Landscape and Ecological Engineering

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 165–174 | Cite as

Exploring green infrastructure benefits at house and neighborhood scale: case study of Illinois, USA

  • Jinki Kim


Recently, the green infrastructure (GI) concept has been adopted by many cities for stormwater management even though doubt still remains as to whether it can be fully embedded into planning and design. As many researchers have stated, GI planning has been discussed as offering a number of broad benefits in ecological, economic, and social spheres. The aim of this study is to examine the benefits of GI which can be used at various ranges of scale to support the principles of low impact development (LID). Case studies of two different scales, site scale and neighborhood scale, have shown ecological, social, and economic benefits of GI. The projects include GI elements and LID strategies such as green roof, rain barrels, porous pavement, rain garden, gravel grass, vegetated swales, and retention basins. The result indicates that GI elements are effective in detaining stormwater and reducing the amount of runoff. Native prairie grasses, sedges, and plantings also improved habitat value and led to a noticeable increase in birds, bees, and butterflies. The GI project provided outdoor activities, promoted social interaction, and showed a positive effect on economic spheres as well. Quantification of these benefits is important for landscape architects, planners, and policy makers because it can provide better strategies for GI planning.


Green infrastructure LID Stormwater management GI benefits 


  1. Ahern J (2007) Green infrastructure for cities: the spatial dimension. IWA, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Armson D, Stringer P, Ennos AR (2013) The effect of street trees and amenity grass on urban surface water runoff in Manchester. Urban For Urban Green 12(3):282–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barbour MT, Gerritsen J, Snyder BD, Stribling JB (2008) Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and wadeable rivers: periphyton, bethic macroinvertebrates, and fish, second edition. EPA 841-B-99-002. US Environmental Protection Agency; Office of Water, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  4. Benedict MA, McMahon ET (2006) Green infrastructure: linking landscapes and communities. Island, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  5. Branas CC, Cheney RA, MacDonald JM, Tam VW, Jackson TD, Ten Havey TR (2011) A difference-in-differences analysis of health, safety, and greening vacant urban space. Am J Epidemiol 174(11):1296–1306CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. CDM (2008) Rapid bioassessment of Boneyard Creek for phase 2. Boneyard Creek Improvements, City of ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  7. Cao X, Onishi A, Chen J, Imura H (2010) Quantifying the cool island intensity of urban parks using ASTER and IKONOS data. Landsc Urban Plan 96(4):224–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cellini J (2013) Annual monitoring report for the Boneyard Creek project site in Champaign, Illinois (AES Project #12-0248). Applied Ecological Services, Inc., West Dundee, ILGoogle Scholar
  9. Center for Neighborhood Technology (CNT) (2010) The value of green infrastructure—a guide to recognizing its economic, environmental and social benefits. Center for Neighborhood Technology, Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  10. Coley RL, Sullivan WC, Kuo FE (1997) Where does community grow?: the social context created by nature in urban public housing. Environ Behav 29(4):468–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coutts C, Horner M, Chapin T (2010) Using geographical information system to model the effects of green space accessibility on mortality in Florida. Geocarto Int 25(6):471–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davis AP, Shokouhian M, Sharma H, Minami C, Winogradoff D (2003) Water quality improvement through bioretention: lead, copper, and zinc removal. Water Environ Res 75(1):73–82CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Econsult Corporation (2009) Commercial corridors: a strategic investment framework for Philadelphia. Econsult Corporation, Philadelphia, PAGoogle Scholar
  14. ECONorthwest (2007) The economics of low-impact development: a literature review. ECONorthwest, Eugene, ORGoogle Scholar
  15. Fjørtoft I, Sageie J (2000) The natural environment as a playground for children. Landscape description and analyses of a natural playscape. Landsc Urban Plan 48:83–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gaffin SR, Rosenzweig C, Khanbilvardi R, Parshall L, Mahani S, Glickman H et al (2008) Variations in New York City’s urban heat island strength over time and space. Theor Appl Climatol 94:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hansmann R, Hug S-M, Seeland K (2007) Restoration and stress relief through physical activities in forests and parks. Urban For Urban Green 6(4):213–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heckert M, Mennis J (2012) The economic impact of greening urban vacant land: a spatial difference-in-differences analysis. Environ Plan A 44(12):3010–3027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kuo FE, Sullivan WC (2001) Environment and crime in the inner city: does vegetation reduce crime? Environ Behav 33(3):343–367Google Scholar
  20. Kuo FE, Sullivan WC, Coley RL, Brunson L (1998) Fertile ground for community: inner-city neighborhood common spaces. Am J Commun Psychol 26(6):823–851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McPherson EG, Simpson JR, Xiao Q, Wu C (2011) Million trees Los Angeles canopy cover and benefit assessment. Landsc Urban Plan 99(1):40–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mell IC (2008) Green Infrastructure: concepts and planning. Forum ejournal 8:69–80Google Scholar
  23. Mentens J, Raes D, Hermy M (2006) Green roofs as a tool for solving the rainwater runoff problem in the urbanized 21st century? Landsc Urban Plan 77(3):217–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nowak DJ, Crane DE, Stevens JC (2006) Air pollution removal by urban trees and shrubs in the United States. Urban For Urban Green 4:115–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Onishi A, Cao X, Ito T, Shi F, Imura H (2010) Evaluating the potential for urban heat-island mitigation by greening parking lots. Urban For Urban Green 9:323–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Parsons R, Tassinary LG, Ulrich RS, Hebl MR, Grossman-Alexander M (1998) The view from the road: implication for the stress recovery and immunization. J Environ Psychol 18(2):113–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wise P (2014) 2014 campus bicycle plan. University of Illinois Facilities & Services, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  28. Xiao Q, McPherson EG, Simpson JR, Ustin SL (1998) Rainfall interception by Sacramento’s urban forest. J Arboric 24(4):235–244Google Scholar


  1. Center for Neighborhood Technology (CNT). Green Values National Stormwater Management Calculator. Accessed 30 Apr 2017
  2. Chicago Metro District Water Schedule of Rates. Accessed 5 Dec 2016
  3. Jolley T (2015) Flooding complaints on the rise in Champaign. Accessed 30 Apr 2017
  4. Marcus de la fleur (2005) One drop at a time—new resourceful paradigms at 168 Elm Ave. Elmhurst, Illinois. Accessed 6 Mar 2017
  5. The County of DuPage Stormwater Management Operations & Maintenance. Accessed 5 Dec 2016
  6. United States Department of Transportation (2010) Carbon sequestration pilot program: estimated land available for carbon sequestration in the national highway system. Accessed 15 May 2016
  7. United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) (2016) What is green infrastructure? Accessed 15 May 2016

Copyright information

© International Consortium of Landscape and Ecological Engineering and Springer Japan KK 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kongju National UniversityGongjuRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations