BEAVER CREEK WATERSHED GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN, Executive Summary

Beaver Creek Watershed GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE plan prepared by Prof. Mark DeKay & Prof. Tracy Moir-McClean Green Vision Studio College of Architecture and Design University of Tennessee, Knoxville GIS project manager/cartographer Andrew Wunderlich GIS analyst/cartographer research team Kristian Dennis Joshua Shinn Kari Fellers sponsored by Beaver Creek Watershed Task Force executive committee: Roy Arthur Tom McDonough Tim Gangaware Karen Nolt Chris Granju Stefanie Farrell with support from New thinking and new settlement patterns can provide for development, stewardship, and rich community. Tennessee Valley Authority Knox County Stormwater Department Knox Land and Water Conservancy The University of Tennessee, Knoxv illle ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Cover Image by Andrew Wunderlich View of the Beaver Creek Watershed, looking up the valley, from southwest to northeast. Proposed communities surrounding town and village centers are shown in gray-blue. Proposed stewardship corridors network is shown in green. Creeks and water are shown in blue. The Beaver Creek Green Infrastructure Plan is sponsored by the Beaver Creek Task Force. Partners in the BCTF include: • Beaver Creek Watershed Association • CAC AmeriCorps • City of Knoxville, Tennessee • Hallsdale-Powell Utility District • Knox County, Tennessee • Knoxville-Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission • Natural Resource Conservation District • Knox County Soil Conservation District • KGIS • Tennessee Valley Authority • Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation – Division of Water Pollution Control • Knoxville Early Action Compact • Tennessee Department of Agriculture • University of Tennessee Energy, Environment, and Resources Center • United States Geological Survey • West Knox Utility District Roy Arthur, Knox County Watershed Coordinator, was responsible for project oversight. The iscal agent is Knox Land and Water Conservancy. Funding is from Knox County, the University of Tennessee, the authors, and TVA. Thanks to our expert advisors and resource people: • Mary Halley, AMEC • Stefanie Farrell, Hallsdale Powell Utility • Liz Bouldin, TVA • Dr. John Schwartz, UT Civil and Environmental Engineering • Mike Carberry, MPC • Daniel Horne, Natural Resources Conservation Service • Lisa Huff, TDEC Natural Heritage Program • Wayne Schacher, Natural Resources Services 2 Copyright © 2006 Mark DeKay & Tracy Moir-McClean. All rights reserved. Other than use directly by the Beaver Creek Task Force Executive Committee, no part of this report may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage or retrieval) without permission in writing from the authors. Legal Disclaimer This report has been developed at the University of Tennessee’s College of Architecture and Design to provide conceptual planning and urban design guidance. Although every effort has been made to insure the accuracy of the data and methods presented, we can not insure this material to be free of errors. None of the materials presented in this report are intended as detailed design or engineering advice. We recommend consulting qualiied professionals for detailed advice on speciic project design and implementation. Contact Information Mark DeKay, associate professor Tracy Moir-McClean, associate professor Green Vision Studio College of Architecture and Design University of Tennessee 1715 Volunteer Boulevard Knoxville, TN 37996 865-974-9667 [email protected] [email protected] B E AV E R C R E E K WAT E R S H E D G R E E N I N F R A S T R U C T U R E P L A N CONTENTS A B C 4 BACKGROUND & CURRENT CONDITIONS 10 D PROTECTING THE WATER NETWORK 36 G CONSERVATION EASEMENTS & PROGRAMS 70 Objectives 11 Subwatersheds & Basins 37 Conservation/Greenway Easements 71 What is Green Infrastructure? 11 Existing Water Features 39 Grassland and Farm Preservation Programs 73 Driv ing Issues 12 Water Feature Buffers 39 Conclusions 75 General Methodology 12 Process for Creating Water Buffers 41 Feature Buffer Details 44 Conclusions 45 THE LAND & ITS SETTLEMENT PATTERNS 14 Landform Elevation 15 Landform & Slope 17 Existing Forest 17 Existing Land Use 17 Existing Development Intensity 17 Terrain & Settlement 19 Neighborhoods & Centers 25 Conclusions 25 THE OPEN SPACE NETWORK E COMPOSITE PATTERNS: GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE H 46 CONCLUSIONS 76 New Perspectives, New Solutions 77 Major Findings from the Watershed Assessment Report 78 79 Green Infrastructure in Beaver Creek 47 The Structure of Green Infrastructure 47 Major Recommendations from the Stormwater Master Plan Elements of the Network 48 Lessons Learned in This Study 79 A Ridge and Valley Stewardship Network 48 Process for Creating the Stewardship Network 49 New Spatial Patterns for the Beaver Creek Watershed 80 Preliminary Parcel Assessments 51 Next Steps 82 Conclusions 51 Final Thoughts 84 26 F A VISION FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT 54 Planning Open Space 27 Developed Open Space 29 Three Big Ideas & One Underlying Perspective 55 Existing Neighborhood Parks Catchments 29 Intentions & Design Patterns 57 Undeveloped Open Space 29 Proposed Town, Village, & Neighborhood Centers 58 Identifying & Valuing Open Space 31 Proposed Future Settlement Pattern 60 Species Richness 31 Conservation Neighborhood Suitability 62 Land Value for Wildlife Habitat 31 A Vision for Developed Open Space 62 Agricultural Land Value 31 Proposed Parks & Soft Transit Net 65 Habitat Value vs. Agricultural Land Value 35 Conclusions 69 Conclusions 35 B E AV E R C R E E K WAT E R S H E D G R E E N I N F R A S T R U C T U R E P L A N CONTENTS Executive Summary 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY es View of the Beaver Creek Watershed, looking down the valley, from southwest to northeast. Proposed communities surrounding town and village centers are shown in gray-blue. Proposed stewardship corridors network is shown in green. Creeks and water are shown in blue. 4 Beaver Creek Green Infrastructure: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY sum EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Objectives This plan uses the green infrastructure approach: • To help protect and restore naturally functioning ecosystems; • To propose solutions that can improve water quality and mitigate looding; • To enhance recreation opportunities; and • To provide a framework for future development. Some of its further objectives are: • To identify ways to connect communities and neighborhoods; • To identify conservation buffers for riparian zone protection, lood mitigation, wetland protection, and habitat value, in support of future easements; • To identify lands for greenway development; and • To identify lands with signiicant historical, recreational, or visual value. What Is Green Infrastructure? Green Infrastructure is the supporting systems the landscape provides for a settlement— an interconnected system of natural areas and other open spaces managed for the beneits to people and the environment. This system interconnects elements of the Driving Issues in Beaver Creek The Beaver Creek watershed has a history of impaired water quality and looding of the valley loor. It is one of the most rapidly developing areas in Knox County. The creek is on the 303(d) list maintained by the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), which indicates that it violates water quality standards and is too polluted to support many of its designated uses. Beaver Creek is a priority watershed for riparian zone management and protection. Knox County is classiied by the EPA as a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) “Phase II” stormwater community (successor program to the Clean Water Act), which requires plans to be developed to address surface water pollution. The Beaver Creek Green Infrastructure Plan is a pilot project that anticipates a government response to Phase II requirements. Rapid, sprawling, unplanned low-density residential development and corridor commercial development are driving open-space loss, habitat fragmentation, and the degradation of the scenic character and rural lifestyle the area once enjoyed. Method Our approach can be described as a knowledgeinformed, analysis-driven, synthetic, and creative landscape design approach to planning issues. In very Beaver Creek Green Infrastructure: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY broad terms, we have conducted this study in stages of documentation, analysis, generation, synthesis, prioritization, and design. B. THE LAND & ITS SETTLEMENT PATTERNS In this section we examine basic patterns of the land that inluence open space and development: terrain and slope, forest cover, and historic and present settlement patterns in the watershed. Landform Elevation The spirit of the Beaver Creek Watershed is heavily dependent on its relationship with its unique landscape. The watershed’s landform presents several potential issues that inluence how people can settle in it: • Steep slopes with thin clay soils, subject to landslides and erosion, particularly if tree cover is removed. • Sinkholes, which are collapsed caves in limestone. • Limited options for locating transport routes. • Limited lat land, which increases pressure for development of farmland. This also leads to a dispersed urban pattern with large intervening areas of steep undeveloped land. D R IV IN G ISSU ES • • • • Plan-initiating Issues Increased Flooding Poor Water Quality State “303d List” of Polluted Streams Conservation Easements • • • • Related Issues Sprawl Open Space Loss Habitat Fragmentation Degrading Rural Character EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. BACKGROUND AND CURRENT CONDITIONS natural and cultural infrastructure elements. Green Infrastructure includes natural areas, recreational places, infrastructure elements, heritage lands, and hazard areas. Existing Forest Continuous forest corridors remain on the ridges, but development on the valley loor has signiicantly reduced the streamside forest. The natural land cover in this region is dense forest, which once characterized the Beaver Valley. However, in the Beaver Creek Watershed, continuous forest corridors remain only on the ridges, while develop- es Good planning can reduce current problems and avoid creating many new ones. This project develops a plan for the Beaver Creek Watershed’s green infrastructure, incorporating smart growth and smart conservation concepts. 5 BASIC METHOD OUTLINE 1) DOCUMENT existing green infrastructure networks. 2) ANALYZE each system to understand the issues. 3) GENERATE “corridor” proposals for ridge preservation, water feature protection, and heritage preservation. 4) SYNTHESIZE these into a composite stewardship pattern. 5) PRIORITIZE land for conservation programs. 6) DESIGN proposals within a conservation framework: • new and strengthened settlement centers • locations for conservation neighborhoods • locations for density gradients of settlement. DESIGN a network of parks and greenways linking recreation land, centers, and communities. ment on the valley loor has signiicantly reduced the streamside forest. Even these ridge forests are broken by many roads. Continued deforestation results in multi-million dollar inancial consequences, as well as quality-of-life consequences. In particular, loss of streamside forest contributes to looding and degrades water quality and habitat in streams. Deforestation on slopes leads to erosion and possible landslides. Loss of trees anywhere in the watershed increases local temperatures, energy use, and rainfall runoff volume. Existing Development Much of the Beaver Creek Watershed is suburbanized already. Look south to North Knoxville to see the future of business-as-usual development in Beaver Valley. Sprawl covers former farms. There are no towns and no villages, only strip commercial. From south to north, moving from Knoxville to north county fringes, unplanned suburban development is inversely proportional to agricultural land use. Over time, the commercial strip and the single family, low-density subdivisions are replacing rural farms and towns. Communities are losing their identity. The green farmland residents care about is disappearing. New development is universally of the sprawl type. Commercial development is mostly automobile-oriented strip-type. Neighborhoods & Centers Conclusions Out-of-control “sprawl” is merging the formerly distinct communities of Gibbs, Halls, Powell, Karns, and Solway. The new I-475 exits to the valley will accelerate this growth. The area’s scenic beauty and rural landscape heritage is disappearing as farms convert to subdivisions. New residences are dispersed at low density, which is an expensive way to build. Commercial areas are located along highways. Everyone must drive or be driven, and no one can walk or bike. Due to this pattern of development, trafic is worse every year. es Evaluation of Existing Parks and Greenways Strengths • Good access to active recreation opportunities. • Schools and libraries are linked to parks. • Schools have sidewalks. • Greenway segments are well-located. Weaknesses • No pedestrian network. • Parks and greenways are unevenly distributed. • Many new “close-to-home” parks are needed. GOALS FOR UNDEVELOPED OPEN SPACE • Identify Conservation Land: To find the best places for conservation and development. • Protect the Public: To maintain high healthsafety-welfare value land, maximizing its contribution. • Save for the Future: To “bank” good farm land for growing food locally in the future. • Foster Local Identity: To separate communities and preserve rural heritage. • Weaving Networks: To plan for a framework of heritage land and environmentally valuable land in an interconnected system. C. THE OPEN SPACE NETWORK Planning Open Space If a community wants to grow while maintaining a high quality of community health, safety, and welfare, it needs to identify lands that contribute to community values. Beyond identifying land, the community must strategize to maintain these lands in an undeveloped or lightly developed state and work to connect these lands into an Open Space Network. An open space network is an interconnected pattern of open space elements (parks, greenways, forests, wetlands, etc.) that allows the system to function in an integrated way. These elements must be interconnected so that people, water, and wildlife can move and low between destinations as needed. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This analysis shows that the Beaver Creek Watershed’s community structure follows none of contemporary planning’s best practices. Currently, shopping, home, work, and play are all in different low-density zones, and development prac- tices rely on everyone driving to everything all the time. Neighborhoods are nowhere near the services these people need. All commercial development is linear and auto-oriented. Habitat Land and Farm Land We have analyzed the land for its value as wildlife habitat and for farming, along with a comparative study of these different values. Both upland and riparian areas were ranked for habitat value, based on the criteria of patch size, interior patch habitat size, connectivity to other habitat patches of the same type, distance to water, and species richness. • Riparian forest is already very rare; upland forest is disappearing rapidly with new development. • Forest remains mostly on steep slopes and ridges, Beaver Ridge, and parts of Black Oak Ridge. • Grassland is mostly farm meadows, with little or no native grassland habitat remaining. However, restoration of some grassland as native species preserves is recommended. Neighborhoods and Centers Analysis: centers without neighborhoods; neighborhoods without centers. 6 Beaver Creek Green Infrastructure: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Both farmland and wildlife habitat are fragmented by sprawling suburbs. Together, using foresight, stewardship, and decisive action, the valley’s valuable land, heritage, and beauty can be saved. Without foresight, stewardship, and decisive action to guide development, the watershed will become just another sprawling suburb. Our analysis shows this with undeniable clarity. D. PROTECTING THE WATER NETWORK When it comes to water, our current land development methods have grave implications for public health and safety. The Beaver Creek loodplain is growing. Streams and loodplains are dynamic features. They change in response to changes made in the landscape uphill from the stream. In the last 10 years, many more people, homes, and businesses have moved into the watershed. Changes caused by current development practices can be boiled down to two impacts: 1) Stream water quality is worse now than it used to be, and it continues to decline. 2) Flooding is worse now than it used to be, and it is getting even worse. One of the most important things we did in this study was to assemble a map that included the water features that are important to water quality and lood mitigation. To protect these water features, we identiied a protective buffer of land. In this buffer, natural Conclusions The valley can deinitely absorb more development. Conservation and development can coexist as complementary patterns. The question is, What kind of development and in which places? This chapter covers our recommendation on answering the “where” part of this question, relative to water issues. We have identiied a repeatable, rational method for incorporating protected lands into a system of water feature buffers. This approach can be applied anywhere in this region, yielding similar results. E. COMPOSITE PATTERNS: GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE Green Infrastructure is the supporting systems that the landscape provides for a city: an interconnected system of undeveloped natural areas and developed open spaces managed for beneit of people and the environment. Beaver Creek Green Infrastructure: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Our objective in this portion of the work was to identify the best land for conservation to achieve diverse goals for speciic public beneits. Second, we linked these different conservation areas into an integrated network. The Land Stewardship Network In the Beaver Creek Watershed study, we’ve developed new patterns relevant for the ridge-and-valley type landscape. In particular, we identiied and proposed four types of stewardship corridors that link together to create a composite land stewardship network pattern: •฀ stream protection corridors, which expand, link, and protect water feature buffers. •฀ groundwater protection corridors, which link strings of nearby springs and sinkholes in particularly sensitive areas where karst geology makes the groundwater system especially vulnerable. •฀ ridge protection corridors, which protect steep slopes and the forests on them. •฀ heritage protection corridors, which include and connect rural reserves and tie these to the other corridors. The land stewardship network represents the land most valuable for conservation to the community as well as natural processes. Levels of recommended conservation and development vary as appropriate for each area’s open-space value, existing land use, and other characteristics. This network forms a framework within which more intense development, such as identifiable neighborhoods and village centers, can be targeted by planners and developers. Composite 3-Zone Water Buffer Conclusions We have identiied timeless patterns that should shape development in this landscape. We propose solidly reasoned environmental and cultural stewardship as the foundation of the land stewardship network. While this is one speciic proposal, based on a long series of value choices and informed professional decisions, we believe that any proposal attentive to cultural conservation issues in this watershed would arrive at similar core concepts. Ridge, stream, and heritage protection, and their network connections, are deep, signiicant, timeless patterns. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Conclusions characteristics of the land are maintained or restored for purposes of protecting water quality, maximizing stormwater storage, and promoting iniltration. The buffer concept we used is one of variable width with a minimum size. Our buffer approach is based on three principles: • Create a continuous linear buffer that protects the stream network, including Beaver Creek and its tributaries. • Protect streams and adjacent features together, so the linear buffer is expanded to include associated loodplains, wetlands, springs, and sinkholes. • Protect chains of related features, like sinkholes or wetlands that occur distant from a stream by uniting individual feature buffers into a linear buffer. The EPA recommends dividing a buffer into three zones, where management practices vary from protection (closest to feature) to conservation (in the middle) to stewardship (furthest from the feature). Zone 1: Protection, contains Beaver Creek and its tributaries, plus nearby springs, wetlands, sinkholes, and impacts (steep slopes). Zone 2: Conservation, remains at a minimum width and expands whenever the loodplain extends beyond this minimum distance. Zone 3: Stewardship, is an area at the edge of the buffer designated to provide a transition to the more groomed character of the places where people live. The Composite Land Stewardship Network, made of Stream Protection Corridors, Ridge Protection Corridors, and Heritage Protection Corridors es A community with vision will preserve its best farmland for the future. Our question was, Where is the best land for farming? We ranked parcels by their soil suitability for agriculture. The implication of this analysis is that working farms with good soil should be kept for future generations, and new development should be directed to land less suited for agriculture. Land characteristics suggest potential land use. Some land is good for wildlife habitat and agriculture. Our analysis intersects Land Valuable for Wildlife Habitat with the Agricultural Land Value analysis. The resulting map should be consulted on every land-use decision for these parcels. It gives a concrete basis for adding agricultural and wildlife values to land decisions. 7 F. A VISION FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT Land, People, and Towns as an Integrated Living Fabric The Beaver Creek Watershed is at a transitional point. A signiicant proportion of land ideal for development has already been developed, and sprawl is proceeding rapidly. A Vision of the Possible We outline in some detail in this study many of the pressing problems of this area under its current development scenario. It’s worth noting, however, that the watershed’s development does not have to result in undifferentiated sprawl. It can be planned and managed to help it mature into a place where: • Life feels like living in a traditional small town. • Amenities of town living are just steps away from recreational opportunities and green parks. • Children don’t need mini-vans to reach soccer practice and scout meetings. • Everyone can have clean air and water. • The county meets its legal environmental obligations. • Property values are strong. • A relationship with nature is a daily event. • Our important land heritage is honored. • Businesses prosper from clustering and higher pedestrian trafic. • Settlement and land form an integrated whole. To achieve this vision, we must rethink how our community builds. How we build on the land is the problem as well as the solution. Most of the issues facing the watershed are related to land-use patterns. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Heart of Our Response: Three “Big Ideas” & One Underlying Perspective es Underlying everything in this report, and our approach, is the idea that the form of settlement grows out of an understanding of landscape context, both ecological and social. Context informs, bounds the problem, and suggests the shape of, or at least the container for, design solutions. This perspective underlies the three “big ideas” and helps organize the complementary patterns of open space and settlement in the watershed. The land stewardship network is shaped by a combination of topography, hydrology, ecology, and settlement. This network in turn shapes the framework of open space that contains and shares boundaries with settlement centers. These settle8 ment centers form a pattern of linked settlements, a constellation of centers. Within settled areas, context also helps us determine where to recommend different types of neighborhoods creating a tapestry of neighborhood types. A Framework Of Open Space. We need to regard conservation and development as complementary, rather than antagonistic, patterns. To achieve this, watershed residents need: 1) A clear, shared vision of the larger patterns of connectivity; 2) Knowledge about the relative value of land for different uses; and 3) A new deinition of conservation that accommodates use. We propose two kinds of patterns to address current open-space fragmentation and to link conservation and development: • land stewardship network, which spatially deines the larger stewardship patterns in which individual properties participate. • spectrum of conservation land, which allows for and deines a range of levels of conservation and types of human activities, based on the land’s relative values for both. A Constellation Of Centers. We believe that the future of this landscape lies in an interconnected net of centers of different types, at three scales. Beaver Valley has a choice: a wall-to-wall carpet of sprawl or a more complex pattern of many centers where people live closer together in traditional towns and steward open land. In Beaver Creek, residents are losing the places to which they once belonged, while their lives are lived from the automobile. To address these two issues, we have proposed three kinds of patterns: town centers, village centers, and neighborhood centers. Centers give a sense of identity and orientation. They also place homes close enough to each other to support walkable shopping and other services. Density is convenient. A Tapestry Of Neighborhood Types. Within available land, different kinds of neighborhoods, varied by density and organization, are distributed by coordinating an ideal town model with suitable use locations. Conservation is paid for by development, and if some areas are conserved by limiting development, others must be designated to absorb relatively more new development. We used two concepts about where more and less dense developments are located: • The model small town, with its density gradient (dense in the center to dispersed at the edge), and • suitable use locations, a cornerstone principle of good planning that locates different activities in the best places for each. The Layout of Centers and Neighborhoods Bringing Centers to Neighborhoods and Neighborhoods to Centers Centers, when combined with their related neighborhoods, offer an amazing convergence of social, economic, and ecological beneits. The proposal for a constellation of centers of varying scales is fundamentally different from existing sprawl development in two ways: • Mixed-use centers at all scales are tied to speciic spatial territories. • Centers are organized around walkable streets, rather than highways. It is important to envision how the landscape will look in twenty years when all the available land is built on. There are two options for growth: traditional Proposed Parks and Soft-transit Network Beaver Creek Green Infrastructure: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY towns and neighborhoods, or sprawl. This proposal organizes neighborhoods along a density gradient that can be locally calibrated. A conservation neighborhood (CN) clusters housing in one part of a site to preserve conservation features in another part of the site. CNs are especially important in a ridge and valley landscape. We devised a method for assessing the suitability of CNs in the watershed, based on a weighted ranking of two criteria: the presence of moderate slopes (15-25%), and the area’s contribution to lood mitigation and waterquality improvement. S P E C IF IC RECOM M EN DATION S IN B EAVER CREEK Detail of the proposed town and village centers, with adjacent neighborhoods around Powell • • • • • • • The soft-transit net must connect all of the parks in the family of parks and link all of the public spaces within centers. The system is designed for short and long walking loops and for longer biking and hiking loops. Greenways use the land stewardship network when possible. Tree-lined boulevards create main streets, slow trafic, and link existing neighborhoods. community gateways mark the entry to identiiable towns and villages. safe streets are streetscaped pedestrian routes where greenways are not possible. footpaths and equestrian trails connect settlements to more remote terrain. G. CONSERVATION PROGRAMS One of the major goals of this plan is to identify priority lands for conservation, including parcels where conservation easements are most appropriate. We identiied priority parcels eligible for two government conservation programs, the Grassland Reserve Program and the Farm and Ranch Lands Protection program. Beaver Creek Green Infrastructure: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Detail of proposed future build-out development pattern, around Powell H. CONCLUSIONS Necessity For New Attitudes Old attitudes created today’s landscape; only new attitudes can ensure that the landscape of tomorrow is different. Changing Beaver Creek’s future requires new attitudes. The community as a whole needs to revise its understanding of land, nature, property rights, and social welfare, and to change how it understands the problems and what solutions are viable or desirable. In short, we must change our perceptions to see that: • Nature is everywhere in urban environments. • Development patterns that create healthy community are fundamentally dependent on the majority of citizens holding to the importance of “community values.” • The patterns of our city and county are a relection of what we collectively value. We have a choice to create a clear strong vision of the future or to settle for “sprawl-as-usual.” Next Steps Don’t just plan, act! Continued Study and Implementation in the Beaver Creek Watershed • Design subwatershed plans. • Design detailed greenway plans. • Coordinate with the Site Planning Roundtable. • Create multi-tier development guidelines. • Modify Metropolitan Planning Commission sector planning. • Adopt form-based zoning. • Use green infrastructure plan in MPC approvals. • Use green infrastructure plan in stormwater permitting process. • Prioritize and strategize conservation easements. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The location of public places has, historically, been opportunistic and poorly tied to settlement structure. In this new vision, public space and settlement structure deine each other. The last step in this planning and design process is a proposal for a parks and soft transit net. Parks are located based on the family-of-parks rule, in which the size of parks varies with the distance from home. Parks should never be too far away. By this way of thinking, the city and county park system needs a few very large central parks and plazas, a few large nature parks, several big city parks, scores of medium-sized neighborhood greens (as many as there are neighborhoods), and a great number of small playlots and pocket parks, a few in each neighborhood. The drawing on the facing page shows the proposal. The parks system serves each level of settlement center— town, village, and neighborhood— and provides a range of park-use types. The main differences between this proposal and conventional parks planning are: • Parks are tied to the structure of neighborhoods, villages and towns. • Soft transit is a network, not isolated elements. • An emphasis is placed on neighborhood greens located in neighborhood centers. We strongly believe that parks and public space belong at the heart of our communities and are central to community identity, social discourse, and quality-of-life. Each settlement center is conceived of as having a neighborhood green, a village square, or a town plaza within it. The organization of the soft-transit net is based on a series of principles: HERITAGE PROTECTION CORRIDORS WATER FEATURE BUFFERS GROUNDWATER PROTECTION CORRIDORS STREAM PROTECTION CORRIDORS RIDGE PROTECTION CORRIDORS FRAMEWORK OF OPEN SPACE LAND STEWARDSHIP NETWORK SPECTRUM OF CONSERVATION LAND A CONSTELLATION OF CENTERS A TAPESTRY OF NEIGHBORHOOD TYPES CONSERVATION NEIGHBORHOODS FAMILY OF PARKS SOFT TRANSIT NET CONSERVATION EASEMENTS Expansion of this Work to Other Watersheds • Expand to the rest of Knox County. • Develop automated methods. es A Vision For Developed Open Space • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 9