20 | | Zion | 105 | 0 | 105 | 108 | 0 | 108 | 89 | 0 | 89 | 98 | 14 | 112 | 97 | 0 | 97 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | **Municipal Total** | **3,045** | **546** | **3,591** | **3,415** | **1,122** | **4,537** | **2,888** | **966** | **3,854** | **3,059** | **817** | **3,876** | **3,394** | **477** | **3,871** | | Balance of Lake County* | 412 | 43 | 455 | 319 | 77 | 396 | 280 | 0 | 280 | 307 | 20 | 327 | 301 | 0 | 301 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | **Lake County Totals** | **3,457** | **589** | **4,046** | **3,734** | **1,199** | **4,933** | **3,168** | **966** | **4,134** | **3,366** | **837** | **4,203** | **3,695** | **477** | **4,172** | *Balance of Lake County includes unincorporated Lake County plus Third Lake and Volo. Note: 1. This table excludes manufactured homes and does not include permits issued for additions, alterations, or conversions to residential building. 2. Barrington and Barrington Hills are listed under Cook County; Fox River Grove, Port Barrington, Island Lake, and Lakemoor are listed under McHenry County. Source: Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission and U. S. Census Bureau. Lake County, Illinois ## Housing Value and Income Trend Analysis Lake County’s median housing value increased considerably during the last 30 years. Figure 8.5 shows Lake County’s median housing value trend. In 1970 the median housing value was only $24,500. By 2000, it reached $198,200. This is a 710% increase over 30 years. In the same time period, the median housing value in the Chicago region increased 550%. Lake County’s median income increased considerably less during the last 30 years. Figure 8.5 also shows Lake County’s median household income trend. In 1969 the median household income was only $12,200. By 1999, it reached only $66,973. This is an increase of only 449% over 30 years. After adjusting for inflation, the median housing value in Lake County still increased 81% over the last 30 years. During the same time, the median household income increased only 24%. ## Housing Value by Location Housing value varies greatly from one community to another. Figure 8.6 shows the 2001 market value of single-family housing units in Lake County (multifamily housing units are not included in this map) based on the equalized assessed value (EAV) from Lake County tax assessment records. There were approximately 170,000 single-family housing units (including both land and building) assessed at the market value of $30,000 or more in 2001. In order to show the distribution of housing value, these housing units were divided into four equally sized groups. The first group of housing units, with the lowest value ranging from $30,000 to $122,487, is mostly located in the northern Lake Michigan Lakefront communities and the Round Lake area. The second group, with housing value from $122,488 to $187,174, is primarily located in the northern half of the County (north of State Highway 137). Almost all of the most expensive units, with housing value of more than $294,480, are located in the southern half of the County and along the I-94 corridor. The group with housing value ranging from $187,174 to $294,480 is more evenly distributed throughout the County. ## Housing Affordability The percentage of income used for housing expenses is an indicator of housing affordability. In Lake County, the percentage of income of homeowners used for housing expenses increased during the 1990s as shown in Figure 8.7. In 1990, more than 49.1% of the homeowners spent 20% or less of their income on housing; only 13.7% spent more than 35% or more on housing expenses. However, in 2000, the percentage of homeowners spending 20% or less of their income on housing declined to 44.5%; the percentage of homeowners spending 35% or more of their income on housing increased to 18.5%. On the other hand, there were signs of relief for renters during the 1990s. The percentage of renters spending 20% or less of their income on housing increased slightly; the percentage of renters spending more than 35% of their income on housing declined slightly. However, more than one-third (34.6%) of the County’s rental households spent more than 30% of their monthly income on rent. These households are “rent burdened” and have less money available for other needs. A housing unit is considered affordable if the purchase price is no more than 2.5 times higher than the buyer’s annual household income (Chicago Metropolis, The 2002 Metropolis Index). According to the Census, the median household income in Lake County was $66,973 in 1999. A household earning Lake County’s median income could afford a housing unit priced at $167,400 or lower. ### Figure 8.5 ### Median Housing Value for Lake County, 1970-2000 ### And Median Household Income for Lake County, 1969-1999 ### (In Current and 2000 Dollars) <
> Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000 U.S. Department of Labor ### Figure 8.6 ### Housing Value for Single-Family Units ### Based on 2001 EAV in Lake County <
> | Surface Water | | | :--- | :--- | | **Housing Value** | | | ■ $30,000 - 122,487 | | | ■ $122,488 - 187,173 | | | ■ $187,174 - 294,480 | | | ■ Over $294,480 | | Source: Lake County Geographic Information System ### Figure 8.7 ### Percent of Income Used for Housing Expenses, 1989 and 1999 <
> Note: The total percentage does not add up to 100% in either chart due to the fact that a small portion of the data cannot be computed. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1990 and 2000 Figure 8.8 shows the median housing value of Lake County in 2000 by census block groups. All parts of Lake County are within a census block group even if it is a non-residential area. It also shows a ratio indicating whether the block group is affordable to a household making the County’s median household income. The ratio is calculated by using the median housing value of the census block groups divided by Lake County’s median household income. According to the 2002 Metropolis Index (Chicago Metropolis 2020), a municipality having a ratio of 2.5 or less is classified as “affordable.” A ratio between 2.5 and 3.5 is considered “somewhat affordable,” while a ratio above 3.5 is considered “not very affordable” for a family with the County’s median household income. The 2002 Metropolis Index has been applied to block groups in Figure 8.8. North Chicago, with a ratio of 1.5, is the most affordable community in Lake County. On the other end, the Village of Bannockburn is the least affordable community in Lake County with a median housing value of nearly one million dollars and a ratio of almost 14.[^p9-1] ### Manufactured/Mobile Homes Manufactured homes are housing units that are built within a factory, under the 1976 Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Manufactured Housing Code, commonly referred to as “HUD Code Housing.” HUD Code Housing is exempt from state and local construction and safety codes. Mobile homes are housing units built in a factory prior to the adoption of the HUD Code in 1976 (American Planning Association, March 12, 2001). Many people continue to use the term “mobile homes” when referring to “manufactured homes.” According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Lake County had 4,269 manufactured/mobile homes in 2000. This accounts for 1.9% of the total housing units in the County, compared to 0.9% in the Chicago Metropolitan area, 3.2% in the state of Illinois, and 7.6% in the United States. The manufactured/mobile homes in Lake County are concentrated in a few communities. Park City, [^p9-1]: The ratios are calculated using block group data. Ratios describing entire municipalities are not the same. Lake County, Illinois Beach Park, and Round Lake Park together accounted for 65% of the County’s total manufactured/mobile homes in 2000. Park City has nearly 1,500 manufactured/mobile homes, which is more than half of its housing stock. The majority of Lake County’s municipalities do not have any manufactured/mobile homes. The cost of manufactured/mobile homes is 10 to 35% less than comparable site-built homes, excluding the cost of land. Manufactured homes can be built with various sizes, styles, and options, and can look very similar to site-built homes. Nationally, manufactured homes have become an important source of housing for young families, first time homebuyers, older adults, and others with limited income (American Planning Association, March 12, 2001). In Illinois, manufactured/mobile homes are taxed differently than site-built homes. Manufactured/mobile homes are treated as personal property, as long as the wheels remain on the structure, and are not subject to real estate taxes. The land that manufactured/mobile homes sit on is taxed as real estate, as are on-site additions, such as garages, decks and porches. These additions must also be built to local, state, or regional building codes. State Legislation is routinely proposed that would change the manner in which manufactured/mobile homes are taxed. Instead of real estate tax, the owners of manufactured/mobile homes pay a small Mobile Home Local Services Tax, which is based on the age and size of the structure. According to the Mobile Home Local Services Tax Act, the tax rate for the first three years on a new manufactured home is 15 cents per square foot. For example, the owner of a new 1,200 square-foot manufactured home pays $180 a year for the first three years. The rates decrease over the years. By the time the manufactured home reaches 15 years and over, the rate is 7.5 cents per square foot. This tax rate has remained unchanged since the adoption of the law in 1973. When manufactured/mobile homes are bought and sold, transfer of ownership is conducted in a form similar to a motor vehicle title, which is handled by the Secretary of State’s office or at the local office of Department of Motor Vehicles. Manufactured/mobile home owners are also required to pay sales tax, similar to the process used for motor vehicle sales. Some states have passed legislation requiring manufactured/mobile homes be taxed as real property. In South Dakota, for example, manufactured homes built in 1977 and after are taxed the same way as site-built homes (South Dakota Department of Revenue, Summer 2001). Real estate taxes are collected for both the home and the land to support public services such as schools, roads, fire and police protection. If new legislation is adopted in Illinois to ensure that manufactured homes are taxed at an equitable rate to support the services provided to residents, Lake County could consider new manufactured home parks as a method of providing affordable housing. ### Housing and Employment Currently, there is a mismatch of workforce housing and employment locations in Lake County. Figure 8.8 compares housing affordability against the location of jobs in Lake County. Based on the 2000 employment data provided by Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission as shown in Figure 3.5 in Chapter 3, Economy and Employment, the southeast quarter of the County accounts for 60% of the total jobs in the County. At the same time, it accounts for only 34% of the total households in Lake County. This is also the area where housing value is among the highest in Lake County. The great majority of the housing units in this area are out of the reach of households with earnings at or below Lake County’s median income. ### Figure 8.8 ### Housing Affordability and Employment Locations <
> | | | | :--- | :--- | | ★ Employment Centers | | | Surface Water | | | **Median Housing Value by Census Block Group** | | | Affordable: Less than $167,400
(A ratio of 2.5 or less) | | | Somewhat Affordable: $167,400-234,400
(A ratio between 2.5 and 3.5) | | | Not Very Affordable ($234,500+)
(A ratio above 3.5) | | Source: Lake County Geographic Information System Lake County, Illinois Rental units provide housing for workers who either cannot or do not want to buy a home. Ideally, rental vacancy rates in a given area should not fall below 6%. According to the Census, the rental vacancy rate decreased from 6% in 1990 to 5% in 2000. During the 1990s, the increase in rental housing units in Lake County far lags behind the employment growth. Lake County created nearly 128,000 new jobs, while adding only 2,724 new rental units between 1990 and 2000. This caused the ratio of jobs to rental units to rise sharply from 4.74 jobs per rental unit in 1990 to 7.02 jobs per rental unit in 2000. This mismatch of housing and employment in Lake County will inevitably lead to an even greater traffic burden on the already congested transportation system. It may also reduce the attractiveness of the County to employers and eventually hurt the economic viability of Lake County. Employers have begun to pay attention to local housing issues. The Employer-Assisted Housing program, which is undertaken by the Metropolitan Planning Council (MPC), has attracted some employers in the Chicago Metropolitan area. Under this program, employers will provide financial assistance or benefits to their employees to purchase or rent a home near their work. Employers in return will see a reduction in turnover, increase in morale and loyalty, as well as state and federal tax benefits. Current incentives provided by the state of Illinois include matching funds and tax credit for the employer-assisted housing program. “The matching funds provide a dollar-for-dollar match to the assistance provided by an employer to an employee buying a home. Through the tax credit, participating Illinois corporations and individuals receive a $.50 credit toward their state income tax for every $1 in cash, land, or property donated to employer-assisted housing” (Metropolitan Planning Council, February 27, 2003). Businesses should also be encouraged to locate in areas of the County where there is an available workforce. Figure 3.4 in Chapter 3, Economy and Employment, shows the number of households, the number of jobs, and the ratio of jobs per household. The jobs per household ratio can be used as a proxy for the measurement of the commercial/industrial and residential land use balance of a region. It can also be used as a measure of the job housing balance for a region. Over a large area such as a county, metro area, or state the ratio falls between 1.2 and 1.6 jobs per household. In the U.S., the majority of households are composed of one or more workers. Therefore, areas with a ratio of less than one have a shortage of jobs compared to housing. Areas with a ratio of over two do not have the housing to support the jobs that exist there. The data in Figure 3.4 can be aggregated into larger geographic areas, such as quarters of the County. (The quarter County boundaries are shown in Figure 8.8.) The Northwest Quarter has a jobs per household ratio of 0.6 and the Southeast Quarter has a jobs per household ratio of 2.9. Workers who live in the Northwest Quarter of the County are employed elsewhere. Those who work in the Southeast Quarter of the County live elsewhere. ### Housing Location Housing is the single largest land use in Lake County. It is approximately 25% of the total County area, according to the 2000 land use inventory, which will be further discussed in Chapter 9, Land Use, of this *Plan*. In order of preserve certain open space areas, new housing developments should be planned in areas of the County with access to public transit, employment centers, available infrastructure and public services. New housing developments should not be located in areas of the County with concentrations of environmental resources. Transportation efficient developments, such as Employment Oriented Development and Transit Oriented Development, which are described in Chapter 7, Transportation, should be encouraged. These compact developments can minimize traffic impacts and preserve open space. Since municipalities generally are in better positions to provide public services and to collect development impact fees, large-scale residential developments should be encouraged to occur within municipalities. This is particularly true for municipalities that have lower workforce age population than jobs as these municipalities are importing a large amount of labor and have the ability to absorb additional residential development. ### Transit Oriented Development Transit Oriented Development (TOD) is designed to encourage the use of public transit. A typical TOD neighborhood “has a center with a rail or bus station, surrounded by relatively high-density development, with progressively lower-density spread outward” (Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 2003). Usually, a TOD is located within one-half mile of a public transit station. According to the study conducted by California Department of Transportation, major benefits provided by TOD include: provide more mobility choices, increase public safety, increase transit ridership, reduce rates of vehicle miles traveled, increase household’s disposable income, reduce air pollution and energy consumption, help conserve land and open space, promote economic development, reduce infrastructure costs, and contribute to more affordable housing. Transit Oriented Development may be applied to new suburban neighborhoods designed around public transit. It can also include incremental changes to existing neighborhoods that have public transit (Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 2003). “Successful TOD implementation typically involves a number of elements such as: optimal transit system design; community partnerships; understanding local real estate markets; planning for TOD; coordination among local, regional, and state organizations; and providing the right mix of planning and financial incentives and resources” (California Department of Transportation, page 2). There are a number of TODs that are performing well in the market place across the United States. For example, the Sunnyside Transit Village is a TOD located about 10 miles from downtown Portland. It includes apartments, townhomes, single-family detached residences, and professional offices surround a core of retail and public services around a transit station. The TOD is developed in a dense and walkable setting that allows the residents to satisfy more of their needs without adding to regional highway traffic congestion (Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 2003). ### Conservation Residential Development The Conservation Residential Development, also called Cluster Residential Development, is the grouping of housing units in specific areas of a site to allow the remaining land to be used for recreation, common open space, or preservation of environmentally sensitive areas. The main objective of the Conservation/Cluster development is to allow residential development while still protecting the area’s environmental features, allowing for more open space, and protecting farmland and the character of rural communities (Church, 2000). The total number of housing units on the entire site usually is no greater than would be allowed by otherwise applicable local laws and regulations. Conservation/Cluster Residential Development has been very popular in rural areas of the eastern United States (Blair, 1999). It is still somewhat new to many Midwestern communities. In recent Lake County, Illinois years, Lake County and some municipalities have incorporated Conservation/Cluster Residential Development into their zoning and subdivision regulations. As a result, more and more new residential neighborhoods are developed by using the Conservation/Cluster Residential Development approach. One such Conservation/Cluster Residential Development in Lake County is Prairie Crossing, which is located in Grayslake. Prairie Crossing has been designed to combine development with the preservation of open space, including wetlands, lakes, and organic farms. Homes sites are clustered in certain areas leaving 60% of the 678-acre site open (Prairie Crossing). Conservation/Cluster Residential Development may provide many advantages to the community, developer and homeowners (Blaine, 1999): * Community: Community may benefit because Conservation/Cluster Residential Development usually provides open space, protects environmental resources and preserves community character. * Developer: Developers often experience less site development costs and may increase the marketability of the development. * Homeowners: Homeowners may feel a sense of community, less housing maintenance and higher quality of life. Conservation/Cluster Residential Development is an innovative approach for residential development, but it may not fit the goals of every community. ### Transfer of Development Rights Conservation or Cluster Development usually applies to only one single site on a large parcel or several adjacent parcels with the same owner. When the parcels are not adjacent to each other or involve different landowners, another land use planning tool called Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) can be used. TDR is a program for transfer of blocks of development rights from one individual property owner to another (Barnes, Brent C., 1997: p241). For example, the “right” to develop four housing units permitted by zoning on an acre of property could be sold to another site and combined with the base entitlement there. The seller retains all interest in the land itself and in whatever legal use(s) existed at the time of the transfer, but loses all ability to further develop the site. The area from which the development rights are transferred is called TDR sending area. The area that receives the development rights is called the TDR receiving area. The TDR sending areas are generally areas that need to be protected or preserved or areas that are not suited for residential development. Such areas include, but are not limited to, areas with concentration of environmental resources, forest areas, farmland, and areas impacted by severe airport noise. TDR receiving areas should meet the following criteria: * Be located near (within one-half mile of) public transit, or near roadways capable of handling higher traffic volumes, or near employment centers; * Have adequate infrastructure and services; * Not contain environmentally sensitive areas and environmental resource areas; and * Have a community character compatible to residential development. In many cases it may be desirable, although not always necessary, that the TDR sending area and TRD receiving areas be located in the same school district. In all cases, the establishment of TDR receiving areas must take into consideration the impact of the new development on the receiving school district and other tax districts. Regional Framework Plan Current Illinois state law does not allow Transfer of Development Rights unless the county or municipality is a home rule unit. Since Lake County and most of the municipalities in the County are not home rule units, seeking new legislations to allow TDR is the first step for Lake County and municipalities that are interested in TDR. Before any state law that allows TDR is in place, Lake County and other non-home rule communities should consider modifying their regulations to provide density bonuses for residential developments in some areas in exchange for deed restriction or public land donations in other areas. The number of bonus units shall not exceed the number of units that could have been built on the land that is to be subject to deed restrictions or donated for public use, taking into account zoning and all applicable development standards. Bonus units should not be granted for placing deed restrictions on land that is already unbuildable, due to floodplains, non-mitigatable wetlands, or other constraints. A density bonus program should take into account all of the objectives presented for TDR programs, including consideration of impacts on school districts and other tax districts. ### Housing Demand for Senior Citizens Figure 8.9 shows population growth trends for the age group of 65 years and over, commonly referred to as Senior Citizens. During the last 30 years, the population of this age group grew 129%, or a net increase of approximately 1,000 persons per year. At the same time, the growth rate for the total population was only 68% in Lake County. By the year 2020, persons born between 1946 and 1964 (often referred to as Baby Boomers) will be entering the “65+ Years” age group. The population in this age group will increase significantly across the country. Based on NIPC’s forecast, the population for this age group in the Six-County[^p15-2] Region will reach 1,324,197 or 14.6% of the total population by the year 2020 compared to only 870,552 or 10.8% of the total population in 2000. Assuming Lake County experiences the same rate of percentage change as the region, the population of this age group in Lake County could reach 93,690 by the year 2020, or a net increase of 1,935 senior citizens per year for the next 20 years. #### Figure 8.9 #### The Population of 65 Years and Over in Lake County, 1970-2000 | | Census 1970 | Census 1980 | Census 1990 | Census 2000 | | :--- | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | | Population of 65+ Years | 24,015 | 31,812 | 43,422 | 54,989 | | % of Total Population | 6.3% | 7.2% | 8.4% | 8.5% | Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000 Since the household size for the population of 65 years and over is generally smaller than the average, housing demands of this age group is stronger. Using the same ratio of 65 years and over householders to the population of 65 years and over in 2000, it has been calculated that the number of households with a 65 years and over householder will reach more than 55,619 in 2020, [^p15-2]: The Six-County Region consists of Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry and Will counties. Lake County, Illinois compared to 32,640 in 2000. This is a net increase of nearly 23,000 households during the next 20 years or an average of 1,150 a year. There are three choices when people retire: stay in their current homes, move locally, or leave the area. They may move several times after the age of 65 (Williamson, 2002). Since Lake County is not a destination for retirees, it is more likely that most of the people in the age group of 65 years and over in Lake County have been living in the County or the surrounding areas. Some of the people in this age group may choose to stay at their current homes. Others may be eager to get rid of yard and house maintenance headaches by moving to smaller, high-quality, owner-occupied housing. Their interest could spur communities to add new infill housing at higher densities (Williamson, 2002). As discussed earlier in the chapter, housing value in Lake County is high in many communities and has been increasing faster than income. For those senior citizens who have limited income, real estate taxes can become a heavy burden. Currently, there are several tax exemptions or programs available to assist senior citizens in Lake County. According to the County Treasurer’s office, these tax exemptions or programs include: * Senior Homestead Exemption: This exemption lowers the equalized assessed value (one-third of market value) by $2,000. This program is available to all senior citizens. * Senior Citizens Assessment Freeze Homestead Exemption: This exemption freezes the assessment on the properties of senior citizens with a maximum household income of $40,000. * Senior Citizens Real Estate Tax Deferral Program: This program is designated to allow senior citizens to defer payment of part or all of the property taxes on their personal residences. This program also requires a household income of $40,000 or less. * Senior Citizens Circuit Breaker Grants: This program provides grants to low-income senior citizens. The amount of the grant is based on the amount of property tax and household income. To qualify for this grant, the total annual household income must be no more than $21,218 for a one-person household; $28,480 for a two-person household; or $35,740 for a three-person household. ### Assisted Housing Assisted housing in Lake County includes conventional public housing units, Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, Section 8 Project-based housing assistance, affordable housing developments supported by the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and the Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program, state programs funded through the Illinois Housing Development Authority (IHDA), and the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Program (which is administered by IHDA). These programs provide assistance to households with incomes no greater than 80% of the Chicago metro area median income. These housing programs provide housing assistance to meet the needs of those low-income households who cannot afford decent, safe, and sanitary housing at market rate. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), low-income is defined as 80% of the median family income for the area, subject to adjustments for areas with unusually high or low incomes or housing costs (HUD, February 20, 2003). A family of four with an annual income of no more than $56,500 in 2003 is considered a low-income family in Lake County. In addition, the County in 2000 began funding an Affordable Housing Program (using general revenues) for households with incomes up to 100% of the area’s median household income. There are 1,217 public housing units in Lake County, which are administered through three Public Housing Authorities (PHA): Lake County PHA, North Chicago PHA and Waukegan PHA. Forty-nine percent of the public housing units are located in Waukegan and North Chicago. The Section 8 program provides rental assistance for income-eligible households to rent appropriate permanent housing. This program includes tenant-based Housing Choice Vouchers and project based Section 8 assistance. Under the Housing Choice Voucher program, voucher holders can choose where they would like to live in the County. Even so, they are mostly concentrated in North Chicago, Waukegan, Zion, the Round Lake region, and in Warren Township (Lake County Consortium, Consolidated Plan 2000:56). There are 3,450 Section 8 Housing Choice vouchers that are administered through the three housing authorities, 69% of which are through the Lake County Housing Authority. Under the project-based Section 8 program, specific units in a privately owned HUD-assisted project are designated for Section 8 subsidies. Because Section 8 contracts between the private owner and HUD are for a limited period of time (usually 20 years), many projects that started off with Section 8 assistance no longer have subsidies. Presently, there are over 1,700 Section 8 project-based units in Lake County. They are located throughout the County. IHDA programs include financial assistance for the development of affordable rental housing for low-income households. The LIHTC program provides tax credits to investors who provide financing for the development of rental housing, a portion of which is required to be affordable to low-income persons. There are 39 IHDA-assisted projects in Lake County (including LIHTC projects) consisting of 4,507 units. Some of these units also have project-based Section 8 assistance and may be included in the numbers above. (Illinois Housing Development Authority, Report on Assisted Housing, May 2002) The affordable housing activities supported by the HOME and CDBG programs include: rental housing construction and rehabilitation; construction of new single-family homes; downpayment assistance to first-time homebuyers; and rehabilitation of owner-occupied single-family homes. Thus far, countywide, including North Chicago and Waukegan, HOME and CDBG funds have assisted in the construction of 176 new rental units, the rehabilitation of 81 rental units, construction of over 70 new single-family homes, downpayment assistance to 939 households under the First-Time Homebuyers Program, and the rehabilitation of over 240 owner-occupied homes. The County Affordable Housing Program has been funded at a level of $300,000 per year from 2000-2003. In 2004 the program has been funded at a level of $500,000. The $1,700,000 allocated to date under this program has included funding for: the development of 32 single-family homes; down payment assistance to first-time home buyers; transitional housing for victims of spousal abuse and their children; a residence for persons with developmental disabilities; rehabilitation of rental housing; and acquisition and rehabilitation of single-family homes. Some of the projects mentioned above are through cooperative partnerships between public and private entities. Other innovative approaches such as land banking, covenant restrictions, and community land trusts should also be considered as methods to provide housing assistance to low-income families. Lake County, Illinois Land banking is the process of purchasing land and holding it for future use. A government agency or non-profit organization may use this technique to purchase land at today’s prices and develop the land in the future for a definite public purpose. For example, Boulder Housing Partners, a non-profit organization in Boulder, Colorado, has held land for 10 to 15 years before the land was developed into residential communities that provide some affordable housing. Covenant restrictions can also be used in providing housing to low-income families at below the market rate. A community land trust is a nonprofit organization that owns real estate in order to provide benefits to its local community; making land and housing more affordable to residents. The land is held permanently by the CLT and is leased to the homeowners that are located on the land. When a homeowner decides to sell, the lease requires the homeowner to sell back to the CLT or to another lower income household at an affordable price (Institute for Community Economics, 2003). ### The Affordable Housing Planning and Appeal Act On January 1, 2004, the Illinois Affordable Housing Planning and Appeal Act (P.A. 93-595/P.A. 93-678) went into effect. This law requires all counties and municipalities where less than 10% of housing is affordable housing, to adopt affordable housing plans. Counties and municipalities where 10% or more of the total year-round housing units are affordable, are exempt from the law, as are municipalities under 1,000 in population. Under the law, in non-exempt communities, developers proposing affordable housing projects, which are denied or which are approved with infeasible conditions, may appeal local decisions to the State Housing Appeals Board. This board will be activated in January of 2009. The Illinois Housing Development Authority (IHDA) is to publish an annual list of exempt and non-exempt local governments beginning October 1, 2004 (Dibble, 2004). Non-exempt municipalities and counties must prepare an affordable housing plan by April 1, 2005. An affordable housing plan must consist of at least the following: 1. A statement of the total number of affordable housing units that are necessary to exempt the local government from the operation of this Act; 2. An identification of lands within the jurisdiction that are most appropriate for the construction of affordable housing and of existing structures most appropriate for conversion to, or rehabilitation for, affordable housing, including a consideration of lands and structures of developers who have expressed a commitment to provide affordable housing and lands and structures that are publicly or semi-publicly owned; 3. Incentives that local governments may provide for the purpose of attracting affordable housing to their jurisdiction; and 4. A goal of a minimum of 15% of all new development or redevelopment within the local government that would be defined as affordable housing in the Act; or a minimum of a three percentage point increase in the overall percentage of affordable housing within its jurisdiction, as defined in this Act; or a minimum of a total of 10% of affordable housing within its jurisdiction. Within 60 days after the local adoption of an affordable housing plan or revisions to its existing affordable housing plan, the non-exempt local government must submit a copy of that plan to IHDA (Dibble, 2004). Please contact the Illinois Housing Development Authority for more information. Lake County is exempt from the law. According to IDHA’s analysis, 23.3% of the housing units in the unincorporated County are affordable. However, according to IDHA, the following 20 Lake County municipalities must comply with the provisions of the law: | | | | :--- | :--- | | Barrington Hills | Lake Forest | | Deer Park | Lake Zurich | | Deerfield | Lincolnshire | | Green Oaks | Lindenhurst | | Hainesville | Long Grove | | Hawthorn Woods | North Barrington | | Highland Park | Riverwoods | | Kildeer | Third Lake | | Lake Barrington | Tower Lakes | | Lake Bluff | Wadsworth | *Lake County Programs for Affordable Housing* Lake County is prepared to offer both technical and financial assistance to municipalities seeking to implement the Affordable Housing Planning and Appeal Act. This *Plan* contains a significant amount of research and analysis regarding demographic, economic, housing, and land use patterns and trends. This *Plan* can provide the statistical data required for each municipality’s Affordable Housing Plan. Staff of the Planning and Support Services Division is available to assist municipal officials in analyzing policy options and developing strategies to achieve housing goals. Please contact the Planning and Support Service Division of the Lake County Department of Planning, Building and Development for assistance (Rovang, 2004). The Lake County Consortium’s HOME/CDBG Housing Fund and the Lake County Affordable Housing Program can assist in financing the development of new affordable housing opportunities. Both programs can assist governmental entities, non-profit organizations, or for-profit developers in creating new rental and owner-occupied residential units for income qualified households. The Lake County Community Development Division has staff available to assist municipalities in the development of an affordable housing project and/or program. Please contact the Community Development Division of the Lake County Department of Planning, Building and Development to discuss how the Housing Fund or the Affordable Housing Program can assist a municipality in creating affordable housing opportunities (Rovang, 2004). ### Military Housing Most Navy personnel live in group housing at the Great Lakes Naval Training Center located in North Chicago. Some live in the family housing units located within or around the base. The Great Lakes Naval Training Center owns and manages approximately 2,300 family housing units in Lake County. Two thousand of these units are located in North Chicago. Three hundred of them are located in Fort Sheridan. These military housing units are included in the Census and account for approximately 1% of the total housing units and 5% of the rental housing units in Lake County for Census 2000. Other Navy personnel and their families receive housing subsidy and live off the base. They may own or rent houses or apartments anywhere in Lake County or adjacent counties. Lake County, Illinois In 2003, the federal government proposed to reform military housing. Instead of owning and managing military housing, the federal government wants to privatize military housing. All eligible military personnel will receive housing subsidy and can rent or buy homes wherever they choose. Privatized military housing will give rental preferences to military personnel. This reform could have potential impact on Lake County’s housing market. Although the total number of military housing units that could be privatized accounts for only 5% of the total rental housing in Lake County, it accounts for more than 40% of North Chicago’s rental housing units. ### Housing Demand and Forecast Chapter 2, Population, of this document includes the population forecast that was developed by the Lake County Department of Planning, Building and Development based on the NIPC’s 2030 population forecasts. The Lake County Regional Planning Commission accepted the population forecast on January 6, 2004. The population forecast is the basis for the household forecast utilized in this chapter. From the household forecast, a forecast for housing unit needs by Cooperative Planning Area has been developed as shown in Figure 8.10. The forecast of housing units is based on the assumption that the housing vacancy rate for each Cooperative Planning Area stays at a level similar to that of 2000. In order to accommodate the projected population and household growth, Lake County will need approximately 55,500 additional housing units by 2020. This translates into a net increase of 2,775 housing units per year for the next 20 years. The total number of new housing units constructed will be slightly higher due to teardowns. This is significantly less than the number of units constructed annually in Lake County for the period of 1998 to 2002, which averaged over 4,000 units per year. ### Figure 8.10 ### Housing Units Forecast by Cooperative Planning Areas | | 2000 Census* | | 2020 Forecast^ | | Net Increase 2000-2020 | | | :--- | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | | **Cooperative Planning Areas** | **Households** | **Housing Units** | **Households** | **Housing Units** | **Households** | **Housing Units** | | Lakes Region | 24,403 | 26,573 | 32,754 | 35,667 | 8,351 | 9,094 | | North Central | 18,489 | 19,004 | 23,787 | 24,450 | 5,298 | 5,446 | | Northeast | 52,477 | 55,458 | 62,692 | 66,253 | 10,215 | 10,795 | | West Central | 8,457 | 8,968 | 16,833 | 17,850 | 8,376 | 8,882 | | Greater Avon | 20,428 | 21,129 | 29,744 | 30,765 | 9,316 | 9,636 | | Central Lake County | 27,587 | 28,383 | 31,392 | 32,298 | 3,805 | 3,915 | | Southeast | 29,525 | 30,514 | 29,764 | 30,761 | 239 | 247 | | Greater Barrington | 6,612 | 6,859 | 7,259 | 7,530 | 647 | 671 | | Southern Route 12 | 13,026 | 13,272 | 17,774 | 18,110 | 4,748 | 4,838 | | South Central | 15,293 | 15,759 | 17,435 | 17,844 | 2,142 | 2,085 | | **Lake County Total** | **216,297** | **225,919** | **269,434** | **281,528** | **53,137** | **55,609** | Sources: *U. S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 ^Housing Units forecast is based on the population estimate taking into consideration changes in household size, as forecast by NIPC. As shown in Figure 8.10 the increase of housing units will not be evenly distributed among the ten Cooperative Planning Areas.[^p21-3] The Northeast Cooperative Planning Area is expected to have the largest growth with a net increase of nearly 11,000 units; while the Southeast Cooperative Panning Area is only expected to grow an additional 247 units by 2020. ### Goals and Policies[^p21-4] **8.1 Goal:** Lake County and municipalities will cooperatively plan for housing to meet the needs of the County’s growing population in a manner consistent with local planning objectives and this *Regional Framework Plan*. 8.1.1 **Policy:** To the greatest extent possible, residential development should occur within municipalities, based on this *Regional Framework Plan*. 8.1.2 **Policy:** To the greatest extent possible, designate sufficient residential uses on the Future Land Use Map in areas other than those identified as High Priority Open Space to accommodate future housing. 8.1.3 **Policy:** Seek state legislation to allow Transfer of Development Rights as a tool to encourage higher density housing in areas near existing and programmed public transit and infrastructures in exchange for land development restrictions located in areas less suitable for development due to limited infrastructure availability or environmental limitations. 8.1.4 **Policy:** Streamline government approval processes to optimize the time for development review and approval. **8.2 Goal:** Encourage a diverse variety of housing units to meet the needs of Lake County residents of different demographic groups and economic levels in a manner consistent with local planning objectives and this *Regional Framework Plan*. 8.2.1 **Policy:** Designate a variety of housing densities on the Future Land Use Map to accommodate single-family and multifamily housing units. 8.2.2 **Policy:** Encourage more upscale housing development in communities with a large percentage of affordable housing. 8.2.3 **Policy:** Promote more affordable housing development in communities with a large percentage of upscale housing and that are also located near transit and employment centers. 8.2.4 **Policy:** Support the development of appropriate housing for senior citizens of all income levels in proximity to shopping, mass transit, and recreational and medical facilities. 8.2.5 **Policy:** Encourage the development of appropriate housing to serve people with disabilities through the use of federal, state, and local funds. [^p21-3]: See Chapter 1, Introduction, for the explanation and boundaries of the ten Cooperative Planning Areas. [^p21-4]: As stated in Chapter 1, Introduction, a Goal is defined as “the desired result to be achieved by implementing the *Plan*;” and a Policy is defined as “a general method or action designed to achieve a goal.” Lake County, Illinois ### 8.3 Goal: Support the supply of workforce housing near existing and planned employment centers in order to accommodate the workforce needed to maintain a healthy economy. 8.3.1 Policy: Establish incentives and inducements with the state government and local employers to provide more workforce housing in areas near employment centers. 8.3.2 Policy: Encourage employers to participate in Employer-Assisted Housing programs to help employees purchase homes near their work. 8.3.3 Policy: Encourage the development of workforce rental housing in areas near employment centers. ### 8.4 Goal: Provide incentives for businesses to locate in areas of the County where there is appropriate workforce available. 8.4.1 Policy: Update and improve the critical infrastructure needs of these areas through federal, state and local programs. 8.4.2 Policy: Support the improvement of the revitalization areas as identified in Chapter 6, Community Revitalization. 8.4.3 Policy: Coordinate demographic, housing, and employment information with economic development agencies in Lake County. ### 8.5 Goal: Preserve, maintain, and expand affordable housing in Lake County. 8.5.1 Policy: Encourage rehabilitation of existing affordable housing units by continuing to offer rehabilitation grants/loans to eligible households. 8.5.2 Policy: Support innovative approaches such as land banking, covenant restrictions, cooperative partnerships, and community land trusts as methods to encourage the preservation of existing affordable housing, and to encourage the creation of new affordable housing. 8.5.3 Policy: Consider supporting development of manufactured home communities, as appropriate, only when Illinois tax code is changed to ensure manufactured homes are taxed equitably to support public services. 8.5.4 Policy: Encourage, consider, and explore more options for affordable housing including promoting and marketing the successful pilot programs implemented within the County. ### 8.6 Goal: Encourage residential development in areas with access to public transit and near roadways capable of handling higher traffic volumes; discourage residential development in areas with infrastructure constraints or environmental limitations. 8.6.1 Policy: Encourage higher density housing to locate in areas near existing and programmed public transit, infrastructures, and employment centers. 8.6.2 Policy: Lake County will consider modifying its regulations to provide residential density bonuses for areas more suitable for development in exchange for development restrictions in areas less suitable for development. 8.6.3 Policy: Encourage home rule municipalities in Lake County to consider using Transfer of Development Rights in their land use policies and ordinances such as comprehensive plans, zoning, and subdivision regulations. 8.6.4 Policy: Encourage conservation or cluster residential development in the appropriate areas of the County. **Definitions** Affordable Housing: In this document, affordable housing is defined as housing with a value no more than 2.5 times the median household income of Lake County. Average Household Size: A measure obtained by dividing the number of people in households by the total number of households (2000 Census of Population and Housing, Demographic Profiles: Illinois, May 2002, User Notes: Source of Data, Data Issues, and Definitions). Conservation Residential Development (Cluster Residential Development): Conservation or Cluster Residential Development is the grouping of housing units in specific areas of a site to allow the remaining land to be used for recreation, common open space, or preservation of environmentally sensitive areas. Employment Center: Employment centers are defined as quarter sections (1/2 mile by 1/2 mile square) with employment counts of 2,000 or more, based on the 2000 employment data from Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission. Homeowner Vacancy Rate: The homeowner vacancy rate is the proportion of the homeowner-housing inventory that is vacant for sale. It is computed by dividing the number of vacant units for sale only by the sum of owner-occupied units and vacant units that are for sale only (2000 Census of Population and Housing, Demographic Profiles: Illinois, May 2002, User Notes: Source of Data, Data Issues, and Definitions). Home rule unit: A County which has a chief executive officer elected by the electors of the County and any municipality which has a population of more than 25,000 are home rule units. Other municipalities may elect by referendum to become home rule units. A home rule unit may exercise any power and perform any function pertaining to power to regulate for the protection of the public health, safety, morals and welfare: to license: to tax; and to incur debt (Constitution of the State of Illinois, Article VII, Section 6). Household: A household includes all of the people who occupy a housing unit. People not living in households are classified as living in group quarters (2000 Census of Population and Housing, Demographic Profiles: Illinois, May 2002, User Notes: Source of Data, Data Issues, and Definitions). Housing Unit: A housing unit may be a house, an apartment, a mobile home, a group of rooms, or a single room that is occupied (or if vacant, is intended for occupancy) as separate living quarters. Separate living quarters are those in which the occupants live separately from any other individuals in the building and which have direct access from outside the building or through a common hall (2000 Census of Population and Housing, Demographic Profiles: Illinois, May Lake County, Illinois 2002, User Notes: Source of Data, Data Issues, and Definitions). Low-income: Low-income in Lake County is defined as 80% of the median family income for the Chicago Metropolitan area. Adjustments are made to the low-income limits in Lake County to reflect the high housing costs in the Chicago Metropolitan area. Manufactured Housing: Manufactured housing is the type of housing built within a factory under the 1976 Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Manufactured Housing Code, commonly referred to as "HUD Code Housing" (American Planning Association, March 12, 2001). Median Household Income: The median divides the total households into two equal parts: 1/2 of the households having income below the median income and 1/2 above the median (2000 Census of Population and Housing, Demographic Profiles: Illinois, May 2002, User Notes: Source of Data, Data Issues, and Definitions). Median Housing Value: The median divides the housing value distribution into two equal parts: one-half of the housing value falling below the median value of the property and one-half above the median (2000 Census of Population and Housing, Demographic Profiles: Illinois, May 2002, User Notes: Source of Data, Data Issues, and Definitions). Multifamily Housing Units: Multifamily housing units include all units in buildings with two or more housing units, which may be one above the other or side-by-side. If built side-by side, they (1) do not have a wall that extends from ground to roof, or (2) share a heating system, or (3) have interstructural public utilities such as water supply/sewage disposal. Programmed Public Transit: Refers to funded public transit or public transit that has been included in a 5-year Capital Improvement Program. Rental Vacancy Rate: The proportion of the rental inventory that is vacant for rent. It is computed by dividing the number of vacant units for rent by the sum of the renter-occupied units and the number of vacant units for rent (2000 Census of Population and Housing, Demographic Profiles: Illinois, May 2002, User Notes: Source of Data, Data Issues, and Definitions). Senior Citizens: Senior citizens are defined as persons of 65 years and older. Single-Family Housing Units: Single-family housing units include all detached one-family houses. They also include all attached one-family houses separated by a wall that extends from ground to roof with no common heating systems or interstructural public utilities. They exclude mobile homes. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR): A program for transfer of blocks of development rights from one individual property owner to another. (American Planning Association, New Jersey Chapter, Barnes, Brent C., *Complete Guide to Planning in New Jersey*, 1997) Transit Oriented Development (TOD): Transit Oriented Development refers to land uses designed and located to encourage the use of public transit. TOD projects attempt to attract transit riders and promote cycling and walking by integrating the transit system with other community activities such as employment, retail, and services. Units in Structure: A structure is a separate building that either has open spaces on all sides or is separated from other structures by dividing walls that extend from ground to roof. In determining the number of units in a structure, all housing units, both occupied and vacant, are counted (2000 Census of Population and Housing, Demographic Profiles: Illinois, May 2002, User Notes: Source of Data, Data Issues, and Definitions). Vacant Housing Unit: A housing unit is vacant if no one is living in it at the time of enumeration, unless its occupants are only temporarily absent. Units temporarily occupied at the time of enumeration entirely by people who have a usual residence elsewhere are also classified as vacant (2000 Census of Population and Housing, Demographic Profiles: Illinois, May 2002, User Notes: Source of Data, Data Issues, and Definitions). ### Sources American Planning Association, March 12, 2001, *Policy Guide on Factory Built Housing*, New Orleans, Louisiana. Arendt, Randall G., 1996, *Conservation Design for Subdivisions*, Island Press, Washington, D.C. Barnes, Brent C., 1997, *Complete Guide to Planning in New Jersey*, American Planning Association, New Jersey Chapter, Trenton, NJ Blaine, Thomas W., Schear, Peggy, 1999, Ohio State University Fact Sheet, *Cluster Development*, http://ohioline.osu.edu/cd-fact/1270.html, accessed on April 7, 2003. California Department of Transportation, May 2002, *Statewide Transit Oriented Development Study: Factors for Success in California, Executive Summary*. Chicago Metropolis 2020, 2002, *Recommendations for Developing Attainable Workforce Housing in the Chicago Region*, Chicago, IL. Church, John, 2000, *Cluster/Conservation Development*, University of Illinois Extension Service. Dibble, Kelly K., 2004 (August 11), Letter from Kelly King Dibble, Executive Director of the Illinois Housing Development Authority; to Chief Local Elected Municipal Officials. Illinois Housing Development Authority, May 2002, *Report On Assisted Housing*, Chicago, IL. Institute for Community Economics: The CLT Model, www.iceclt.org, accessed on July 15, 2003. Lake County Consortium, June 2000, *2000-2004 Housing and Community Development Consolidated Plan*, Lake County, North Chicago, Waukegan, IL. Lake County Department of Planning, Zoning & Environmental Quality, 1994, *Framework Plan*, Waukegan, IL. Metropolitan Planning Council, February 27, 2003, *Employer-Assisted Housing 2002 Year-end Report*, www.metroplanning.org, accessed on July 9, 2003. Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, September 27, 2000, *Updated Population, Household and Employment Forecasts for Northeastern Illinois 1990 to 2000*, Chicago, IL. Prairie Crossing, *About Prairie Crossing*, www.prairiecrossing.com, accessed on April 29, 2003 Lake County, Illinois Rovang, Philip J., 2004 (September 17), Letter from Philip J. Rovang, Director of the Lake County Department of Planning, Building and Development; to mayors and presidents of non-exempt municipalities. U.S. Bureau of the Census, *Census 1950, 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000.* U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), February 20, 2003, *Notice PDR-2003-02.* Victoria Transport Policy Institute, March 13, 2003, *Transit Oriented Development, Using Public Transit to create more accessible and livable Neighborhoods,* www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm45.htm. Williamson, Christopher, Planning, July 2002, *The War of the Ages—A generation of baby boomers preparing for retirement encounters the next cohort, their children,* American Planning Association, Chicago, IL. --- ## Open Space — Chapter 4, Environmental Resources, Farmland, and Open Space (PDF) - Source: https://www.lakecountyil.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2504/Chapter-4-Environmental-Resources-Farmland-and-Open-Space-PDF - Pages: 36 - Covers: open_space # Chapter 4 ## Environmental Resources, Open Space, and Farmland ### Vision In the year 2020, Lake County will have a superior open space network that preserves natural resources, cultural resources,[^p1-1] and farmland to promote and enhance functioning ecosystems, agricultural activities, and the quality of life of all residents. ### Significance The interaction of the forces of nature have resulted in a landscape in Lake County that is abundant in its variety of environmental resources including prairies, woodlands, lakes, wetlands of all types, and various species of flora and fauna. Environmental resources and open space were among the most frequent topics sited by participants at the *Regional Framework Plan* Public Forums. “Green space” was identified as the third most important quality of life factor (after “quality schools” and “less traffic congestion”) in the Lake County Resident Transportation Survey (Lake County Department of Communications 2000). Protecting the environmental and cultural resources, open space, and farmland of the County from the impacts of residential and commercial development is a major challenge. This component of the *Regional Framework Plan* will provide mapping and analysis of the distribution of environmental and cultural resources, open space, and farmland in Lake County. Trends in agricultural activities will also be analyzed. This chapter includes countywide inventory maps and policy maps that identify areas that are most appropriate for environmental resource preservation and enhancement and areas that are most appropriate for development, as called for in *A Consensus Plan for Enhancing & Preserving Lake County’s Quality of Life* (Consensus Plan Committee, 1998:3) and suggested by planning experts such as Randall Arendt (1994:253) and Ian McHarg (1992:31), as well as the Natural Lands Trust (1997:3-2). This chapter strives to provide a framework for preserving and enhancing natural resources as an integrated system that conserves natural ecosystem functioning and contributes to the quality of life in Lake County. The analysis and policy recommendations contained in this chapter provide an important parameter for other *Lake County Regional Framework Plan* chapters. In particular, this chapter supports a Future Land Use Map and policies that respect environmental and cultural resources, while accommodating desirable development. ### Issues and Opportunities * Open space, environmental amenities, and recreation opportunities are key components of the County’s quality of life and a major determinant factor in business retention and location decisions. * Water resource-based tourism contributes to the County’s economic vitality. [^p1-1]: Cultural Resources include historic resources, archaeological resources, and scenic landscapes. Lake County, Illinois * Preservation of environmental resources and open space is a top priority of Lake County residents. * Lake County Forest Preserve District referenda demonstrate the public’s support for open space acquisitions. * As development pressure continues to increase, the opportunity to preserve open space and farmland is being lost. * Impervious surfaces (roof tops, parking lots, etc.) caused by development are key contributors to increasing flooding and decreasing water quality. * The quality and quantity of Lake County’s water resources including Lake Michigan, other surface waters, wetlands, and groundwater aquifers are being threatened by development and human activities. * The most cost effective method for managing stormwater is to utilize the natural hydrologic system including stream corridors, lakes, floodplains, wetlands, and depressional storage areas. * Existing state laws do not encourage creative programs, such as purchase of development rights and transfer of development rights programs, to protect environmental resources, open space, and farmland. ### Analysis #### Development Pattern Figure 4.1 shows the built-up areas of the County based on the Lake County 2000 land use inventory. Areas considered built-up include residential (excluding farm houses); government/institutional; industrial; office/research; retail/commercial; transportation facilities and rights-of-way; utilities/waste facilities and rights-of-way; and disturbed land. Areas not considered to be built-up include farmhouses; agricultural land; all public and private open space and recreational areas (including golf courses); forest/grasslands; wetlands; and areas with open water. Lake County’s first permanent settlement of European-Americans was established in 1834, only one year after Chicago was established as a village. According to land use inventories completed by NIPC and revised by the Lake County Department of Planning, Building and Development, 125,463 acres, or 44% of the County’s land area[^p2-2] was developed by 1990. By 2000 the developed area increased by over 14,000 acres to 139,655 acres, or 49% of the County’s land area. This is an 11.3% increase in the developed land area in 10 years. [^p2-2]: For the purpose of this analysis the County’s land area is defined as 284,257 acres, which equals the total County area (301,152 acres) minus the open water area (16,895 acres). Open water areas are subtracted from the County area in order to avoid under-stating the percentage of the County that is developed. The remainder of the statistics presented in this chapter and in Chapter 9, Land Use, are based on the County’s total area. Regional Framework Plan ### Figure 4.1 ### Built-Up Areas <
> | | | | :--- | :--- | | $\sim$ Roads | | | $\blacksquare$ Built-Up Land (2000) | | | $\square$ Surface Water | | Source: Lake County 2000 Land Use Inventory; Lake County Geographic Information System Lake County, Illinois Watershed Planning and Stormwater Management The land area that contributes stormwater runoff to a particular point along a waterway is referred to as its watershed. More specifically, the watershed is the area of land confined by topographic divides surrounding a stream, river, wetland or lake (waterbody) that drains to that waterbody. The watershed includes not just the surface of the land, but also the area below the surface where precipitation that infiltrates into the soil flows into the waterbody from underground. In Lake County, the four major watersheds are the Lake Michigan watershed, the North Branch of the Chicago River watershed, the Des Plaines River watershed, and the Fox River watershed. These watersheds are divided into 26 smaller areas known as sub-watersheds. Watershed and subwatershed boundaries are shown on Figure 4.2. Watersheds provide an important geographic boundary for understanding and managing natural resources. Watershed-level planning considers protecting land and water resources that extend beyond jurisdictional boundaries while reducing negative impacts of land development such as flood damage, soil erosion, habitat loss, and water pollution. As Lake County continues to grow, there is a need to predict and manage, through watershed planning, how land use changes will affect the natural hydrologic system of streams, lakes, and wetlands and the high quality habitats and environmental resources they connect. Nearly 90,000 acres or 30% of Lake County consists of lakes, streams, wetlands, and floodplain areas, as discussed in the environmental resource inventory section of this chapter. In the past, these areas have naturally stored and conveyed the heaviest of rainstorms. From a taxpayer’s standpoint, it is more cost-effective to protect, restore, and enhance lakes, streams, wetlands, and floodplain areas to achieve multiple objectives of flood control, water quality, habitat, open space, topsoil moisture, and aesthetics. A holistic and integrated approach to environmental resource protection, enhancement and management, must include stormwater management goals and policies. The 1994 *Framework Plan* states that the natural hydrologic “system is as much a part of the infrastructure network as our man-made roads, sewers and utility lines.” Additional goals and policies related to comprehensive stormwater management are included in Chapter 5, Infrastructure and Services. Environmental Resources This *Plan* contains an inventory and description of Lake County’s environmental, cultural, and open space resources. The inventory is based on existing data sources that have been provided by local, state, and federal agencies. The resources described in this *Regional Framework Plan* include: 1. Illinois Natural Areas Inventory Areas; 2. Threatened and Endangered Species; 3. Lakes, Ponds, Rivers, and Streams; 4. Wetlands; 5. Hydric Soils; 6. Flood Areas; 7. Forested Areas; 8. Steep Slopes; 9. Protected Open Space; 10. Aquifer Recharge Areas; 11. Scenic Landscapes; and 12. Historic, Archaeological, and Paleontological Resources. ### Figure 4.2 ### Watersheds and Subwatersheds <
> | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 1. Upper Fox River | 10. North Mill Creek | 19. Kellogg Creek | | 2. Sequoit Creek | 11. Mill Creek | 20. Dead River | | 3. Fish Lake Drain | 12. Newport Drainage Ditch | 21. Waukegan River | | 4. Squaw Creek | 13. Upper Des Plaines River | 22. Pettibone Creek | | 5. Lower Fox River | 14. Bull Creek | 23. Bluff/Ravine | | 6. Mutton Creek | 15. Indian Creek | 24. Skokie River | | 7. Slocum Lake Drain | 16. Lower Des Plaines River | 25. Middle Fork | | 8. Tower Lake Drain | 17. Buffalo Creek | 26. West Fork | | 9. Flint Creek | 18. Aptakisic Creek | | Lake County, Illinois In addition to the resources listed above, Highly Erodable Land and Prime Agricultural Land are described and mapped in the Farmland Protection section of this chapter. The maps and analysis contained in this *Regional Framework Plan* are based on existing inventory and mapping data provided by local, state, and federal agencies. Inventory data and maps are not available for Forested Areas; Aquifer Recharge Areas; Historic and Archaeological Resources; and Scenic Landscapes. Figure 4.3 contains a table listing the geographic area for each of these resources for which inventory data are available. Many resources overlap such that the acreage shown in the table cannot be summed to determine total resource areas within the County. The resources that have been inventoried and mapped are depicted on the Environmental Resource Inventory map that accompanies this *Regional Framework Plan*. ### Illinois Natural Areas Inventory Areas Illinois Natural Areas Inventory (INAI) areas are shown in Figure 4.4. These areas contain exceptional or unique environmental resources, as designated by the Illinois Natural Areas Inventory of the Illinois Natural History Survey and the Division of Natural Heritage (IDNR). Within the County, 15,847 acres have been identified as INAI areas. The Illinois Natural Areas Inventory is not a comprehensive listing of all the sites in Lake County that might contain exceptional or unique environmental resources. Identification of a site as an INAI area is not sufficient to ensure the preservation of the natural resources or of the many Threatened and Endangered Species found at these locations. INAI areas may be publicly or privately owned and may be protected or unprotected. INAI areas should not be confused with State Natural Areas, such as Volo Bog and Redwing Slough, which are state owned and maintained. ### Threatened and Endangered Species Lake County has over 130 different known threatened and endangered (T&E) species, as classified by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, the most of any county in Illinois. These species have been identified at 554 sites, which are shown on Figure 4.4. These sites represent locations at which a species was found, trapped, or collected, and therefore only indicates that species’ presence at the time of the last observation. Threatened and endangered species in Lake County include birds, fish, insects, plants and reptiles. Threatened and endangered species sites also include natural communities and rookeries. All threatened and endangered species have been identified by qualified biologists. Many threatened and endangered species sites are located within existing State Parks, State Nature Preserves, and Lake County Forest Preserves. However, threatened and endangered species sites are located on private property where they may be negatively impacted by development. Persons developing land in the vicinity of known threatened and endangered species sites are required to engage in a natural resource consultation process with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources. Many threatened and endangered species have large territories that extend beyond where they have been observed. Regardless of their range, many species require large contiguous areas to provide the healthy conditions and habitat necessary for their survival. ### Figure 4.3 ### Environmental Resources | Resource | Acres | Square Miles | Percent of County Area | | :--- | :---: | :---: | :---: | | County Area | 301,152 | 470.55 | - | | | | | | | Illinois Natural Areas Inventory Sites | 17,533 | 24.76 27.39 | 6% | | T&E Species | \multicolumn{3}{c|}{554 point locations (no area)} | | Forested Area (not mapped) | 37,110 | 57.98 | 12% | | Steep Slopes (8% and greater) | 11,854 | 18.52 | 4% | | **Surface Water** | | | | | Lakes and Ponds | 16,895 | 26.40 | 6% | | High Value Aquatic Resource Streams | | 34 miles | | | Moderate Value Aquatic Resource Streams | | 52 miles | | | **Wetlands and Soils** | | | | | ADID Wetlands (with 100-foot buffer) | 38,474 | 60.11 | 13% | | Lake County Wetland Inventory Wetlands | 61,495 | 96.09 | 20% | | Hydric Soils (non-built-up areas only) | 67,497 | 105.5 | 22% | | **Flood Areas** | | | | | Floodplains and Floodways | 52,108 | 81.42 | 17% | | Flood of Record | 52,898 | 82.65 | 18% | | SMC Flood Hazard Mitigation Areas | 5,663 | 8.85 | 2% | | **Protected Open Space** | | | | | State Parks and State Natural Areas | 7,799 | 12.18 | 3% | | Lake County Forest Preserve Land | 24,220 | 37.84 | 8% | | Libertyville Township Open Space | 1,535 | 2.40 | 0.5% | | Nature Preserves | 5,194 | 8.11 | 2% | **Figure 4.4** **Illinois Natural Areas Inventory Areas** <
> | | | | :--- | :--- | | $\sim$ Roads | | | $\blacktriangle$ Threatened and Endangered Species | Source: Illinois Department of Natural Resources; | | $\blacksquare$ Illinois Natural Areas Inventory Areas | Lake County Geographic Information System | Environmental Resources, Open Space, and Farmland Surface Water Surface water is shown on Figure 4.5. Lakes, ponds, rivers, and streams store and convey water from rainfall and snowmelt. They serve as habitats for plants, aquatic life, and animals. They provide many passive and active recreational activities and provide scenic and spiritual amenities. Certain water bodies, such as the Chain-O-Lakes and Lake Michigan, attract tourist revenues to Lake County. Lake County is bordered on the east by Lake Michigan, the largest lake completely located within the United States and the fifth largest lake in the world. Lake Michigan has an average depth of 279 feet, a maximum depth of 923 feet, and 1,640 miles of shoreline. Despite its massive size, Lake Michigan has a limited ability to provide water for human use and to absorb pollution. To protect the Lake, water withdrawals are regulated by International and U.S. law, as discussed in the Water Supply section of Chapter 5, Infrastructure and Services. Discharges into Lake Michigan are also regulated by International laws, the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (1972) and the U.S. Clean Water Act (1972). The shoreline of Lake Michigan is not static. "The historical record of coastal change along the Illinois shore of Lake Michigan indicates that the most dynamic coastal area in the state [of Illinois] is located between the Wisconsin-Illinois state line and the Waukegan Harbor" (Illinois State Geological Survey, 1998[^p9-1]). Erosion and accretion creates a constant need to dredge harbor areas and fill along the shoreline. The Chain-O-Lakes region in the northwest portion of the County contains a concentration of lakes. Major lakes in that area include: Grass Lake, Fox Lake, Pistakee Lake, and Lake Nippersink. Major lakes in the central portion of the County include Third Lake, Fourth Lake, and Round Lake. Major lakes in the southern portion of the County include Slocum Lake, Bangs Lake, and Lake Zurich. The major rivers flowing through Lake County include the Fox River, the Des Plaines River, and the North Branch of the Chicago River. There are over 350 lakes and ponds in Lake County with a total area of 16,895 acres. The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency's (IEPA) Biological Stream Characterization (BSC) program provides a biological assessment of stream quality. No Lake County stream segments are classified as Class A, Unique Aquatic Resources, streams. Lake County has 33.6 miles of Class B, High Value Aquatic Resource, streams and 51.7 miles of Class C, Moderate Aquatic Resource, streams. The County also has 74.3 miles of Class D, Limited Aquatic Resource, streams, which are not mapped. Steps need to be taken to protect Lake County's vast water resources, including Lake Michigan from agricultural and urban runoff, industrial waste, and sewage overflows. Best Management Practices (BMPs) should be promoted throughout the County to improve absorption and groundwater infiltration opportunities for runoff, including the retention of topsoil. Examples of BMPs include: * Use a cluster approach for subdivision design that leaves as much of a site as possible in large-area open space. * Use vegetated open channels instead of curb and gutter, where appropriate. * Use permeable or porous paving instead of asphalt or concrete where possible. [^p9-1]: 1 #### Figure 4.5 #### Surface Water and Wetlands <
> Environmental Resources, Open Space, and Farmland * Use natural landscaping that thrives in the local environment to reduce the need for pesticides, herbicides, fertilizer, and watering. * Use roof runoff to maintain a rain garden. * Minimize the impervious area of parking lots. Additional goals and policies related to BMPs are included in Chapter 5, Infrastructure and Services. ### Wetlands Wetlands are areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation, which is adapted for life in saturated soil. Wetlands provide habitat for fish and wildlife and store and filter pollution from stormwater run-off, thereby reducing flooding and protecting water quality. The Lake County Wetland Inventory, which is maintained by the Lake County Department of Management Services, GIS Division, identifies 61,495 acres of naturally occurring and artificial wetlands, including farmed wetlands, in Lake County. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has identified certain wetlands within Lake County as having exceptional functional values. These “Advanced Identification” (ADID) wetlands cover 38,474 acres, including 100-foot buffers. Most, although not all, ADID wetland areas are also included in the Lake County Wetland Inventory. Both Lake County Wetland Inventory and ADID wetlands are shown on Figure 4.5. Maintaining the health of Lake County’s remaining wetlands requires reducing the pollution in run-off from impervious surfaces, and retaining absorbent soils and deep-rooted vegetation in bordering buffer areas. ### Hydric Soils Hydric soils retain water and support rich biological communities. They are formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper portion. Hydric soils are associated with and include many surface water and wetland areas. They have poor drainage, complicating the construction of basements, roads, and septic fields. Building in these soils can increase flooding and decrease water quality. As identified in the *Soil Survey Lake County, Illinois* (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1970), hydric soils cover an area of 90,145 acres within the County. Of this area, approximately 22,648 acres have been developed, based on the 2000 Land Use Inventory, and an additional 16,436 acres are located under surface water bodies. Thus, there are approximately 51,061 acres of remaining hydric soils in Lake County, which are mapped in Figure 4.6. These areas need to be protected in order to purify water and channel runoff into streams, rivers, and aquifers. ### Flood Areas Floods are natural events that occur when the volume of water entering a lake, pond, river, or stream causes the waterbody to overflow its banks. Most flood events in Lake County are Lake County, Illinois triggered by periods of heavy rainfall and/or rapid snowmelt. While it is natural for water bodies to over-bank, the frequency and severity of flooding is increased due to human activity. Creation of impervious surfaces, installation of drain tiles and storm sewers, stream channelization, and loss of top soils and wetlands all increase the volume and speed of runoff reaching water bodies. Lake County has numerous areas of land that are partially or completely inundated with water during flood events. Flood areas include riverine floodplains, which occur along rivers, streams, lakes, and ponds, and non-riverine floodplains, which occur in depressional areas. Flood Areas in Lake County can be identified through several mechanisms including Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), floods of record identified in the Hydrologic Atlas published by the U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS), and local identification programs, including the Lake County Stormwater Management Commission’s Flood Hazard Mitigation Areas. These flood areas are shown on Figure 4.7. Mapped regulatory floodplains and floodways, as identified on FIRM maps, cover 52,100 acres in Lake County. Mapped regulatory floodplains are defined as the area of land that is inundated with water during 100 year storm events. Floodways are the channel and that portion of the floodplain that is adjacent to the channel that are particularly critical to storing and conveying flood discharges. The USGS Hydrologic Atlas (1963–1968) places 52,898 acres within areas inundated by historic floods of record. Most, but not all, of these areas are also located in regulatory floodplains and floodways. In addition, the Lake County Stormwater Management Commission has identified 410 areas that cover 5,700 acres of land with local drainage and flooding problems. Over half of these areas are outside of regulatory floodways and floodplains. All flood prone areas, with a tributary area of 100 acres or more, are regulated as floodplain, regardless if they are mapped by FEMA. A substantial portion of flood damage occurs outside of mapped regulatory floodplains and floodways. Changes in the frequency and severity (height) of flooding due to inappropriate development can result in increasing the size and height of the regulatory floodplain. Minimizing impervious surfaces and restoring prairies and wetlands throughout the watershed are essential to reducing the frequency and severity of flooding. Minimizing development in flood prone areas is essential for ensuring the safe conveyance of floodwaters and for protecting human life and property. ### Forests and Prairies Forests and prairies provide a habitat for plants and animals, protect soils, filter rainfall, buffer air and noise pollution, and provide scenic beauty. No geographic survey data exists regarding the extent of remaining native prairies or prairie remnants. Forested area was inventoried for preparation of the Lake County Forest Preserve District *Land Acquisition Plan, Part One, Land Classification and Site Suitability Systems* (Lake County Forest Preserve District 1989) based on 1985 and 1986 aerial photos. At that time, forested area in the County totaled 37,110 acres. ### Figure 4.6 ### Hydric Soils in Non-Built Up Areas <
> ### Figure 4.7 ### Surface Water and Flood Areas <
> Tracts of forested area ranged in size from less than one acre to over 1,000 acres. Of the total forested area, just under 22,000 acres was contained within tracts of 40 acres or larger; just under 9,100 acres was contained within tracts of 160 acres or larger. The 2000 Land Use Inventory identified 27,101 acres of Forest and Grassland, which are defined as areas with trees and grass cover that are not in agricultural use or within areas designated as public and private open space (such as Forest Preserves or State Parks). From this inventory it is not possible to separate forest areas from grassland areas. The definition of grassland areas is not the same as prairie. Forest and prairie areas are not included on the environmental inventory maps. This *Plan* contains a policy recommendation to map forest areas for future planning and open space acquisition efforts. ### Steep Slopes In Lake County, steep slopes are typically associated with water features. Disturbing these slopes can lead to loss of native vegetation, soil erosion, and, ultimately, reduced water quality (Lake County, 1994:9-3). Slopes of 8% and greater, as derived from United States Geologic Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Digital Elevation Models (DEMs), cover less than 4% of Lake County. These slopes are shown on Figure 4.8. The most notable steep slopes are the ravines located along the southern two-thirds of the County’s Lake Michigan shoreline. Other steep slopes occur along the County’s other lakes and streams. Although limited in geographic extent, steep slopes present a significant development constraint and should be protected from inappropriate development. ### Protected Open Space State, County, and local governments have protected over 34,500 acres of land, which is approximately 11% of the area of the County, for natural resources protection and enhancement. Existing protected open space, as shown in Figure 4.9, includes State Parks and State Natural Areas, Lake County Forest Preserves, Libertyville Township open space, and State Nature Preserves. The mapped open space does not include municipal and township parkland nor does it include private conservation land. Municipal and township parks are mapped and discussed in the Park and Recreation Section of Chapter 5, Infrastructure and Services. The state of Illinois has established Illinois Beach State Park on the shore of Lake Michigan and the Chain O’ Lakes State Park. Illinois Beach State Park contains 3,357 acres of land. Chain O’ Lakes State Park contains 3,125 acres of land, a small portion of which is in McHenry County. The state has also established Volo Bog, in Grant Township, and Red Wing Slough, in eastern Antioch Township. Each of these State Natural Areas contains over 700 acres. The Lake County Forest Preserve owns 23,039 acres of open space. Major properties, over 700 acres, include the Lakewood Preserve, Rollins Savanna, Wadsworth Savanna, Independence Grove, Van Patten Woods, Waukegan Savanna, and the Ryerson Woods Conservation Area. Lake County, Illinois ### Figure 4.8 ### Steep Slopes <
> Environmental Resources, Open Space, and Farmland Libertyville Township also has an active open space preservation program. The township has purchased 78 parcels of land and acquired conservation easements on an additional 13 parcels, thereby protecting 1,535 acres of open space. The township has acquired conservation easements on portions of two additional parcels of land, which are not mapped. An Illinois Nature Preserve is a high quality natural area that has been permanently protected by state law due to the rare plants, animals, or other features present. State Nature Preserves can be under public or private ownership. There are 28 State Nature Preserves located totally or partially within Lake County. These preserves contain nearly 5,200 acres of protected land, all of which are located on publicly owned land except for approximately 1,019 acres. Public access is not provided in State Nature Preserves that are under private ownership and may be restricted in State Nature Preserves that are owned and managed by public agencies. In addition to the open space included in the Environmental Resource Inventory map, local government agencies and not-for-profit conservation groups within the County are working to protect open space and environmental resources. Additional open space is also protected through deed-restrictions and set-asides required by the land development and subdivision process of Lake County and many municipalities. No comprehensive inventory exists of these areas, which contribute to the maintenance of perpetual open space in Lake County. This *Plan* contains a recommendation for mapping these areas. Beyond providing environmental resource protection, these areas also provide significant recreational and tourist opportunities. In 2000, Illinois Beach State Park had 2.5 million visitors, Chain O’ Lakes State Park had 1.3 million visitors, and the Volo Bog State Natural Area had 51,500 visitors. The Lake County Forest Preserves average 2.5 million visitors annually. These visitors contribute to the local economy, as discussed in Chapter 3, Employment and Economy. The conservation of open space by private landowners should be encouraged through conservation easements and not-for-profit organizations. Land purchased for open space by public agencies and private conservation organizations should be maintained for such uses. ### Aquifer Recharge Areas Aquifers are subsurface areas that store groundwater. Aquifers are important sources of water for human consumption, as described in Chapter 5, Infrastructure and Services. Aquifers are also an important source of base flow for rivers, lakes, and wetlands. Aquifer recharge is the replenishment of aquifers by water seeping from the land's surface into the groundwater. The water that recharges the aquifers comes from rain, snowmelt, and some lakes and rivers (NIPC, 2001:64). The recharge areas for Lake County’s deep bedrock aquifers, which are generally 750 to 1,549 feet deep, are in Wisconsin and McHenry, Boone, DeKalb, and Kane counties (Larsen, 1973:18). The County's shallow aquifer system, which is up to 749 feet deep, is recharged by local precipitation. The Illinois Groundwater Protection Act (415 ILCS 55/) required the Illinois Department of Natural Resources to conduct a statewide groundwater assessment. This assessment identified three high recharge areas in Lake County. These are the western edge of the County, the Des Plaines River, and Illinois Beach State Park. Aquifer recharge in the rest of Lake County is primarily moderate to moderately low. ### Figure 4.9 ### Protected Open Space <
> Detailed geologic mapping of aquifers and aquifer recharge areas is needed throughout the Great Lakes region. The U.S. Geological Survey along with the states of Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Michigan have formed the Central Great Lakes Geologic Mapping Coalition. The Coalition will identify the location of aquifer recharge areas and the shallow aquifers, provide the geologic information needed for modeling aquifer recharge, and provide information on the vulnerability of shallow aquifers to contamination (Berg et al., 1999:22, Table 3; 35, Table 7). Because of urban expansion and the resultant impacts on groundwater resources and wetlands, Lake County has been designated as one of the highest priority areas of the program. Mapping has been started for the northwestern two-thirds of Lake County. The Central Great Lakes Coalition's entire mapping program will take a minimum of 17 years to complete if adequately funded. Because Lake County is a high priority, maps of the County should be available in the next few years. Lake County and the municipalities must be prepared to act when the maps become available showing the priority recharge areas. Lake County and the municipalities may need to revise their comprehensive plans, zoning maps, and land development regulations. To help protect groundwater resources, the Water Supply section of Chapter 5, Infrastructure and Services, contains a policy recommendation that Consumptive Use Permits be required for wells that produce 100,000 gallons or more per day or 70 gallons per minute. The Consumptive Use permit will require analysis of the impacts of the proposed well on other existing wells and surface waters. ### Historic and Archaeological Resources Lake County’s historic and archaeological resources provide a context that can be used to guide current development and land use decisions. Historic preservation is a tool that can assist in building a desirable future by drawing from the community’s formative roots. The economic benefits of historic preservation can include: construction activity, an increase in property values, and revenue from tourism (Morris, 1992:1). Redevelopment of older areas reduces public costs by making more efficient use of existing infrastructure. It has also been found that providing incentives for rehabilitation projects that follow the principles of historic preservation can have a "catalytic effect" leading to the rehabilitation of additional properties (Morris, 1992:12). Redevelopment and infill development should be designed to be compatible with the context of a community’s historical development patterns (Morris, 1992:35-36). Identifying historic and archaeological sites in advance of construction allows the costs of mitigation to be considered in the project budget. Encountering a site after construction has started can be extremely expensive, and produce results that are not satisfactory to either the developer or the community. While usually associated with greenfield sites, archaeological sites might also exist beneath built-up, urban areas. This possibility has to be considered when infill or redevelopment projects are being planned, especially if state or federal funds are involved. Archaeological sites can range from Paleo-Indian prehistoric sites; to areas of contact between the historic Indian groups and the early French explorers and traders; to 20th century historical sites. Sites dating from the American settling of Lake County in the 1830s and ‘40s can include farmsteads, churches, bridges, water powered mills, transportation routes (trails, early roads, rail lines), quarries, water towers, spring houses, rural schools, and resorts. Many of the County's prehistoric and historical sites may have significance as landmarks at the local, state, or national Lake County, Illinois level. But there has been no known effort to proactively inventory all archaeological and historic sites in Lake County. The state has several statutes dealing with historic preservation. Among these are the “Illinois Historic Preservation Act” (20 ILCS 3410); the “Illinois State Agency Historic Resources Preservation Act” (20 ILCS 3420); and the “Archaeological and Paleontological Resources Protection Act” (20 ILCS 3435). As defined in the Historic Preservation Act, a Historic Place means “(1) any parcel or contiguous grouping of parcels of real estate under common or related ownership or control, where any significant improvements are at least 40 years old, or (2) any aboriginal mound, fort, earthwork, village, location, burial ground, historic or prehistoric ruin, mine case or other location which is or may be the source of important archeological data” [20 ILCS 3410/2(e)]. The Historic Preservation Act establishes the Illinois Register of Historic Places (20 ILCS 3410/6). Privately owned places can only be listed with the owner's consent (20 ILCS 3410/6). Following designation as a historic place, a notice is sent to the recorder of the county where the site is located (20 ILCS 3410/6). Once listed, the “Critical Historic Features” cannot be demolished without the approval of the Director of Historic Preservation and the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance (20 ILCS 3410/7). Owners of historic properties may be eligible for certain tax benefits. Through the Archaeological and Paleontological Resources Protection Act (20 ILCS 3435), the state “reserves to itself the exclusive right and privilege of regulating, exploring, excavating or surveying, through the Historic Preservation Agency, all archaeological and paleontological resources found upon or within any public lands” (20 ILCS 3435/1). Public land includes land owned by the state, a municipality, and units of local government [20 ILCS 3435/.02(e)]. Through this Act, county and municipality undertakings on public lands are required to protect historic resources. The Illinois State Agency Historic Resources Preservation Act (20 ILCS 3420) establishes “High Probability Areas” for archaeological resources. According to this Act, archaeological investigations are required for private undertakings in high probability areas unless the Director of Historic Preservation determines that an investigation is not necessary [20 ILCS 3420/6(c)]. Archaeological investigations can also be required for private undertakings when a known archaeological site is present on the property where the undertaking is proposed. Private undertakings that need state agency approval may be required to identify historic resources and evaluate the likelihood that the undertaking may have an adverse effect upon historic resources [20 ILCS 3420/4(a)]. In this Act, the term historic resource “means any property which is either publicly or privately held” and which is (1) listed, (2) eligible for listing, (3) has been nominated for listing, or (4) “meets one or more criteria for listing in the National Register as determined by the Director” or (5) “is listed in the Illinois Register of Historic Places” [20 ILCS 3420/3(c)(1-5)]. This *Regional Framework Plan* contains policy recommendations for establishing a countywide historic preservation program and adopting a procedure to inform the state Director of Historic Preservation of development activities that are proposed for high probability archaeological areas or that might adversely effect historic resources. Scenic Landscapes Scenic landscapes are areas that highlight the special natural, historic, and cultural features of a region. “Public perception of community character is based largely on what can be seen from an automobile” (Arendt, 1994:192). Therefore, scenic landscapes are often inventoried and protected as scenic corridors and vistas visible from public roads. Scenic corridors and vistas can be designated based on the remaining aesthetic quality of the visible landscape versus the extent to which development intrudes upon the traveler's enjoyment of the view. Scenic corridors provide an enjoyable and relaxing experience for travelers, while providing local communities with substantial benefits, such as higher property values and increased tourism revenue. Protecting scenic corridors and vistas from the effects of haphazard development allows a community to preserve its unique charm and attract positive growth to the area. Scenic corridors give communities an opportunity to protect working lands and recognize their aesthetic, cultural, and natural value. Communities often use scenic byway designations to protect and promote their natural beauty and distinctive character. Working landscapes frequently help to define the local sense of place. Communities are also using scenic byway designations to protect working lands and their visual character through acquiring scenic easements and community education. Lake County does not currently have an inventory of scenic landscapes. One of the recommendations of this *Plan* is to inventory scenic landscapes as a first step towards creating a program to protect the County’s scenic corridors and vistas. This inventory and program should be coordinated with municipalities and future historic and archaeological preservation programs. Priority Open Space A primary objective of this chapter is to identify and map areas that should be considered priorities for maintaining as open space and low intensity land uses. Based on input received from local, state, and federal environmental agencies,[^p21-3] a resource point system has been utilized to identify Priority Open Space areas. The resource scores, as modified based on input from the Lake County Regional Planning Commission, municipal, and township officials, are shown in Figure 4.10. Soil resources and constraints, in the form of Prime Agricultural Soils and Highly Erodable Land soils, are included in the Agricultural Protection section of this chapter. Resources for which no current inventory data are available, are shown on the table with a score of “N/A”. When inventories are available for these resources, they should be included on future Priority Open Space maps. Until such inventories are available, these resources should be [^p21-3]: County, state, and federal agencies represented at one or both of the meetings on Environmental Resources held in June and July 2001 include: Lake County Forest Preserve Lake County Health Department; Lakes Management Unit Lake County Management Services; Map Services Division Lake County Planning, Building and Development; Engineering and Environmental Services Division Lake County Soil and Water Conservation Service Lake County Stormwater Management Agency Illinois Department of Natural Resources U.S. Department of Agriculture; Natural Resource Conservation Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Lake County, Illinois considered based on detailed site inventories to be completed as individual properties are considered for development or preservation. This methodology is consistent with the approach recommended by the Natural Lands Trust (1997:3-3). The scores for resource areas have been aggregated for Public Land Survey quarter-quarter sections, which are approximately 40 acres in size. The quarter-quarter sections have been classified in order that one-third of the County is identified in each of the following categories: High Priority Open Space Areas; Moderate Priority Open Space Areas; and Limited Priority Open Space Areas. Open water, existing protected open space, and existing developed areas have been overlaid on the quarter-quarter sections to create the Priority Open Space Map, shown in Figure 4-11. #### Figure 4.10 #### Environmental Resource Priority Scores | Environmental Resource | Score | | :--- | :---: | | Illinois Natural Areas Inventory Sites | 10 | | T & E Species | 10 | | Steep Slopes (8% and greater) | 6 | | Forest and Prairie Areas | N/A | | Aquifer Recharge Areas (categories to be determined) | N/A | | Historic, Archaeological, And Scenic Resources | N/A | | **Surface Water** | | | High Value Aquatic Resource Streams | 10 | | Moderate Value Aquatic Resource Streams | 8 | | Other Streams | 4 | | Lakes and Ponds | 4 | | **Wetlands and Soils** | | | ADID Wetlands | 10 | | LCWI 20 acre and larger | 8 | | LCWI 5-20 acres | 6 | | LCWI 0-5 acres | 4 | | Hydric Soils 10 acres and larger | 4 | | Hydric Soils under 10 acres | 2 | | **Flood Areas** | | | Flood of Record | | | Floodplains and Floodways | 6 | | SMC Flood Hazard Mitigation Areas | | | **Protected Open Space** | | | State Parks and State Natural Areas | | | Lake County Forest Preserve Land | 6 | | Libertyville Township Open Space | | | Nature Preserves | 6 | Based on recommendations received from resource agencies, the Priority Open Space Map should be utilized for the following purposes: 1. Determine capacity of the County to accommodate additional population growth and economic development without encroaching on high priority open space areas. 2. Serve as the basis for developing a Future Land Use Map and policies that recognize environmental resources. 3. Serve as the basis for the policies for the protection and enhancement of natural resources. 4. Provide a tool for the preliminary screening of development projects to ensure the protection of on-site resources and the implementation of greenbelt corridors that link open space between individual development projects. 5. Provide guidance for the update of local comprehensive plans, including future land use maps and policies 6. Provide guidance for the acquisition of public open space for environmental protection and enhancement and recreational uses. 7. Serve as a tool for guiding the placement and expansion of public infrastructure to avoid encouraging inappropriate land development. Within high priority open space areas, the overall density and intensity of land use should be limited. A variety of methods should be employed to preserve and enhance the environmental qualities of these areas. Some areas identified as high priority open space may be appropriate for public acquisition or for protection through purchase of development rights or conservation easement programs. In other high priority open space areas, zoning and subdivision regulations can be used to direct the type and intensity of development and uses that are compatible with the environmental resources. Public agencies and private conservation organizations acquiring land must have funds available to adequately maintain the property to ensure the protection and enhancement of its desirable environmental characteristics. In areas identified as having moderate open space priority, the intensity of development can be higher. Areas identified as having limited open space priority should receive the highest intensity of development. These areas should accommodate the majority of the County’s forecast population and employment growth. The Priority Open Space Map has been utilized extensively in creation of the Future Land Use Map, as discussed in Chapter 9, Land Use. The Priority Open Space Map is intended as a future land use planning and open space preservation planning tool. This *Plan* does not anticipate the acquisition of all areas identified as High Priority Open Space as public open space. The Lake County Forest Preserve District is the principal agency acquiring land for environmental resource protection in Lake County. For the Forest Preserve to be successful in negotiating future land purchases, it cannot release details regarding its future land acquisition plans. The Forest Preserve District has adopted general goals for land acquisition. These goals include: 1. Protect Wildlife Habitat; 2. Preserve Wetlands, Prairies, and Forests; 3. Provide Trails, Greenways, and River/Lake Access; ### Figure 4.11 ### Priority For Open Space <
> 4. Protect Against Flooding; 5. Save Large Refuges; and 6. Expand Existing Preserves. The factors considered in identifying priority open space are generally consistent with the Forest Preserve District goals. ### Environmental Limitations Figure 4.12 contains an Environmental Limitations Map, showing the location of the most critical environmental resources. Severe Environmental Limitation areas and Moderate Environmental Limitation areas are also included on the Future Land Use Map, as discussed in Chapter 9, Land Use. Areas with Severe Environmental Limitations include Advanced Identification (ADID) Wetlands with 100-foot buffers, Floodways, and Nature Preserves. Areas with Moderate Environmental Limitations include floodplains, Floods of Record, SMC Flood Hazard Mitigation Areas, and Lake County Wetland Inventory (LCWI) wetlands. Areas with Severe Environmental Limitations are generally undevelopable. Areas with Moderate Environmental Limitations can only be developed if appropriate mitigation measures are provided. Chapter 9, Land Use, contains Goals and Policies to limit and guide development of Environmental Limitations areas. Areas with Severe Environmental Limitations and Moderate Environmental Limitations should be respected during the development process. Cluster development may be one method for protecting areas with environmental limitations, while accommodating desirable development. Regardless of how an area is shown on the Priority Open Space Map or the Environmental Limitation Map, individual environmental resources must be identified and protected through the development review and permitting processes. Public acquisition or conservation easements should be considered when the resource is unique or rare and permanent protection is desired. ### Farmland Preservation In 2001, the Lake County Board identified farmland protection as a high priority target issue. The County retained the services of the American Farmland Trust (AFT) to assist with development of this element of the Regional Framework Plan. The data and policy analysis contained in this section is largely derived from the resulting report, *On Thin Soil: The Uncertain Future of Agriculture in Lake County* (AFT, 2001). AFT concluded that saving farmland in Lake County will be a challenge, but it is possible. The report contains policy options and possibilities for protecting farmland as a resource (AFT,2001:15-22) and farming as an economic activity and way of life (AFT, 2001:22-27). The AFT report contains trend data for farmland and farming activities based on the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Census of Agriculture, other statistical sources, and data collected through two focus group meetings and telephone interviews conducted with farmers and farmland owners. One focus group was for traditional farmers, who produce cash grains and livestock. The other focus group was for non-traditional farmers including nursery and landscape operators, vegetable growers, and equestrians. Nineteen individuals participated in the two focus groups. AFT also conducted approximately 12 telephone interviews with farmland owners (AFT, 2001:9). Lake County, Illinois ### Farming Activities Between 1982 and 1997, the number of farms in Lake County decreased from 513 to 335, a drop of 35% (AFT, 2001:2). This decreasing number of farms is in keeping with national trends. Agriculture contributes $36 million to the Lake County economy (IMPLAN Multiplier Reports, 1998, as cited in AFT, 2001, Chart 1). The largest sector is greenhouse and nursery products with a total output of $21.6 million. The next largest sector is food and feed grains with a total output of just over $4 million. The total market value of Lake County agricultural products sold decreased from 1982 to 1987, but increased from 1987 to 1997 (Census of Agriculture as cited in AFT, 2001, Chart 3). The total market value of agricultural products sold was $28.94 million in 1987 and $32.25 million in 1997. Greenhouse and nursery products accounted for 58% of agricultural sales in 1997, up from 33% in 1982. Agriculture provides approximately 600 jobs in Lake County (IMPLAN Multiplier Reports, 1998 as cited in AFT, 2001, Chart 2). By way of comparison, Lake County’s total private sector employment in 1999 was over 305,000. (See Chapter 3, Economy and Employment.) According to IMPLAN Multiplier Reports for 1998, nearly half of Lake County’s agricultural jobs are in the greenhouse and nursery industry (as cited in AFT, 2001, Chart 2). Farm payroll in Lake County increased from 1982 to 1992, and then decreased from 1992 to 1997, when the total farm payroll was $7.54 million. Agricultural services employment increased steadily from 1,006 in 1982 to 3,381 in 1997, an increase of 236% (U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns, as cited in AFT, 2001, Chart 6). Agricultural services includes crop services, veterinary services, other animal services, and landscape and horticultural services. AFT concluded that the overall economic impact of agriculture in Lake County is small compared to other counties, such as Kane County, and small compared to other economic activities in the County (AFT 2000:3). The agricultural profile of Lake County is dominated by the growth of the nursery industry and landscape and horticultural services (AFT 2001:2). Nurseries, fruits and vegetables, and equestrian operations are the most viable agricultural activities in Lake County. ### Farmland The 1997 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Census of Agriculture, reported that Lake County had approximately 50,000 acres of remaining farmland. By way of comparison, the Lake County 2000 Land Use Inventory identified approximately 43,658 acres of land in agricultural use. According to the AFT report, between 1982 and 1997 the average size of existing farms decreased from 180 acres to 152 acres, a drop of 16%. The decreasing average farm size is a reversal of the national trend, which is for larger farms (AFT, 2001:2). The decreasing farm size in Lake County is attributable to the decline of cash grain and livestock operations and the rise of non-traditional agricultural activities including vegetable and nursery operations (AFT, 2001:2). The Agricultural Use Inventory map, shown in Figure 4.13, shows agricultural use areas based on the 2000 Land Use Inventory. This map also shows whether these areas have Prime Agricultural Soils, Highly Erodable Land soils, both (which is possible because some Prime Agricultural Soils are also highly erodable), or neither. ### Figure 4.12 ### Environmental Limitations <
> | | | | :--- | :--- | | ![Legend Color Box] Public Protected Conservation-Oriented Open Space
State Parks and State Natural Areas
Lake County Forest Preserves
Libertyville Township Open Space
Parks, Arboretums, and Botanical Gardens | ![Legend Color Box] Developed Area (2000) | | ![Legend Color Box] Severe Environmental Limitations
ADID Wetlands with 100 foot buffer
Floodways
Nature Preserves | ![Legend Line] Roads | | ![Legend Color Box] Moderate Environmental Limitations
Floodplains
Flood of Record
SMC Flood Hazard Mitigation Areas
LCWI Wetlands
(includes artificial and farmed wetlands) | ![Legend Line] Streams | | | ![Legend Color Box] Surface Water | | | ![Legend Symbol] Threatened and Endangered Species | Source: Lake County Geographic Information System Lake County, Illinois Prime Agricultural Soils have the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing food, feed, forage, fiber, and oilseed crops and is also available for these uses. Prime Agricultural Soils should be protected where possible for agricultural uses. Highly Erodable Land is defined as soil “that has, or that if used to produce an agricultural commodity, would have an excessive average annual rate of erosion in relation to the soil loss tolerance level...” (United States Food Security Act, 1985:4-2) The National Food Security Act Manual 3rd Edition (1996) requires that the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service determine the potential erodability of each soil map unit based on the Universal Soil Loss Equation, which includes consideration of rainfall and runoff; susceptibility of the soil to water erosion; and the combined effects of slope length and steepness. The soil map units are identified in the 1970 Soil Survey, Lake County, Illinois (USDA SCS, 1970). Conservation plans approved by the Soil and Water Conservation District are required for these areas or farmers will not qualify for many federal agricultural programs, under the 1985 Food Security Act. As mapped in Figure 4.13, 72% of the agricultural use area contains Prime Agricultural Soils. An additional 1% of the agricultural use area contains soils that are classified both as Prime Agricultural Soils and as Highly Erodable Land. These areas have excellent production potential, but must be appropriately managed. Nearly one-quarter (24%) of the agricultural use area is classified as Highly Erodable Land. The remaining 3% of the agricultural use area has neither Prime Agricultural Soils nor Highly Erodable Land. According to the AFT study much of the remaining farmland in Lake County is not owned by individuals that are farmers by profession (AFT 2001:5). The AFT identified 10 entities that combined owned approximately 20% of the remaining farmland in Lake County. Each of these entities owned at least 200 acres. This analysis included only parcels of 20 acres or more. Four of the seven owners AFT was able to contact indicated that they have at least some level of interest in keeping their land undeveloped (AFT 2001:6). ### Costs of Services In addition to retaining the opportunity for agriculture and providing desirable open space, the American Farmland Trust points out that farmland does not cost much for a local community to service. The American Farmland Trust has developed a methodology for communities to compare the cost of delivering public services to various land uses. With at least 83 of these “cost of community services studies” completed, AFT has concluded that, on average, farm and forestlands cost 36 cents for every dollar of property tax revenue generated. That compares to a cost of 27 cents for industrial/commercial property per dollar of revenue raised, and $1.15 of costs for residential housing for every dollar of tax revenue generated (AFT, 2001:4). In this manner, agricultural activity provides an opportunity for low-cost economic development. The AFT recommendations for protecting agricultural activities include the following: * Help keep the nurseries and other high-value agricultural operations viable. Start with a simple conversation with these growers to determine their needs and interests. High land prices may limit their expansion plans, but County government should do what it can to help sustain these businesses. ### Figure 4.13 ### Agricultural Use Inventory <
> Lake County, Illinois * Consider changing zoning and other regulations to make it easier for small farmers retailing to consumers to stay in business. These businesses provide fresh produce, bedding plants, and other agricultural products directly to consumers and their presence adds to the quality of life of Lake County. Their unique needs can and should be accommodated. * Give serious consideration to creating a farm heritage center in Lake County that reflects the community’s agricultural heritage but is run as a working commercial farm. Create a task force of interested parties to develop the details of this concept. * Commit more County park planning, land acquisition, and perhaps residential development planning to accommodate equestrian interests. Horses require large tracts of land for boarding, pasturing, and crops to feed them, and the equestrian community is committed to exploring ideas. Goals and policies based on the American Farmland Trusts recommendations for protecting farmland and farming activities are included in the Goals and Policies section of this chapter. ### Air Quality Air quality is measured based on two types of air pollutants: criteria pollutants and hazardous air pollutants. Criteria pollutants are six chemicals that occur frequently in ambient air and can injure human health, harm the environment, or cause property damage. These chemicals include carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has set health-based criteria as a basis for regulating these pollutants, hence the name “criteria pollutants” (www.epa.gov). Hazardous air pollutants (HAPS) cause cancer, birth defects, and other adverse effects to humans, as well as environmental damage. Compared to the six criteria pollutants, the number of HAPS is well over 100. The USEPA has not set health-based criteria for these pollutants. The Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN region is in violation of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), which are intended to protect the public health and welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of criteria pollutants. The region is classified as a “severe” non-attainment area for ozone (USEPA, 2004:1). Ozone, which is a criteria pollutant associated with smog, is formed when nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) react with sunlight. (IEPA, 2003:iii). According to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA), air quality trends for criteria pollutants are continuing to show a downward trend in Illinois. Statewide, ozone levels decreased 7% between 1991 and 2000 (IEPA, 2001:ix). “However, [in 2002] as a result of emissions and high temperatures experienced over a short period of time, exceedances were recorded at critical monitoring sites in the region and attainment was not reached.” (IEPA, 2003:iii). IEPA operates four ambient air quality monitoring stations in Lake County: Deerfield, Libertyville, Waukegan, and Zion. All four locations monitor ozone levels. The Zion location also monitors nitric oxide, nitrogen dioxide, and volatile organic carbon levels. In 2000, none of the four monitoring locations reported any exceedances of the 1-hour limit for ozone (IEPA, 2001:48). In 2002, however, the 1-hour standard for ozone was exceeded on one day at Waukegan and on three days at Zion. In addition, the new 8-hour limit for ozone, which is being implemented by the USEPA, was exceeded on five days at Libertyville, on seven days at Waukegan, and on nine days at Zion. The Air Quality Index (AQI) is the national standard method for reporting daily air pollution levels for the six criteria pollutants (IEPA, 2001:15). The air quality descriptions include: Good, Moderate, Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups, Unhealthy, Very Unhealthy, and Hazardous. In 2000, the AQI index for Lake County was Good 96% and Moderate 4% of days (IEPA, 2001:19). In 2002, the AQI index for Lake County was Good 80%, Moderate 17%, Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups 2%, and Unhealthy 1% of days (IEPA, 2001:19). Lake County and municipal officials should carefully review future air quality reports to determine if the spikes in ozone pollution in 2002 indicate a downward trend or one-time anomaly. The state of Illinois has adopted a State Implementation Plan, which identifies programs to reduce emissions that lead to the formation of ground-level ozone pollution in the region. In order to address mobile source emissions, the Chicago Area Transportation Study (CATS), which is the region’s Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), is required to undertake conformity studies for transportation improvement plans and programs. Because the USEPA has not set health-based criteria for hazardous air pollutants, no official air quality index is available for this type of pollution. The not-for-profit Environment Defense Fund has ranked counties based on each county’s “added cancer risk from hazardous air pollutants”. According to its analysis, Lake County ranks among the worst 10% of all counties in the U.S. for added cancer risk from hazardous air pollutants. This ranking is based on exposure estimates derived from 1996 emissions data. “There are important uncertainties associated with using models to predict current air quality. Scorecard risk estimates are based on EPA exposure estimates and provide a perspective on the magnitude and sources of hazardous air pollution problems. They are not definitive evaluations of health risk in a particular locale” (http://www.scorecard.org). In the Chicago Metropolitan Area non-attainment area, mobile sources (on-road and off-road) contribute 83% of the total anthropogenic ozone precursor emissions on a typical summer day, based on 1996 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency data. Mobile sources also make up 92% of the added cancer risk due to exposure to hazardous air pollutants in Lake County, based on the Environment Defense Fund analysis (http://www.scorecard.org). Improved land use planning is necessary for avoiding worsening air pollution from mobile sources. Chapter 7, Transportation, and Chapter 9, Land Use, of this *Plan* contain recommendations for creating an efficient land use/transportation pattern and targeting development and redevelopment activities in transit and employment centers, where it should be designed to encourage walking, bicycling, and transit usage. ### Goals and Policies[^p31-4] #### 4.1 Goal: Preserve and enhance the County’s environmental resources including high quality wetlands, prairies, and forests and protect the County’s wildlife habitat. [^p31-4]: As stated in Chapter 1, Introduction, a Goal is “the desired result to be achieved by implementing the *Plan*;” and a Policy is “a general method or action designed to achieve a goal.” 4.1.1 Policy: Protect and enhance high quality habitat necessary for the survival of a diversity of plant and animal species. 4.1.2 Policy: Focus environmental resource and open space protection efforts in areas identified on the Priority For Open Space Map as High Priority For Open Space. 4.1.3 Policy: Encourage government agencies and private conservation organizations to purchase and/or acquire conservation easements in areas that contain exceptional or unique environmental resources. 4.1.4 Policy: Within unincorporated areas identified as High Priority For Open Space and Moderate Priority For Open Space, designate future land uses that limit the overall density and intensity of development and that are compatible with the protection and enhancement of environmental resources. 4.1.5 Policy: To the fullest extent possible development should occur within areas identified on the Priority Open Space Map as Built-Up or Limited Priority For Open Space. 4.1.6 Policy: Within incorporated municipalities and areas identified as Built-Up or Limited Priority For Open Space designate future land use areas with development intensities and densities sufficient to support new and improved transit options and to accommodate projected population and employment growth through 2020, in a manner consistent with local planning objectives and this *Regional Framework Plan*. ### 4.2 Goal: Encourage the interconnection of public open space, private open space, and greenways and trails to create landscape linkages that provide corridors for wildlife and recreational opportunities. 4.2.1 Policy: Encourage the Lake County Forest Preserve, Lake County Stormwater Management Commission, municipal, township, state, federal, and private conservation organizations to coordinate and maximize their land acquisitions and provide landscape linkages where appropriate. 4.2.2 Policy: Encourage local governments to require that open space protected through the development review process align with existing and potential adjacent open space and trails. 4.2.3 Policy: Encourage local governments to require developers of large parcels to provide public access easements on areas identified as open space via deed restrictions or homeowners association ownership. 4.2.4 Policy: Encourage the use of cluster development (conservation subdivision) design to retain open space within developing areas. 4.2.5 Policy: Recognizing the need of the Lake County Forest Preserve, state of Illinois, and federal resource agencies to act quickly when land becomes available and to negotiate purchases in confidence; municipalities and preservation agencies should proactively coordinate their long range plans to avoid conflicts regarding future land use, acquisitions, and annexations. ### 4.3 Goal: Protect existing water resources and water quality including lakes, streams, floodplains, and wetlands, from detrimental and unnecessary modification so that their beneficial functions are maintained and public expenditures and damages are minimized (SMC, 2002). 4.3.1 Policy: Identify, map, and prioritize all components of the natural hydrologic system. Select critical components for a high level of public protection, enhancement and management. 4.3.2 Policy: Establish a financial mechanism and program to acquire remaining undeveloped natural waterways and hydric soils areas through the tools of fee simple purchase, conservation easements, transfer of development rights and developer dedications. 4.3.3 Policy: Coordinate all federal, state, local, and private non-profit natural resource groups and their activities toward mutual goals and consensus priorities utilizing a shared GIS database and environmental restoration models as the organizational platform. 4.3.4 Policy: Lake County will promote the use of Best Management Practices to continue to improve the quality of effluent and other discharges into surface water. ### 4.4 Goal: Reduce or mitigate the environmentally detrimental effects of existing and future runoff in order to improve and maintain water quality and protect water related environments. 4.4.1 Policy: Require full, functional mitigation for all physical and environmental impacts resulting from disturbance or alterations to water resources. 4.4.2 Policy: Utilize natural systems and solutions for water quality and quantity mitigation in preference to structural improvements. ### 4.5 Goal: Establish comprehensive watershed management plans within each sub-watershed, which quantify, plan for, and manage stormwater flows, absorption, and transpiration within and among the jurisdictions in those watersheds. 4.5.1 Policy: Require all development plans, Facility Planning Area (FPA) Amendments and engineering plans to be consistent with the watershed’s resources and capacity limitations. 4.5.2 Policy: Watershed plans shall be developed at a level of detail to sufficiently guide member jurisdictions in development location, land use intensity and design decisions so that the natural hydrologic system is not overwhelmed and degraded. Lake County, Illinois ### 4.6 Goal: Identify and preserve historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources and scenic corridors and vistas in Lake County, in cooperation with municipal and other local government agencies. 4.6.1 Policy: Assemble the available information on known historic, archaeological, and paleontological sites in Lake County, in cooperation with municipal and other local government agencies. 4.6.2 Policy: Inventory scenic landscapes and corridors, in cooperation with municipal and other local government agencies. 4.6.3 Policy: Develop a procedure for informing the State Director of Historic Preservation of public or private undertakings 1) that are proposed for high probability archaeological areas; or 2) that might adversely effect historic resources, in accordance with Illinois Statutes. 4.6.4 Policy: Create a historical preservation commission to develop a countywide historic preservation program and to advise the County Board, municipalities, and regional organizations on historic preservation issues. ### 4.7 Goal: Protect the aquifer recharge areas and groundwater resources of Lake County and the region. 4.7.1 Policy: Join with other governmental agencies to petition for state and federal funding for research to determine the amount of water available in the deep bedrock and shallow aquifer systems that serve Lake County. 4.7.2 Policy: Join with other government agencies to fund studies and develop a monitoring program to discover the impacts of water withdrawals on aquifers and surface waters. 4.7.3 Policy: Join with other governments to provide funding to identify capture zones around public water wells and map groundwater contamination potential throughout the region. 4.7.4 Policy: Prepare local aquifer recharge areas and groundwater protection plans that consider, among other factors, land use and zoning, open space preservation, and Best Management Practices. ### 4.8 Goal: Preserve select remaining farmland. 4.8.1 Policy: Promote new and expanded farming activities, including equestrian operations and businesses that provide fruits and vegetables, landscaping materials, and other agricultural products directly to consumers. 4.8.2 Policy: Create a public-private task force to develop the concept of the model “working” farm that incorporates the heritage of farming in Lake County as well as the latest farming methods. 4.8.3 Policy: Invite a broad range of persons and businesses involved in the growing and raising of agriculture products to analyze the impacts of County regulations Regional Framework Plan on farming operations. The main purpose would be to identify County regulations that make it difficult to start, expand, or continue agriculture operations. 4.8.4 Policy: Develop a working relationship with conservation trusts and open space preservation organizations to potentially establish partnerships to protect farmers who want to keep farming but need financial incentives. 4.8.5 Policy: Study other alternatives as time and resources permit to help retain the farming, open space, and scenic vistas for future generations. 4.8.6 Policy: Commit more park planning, land acquisition, and residential development planning to accommodate equestrian interests. 4.8.7 Policy: Lake County will consider providing funding for farmland preservation. ### 4.9 Goal: Eliminate deficiencies in existing environmental inventory maps by identifying and mapping forest lands, additional resource protection open space, aquifer recharge areas, and historic and scenic resources in Geographic Information System formats for inclusion on future environmental inventory maps. 4.9.1 Policy: Form cooperative arrangements with the Lake County Management Services Department and federal, state, and local resource agencies to inventory and map forest lands for inclusion on future environmental inventory maps. 4.9.2 Policy: Form cooperative arrangements with the Lake County Management Services Department and federal, state, and local resource agencies to inventory and map resource protected open space areas, including municipal and township open space, private conservation areas, and deed restricted open space for inclusion on future environmental inventory maps. ### 4.10 Goal: Improve air quality in Lake County to consistently exceed federal standards. 4.10.1 Policy: Develop a land use pattern and other policies that provide more transportation options and decrease trip lengths in order to reduce the growth in traffic congestion, fuel consumption, and air pollution. 4.10.2 Policy: Review the feasibility of replacing County vehicles with high efficiency, low emission vehicles. 4.10.3 Policy: Promote public awareness of air pollution problems and encourage a shift from less efficient, more polluting vehicles, toward more efficient, less polluting vehicles. **Sources** American Farmland Trust (AFT), 2001, *On Thin Soil: The Uncertain Future of Agriculture in Lake County*, Verona, WI Lake County, Illinois Arendt, Randall, 1994, *Rural By Design: Maintaining Small Town Character*, Planners Press, Chicago, IL Berg, Richard C., 2001 (December 4), e-mail from Dr. Richard C. Berg, Illinois State Geological Survey and project chief of the Central Great Lakes Geologic Mapping Coalition Program Berg, Richard C., Ned K. Bleuer, Berwyn E. Jones, Kevin A. Kincare, Richard R. Pavey, and Byron D. Stone, 1999, Mapping the Glacial Geology of the Central Great Lakes Region in Three Dimensions: A Model for State-Federal Cooperation, U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 99-349 Consensus Plan Committee, 1998, *A Consensus Plan for Enhancing & Preserving Lake County’s Quality of Life*, Lake County, Waukegan, IL Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA), 2001, *Illinois Annual Air Quality Report 2000*, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Air, Springfield, IL Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA), 2003, *Illinois Annual Air Quality Report 2002*, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Air, Springfield, IL Illinois State Geological Survey, 1998, *Erosion and Accretion Trends Along the Lake Michigan Shore at North Point Marina and Illinois Beach State Park*, Champaign, IL Lake County Department of Communications, 2000, *Lake County Resident Transportation Survey*, Lake County Department of Communications, Waukegan, IL Lake County Forest Preserve District, 1989, *Land Acquisition Plan, Part One, Land Classification and Site Suitability Systems*, Lake County Forest Preserve District, Libertyville, IL Lake County Stormwater Management Commission (SMC), 2002, *Lake County Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan Draft* Larsen, Jean I., 1973, Geology for Planning in Lake County, Illinois, Illinois State Geological Survey, Circular 481, Urbana IL. McHarg, Ian, *Design With Nature*, 1992, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New York, NY Morris, Marya, 1992, Innovative Tools for Historic Preservation, National Trust for Historic Preservation and American Planning Association, Planning Advisory Service Report Number 436, Washington DC. Natural Lands Trust, 1997, *Growing Greener: A Conservation Planning Workbook for Municipal Officials in Pennsylvania*, Natural Lands Trust, Media, PA Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission (NIPC), 2001 (September), Strategic Plan for Water Resource Management. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1970, *Soil Survey Lake County, Illinois.* U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004, Green Book, printed from Internet on April 23, 2004, http:// www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/onc.html