WOODS CREEK WATERSHED PROTECTION PLAN

FEBRUARY 2001

VILLAGE OF ALGONQUIN BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Salvatore Spella – President Constance Donner Robert Smith Barbara Read Jim Steigert John Schmitt Linda Wolski

VILLAGE STAFF William J. Ganek – Village Manager

Jeffrey J. Mihelich - Community Development Director Robert Mitchard, II – Public Works Director

CONTRIBUTORS

Jeffrey J. Mihelich – Project Manager Katherine A. Thornton – Planner

J. Marshall Eames, Ph.D. – EquiPoise, Inc. James A. Montgomery, Ph.D. – EquiPoise, Inc.

Susan M. Kauffman – EquiPoise, Inc. Erika Gomez – EquiPoise, Inc.

Frank Cuda, P.E. – Scheflow Engineers Mike Hoffman – Teska Associates

David Jabon, Ph.D. – DePaul University

Woods Creek Watershed Protection Plan Steering Committee

Dave Brandt – USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service Jeffrey Mengler – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Brian Smith – U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers Paula Beckman – Pulte Homes, Inc.

Gail Miller – Village of Lake in the Hills Chuck Curran – Resident & Village of Algonquin Planning and Zoning Commission

Jeffrey Mihelich – Village of Algonquin Community Development Director Robert Mitchard, II – Village of Algonquin Public Works Director

Michael Hoffman – Teska and Associates

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Village thanks the members of the Watershed Steering Committee who volunteered their time and professional expertise to make this plan possible. The work to produce this watershed protection plan was partially funded under provisions of Section 104 of the Clean Water Act by Grant Number CD97508701-0 from the United States Environmental Protection Agency.

TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION TITLE PAGE 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 2.0 INTRODUCTION 6 2.1 OVERVIEW 6 2.1.1 Plan Development 6 2.1.1.1 Funding 6 2.1.1.2 Scope of Work 6 2.1.1.3 Project Deliverables 8 2.1.1.4 Project Schedule 8 2.1.2 Project Organization 8 2.1.2.1 Stakeholders and Steering Committee 8 2.1.2.2 Technical Team 10 2.2 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE 10 2.3 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 15 2.3.1 Ecological Goals 16 2.3.1.1 Improved Water Quality 16 2.3.1.2 Reintroduce Native Vegetation 16 2.3.1.3 Protect and Enhance Fens and Wetlands 18 2.3.1.4 Protect Hydric Soils 18 2.3.1.5 Increase Wildlife Habitat 18 2.3.1.6 Preserve and Replenish Aquatic Resources 19 2.3.1.7 Protect and Preserve the Floodplain 19 2.3.2 Societal Goals 19 2.3.2.1 Provide Educational Opportunities 19 2.3.2.2 Increase Recreational Opportunities 20 2.3.2.3 Provide a Natural Aesthetic Setting 20 2.3.3 Policy Goals 20 2.3.3.1 Create a Model Plan 20 2.3.3.2 Develop a Conservation Ordinance 20 2.3.3.3 Form a Conservation Community 21 2.4 EXISTING PROTECTION MEASURES 21 3.0 WATERSHED RESOURCES 24 3.1 METHODOLOGY 24 3.1.1 Woods Creek 24 3.1.2 Watershed 26 3.2 INVENTORIES AND GIS 26 3.3 PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION 28 3.3.1 Existing Problems in the Watershed 28 3.3.2 Threats to the Watershed 30

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

SECTION TITLE PAGE 4.0 WATERSHED PROTECTION STRATEGIES 31 4.1 SITE DESIGN 31 4.1.1 Eco-corridors 31 4.1.2 Clustered Housing 32 4.1.3 Reduced Street Widths 34 4.1.4 Natural Resource Buffer 34 4.1.5 Natural Landscaping Materials 35 4.1.6 Rooftop and Rear Yard Runoff 36 4.2 STRUCTURAL STRATEGIES 36 4.2.1 Wetland Detention Design 36 4.2.2 Vegetated Swales and Filter Strips 37 4.2.3 Infiltration Trenches and Basins 37 4.2.4 Eco-trail Design 37 4.2.5 Signs and Fencing 38 4.3 ADMINISTRATIVE STRATEGIES 38 4.3.1 Watershed Protection Fee 38 4.3.1.1 Residential Fee 38 4.3.1.2 Commercial Fee 38 4.3.2 Construction Inspection 39 4.3.3 Floodplain and Natural Area Acquisition 39 4.3.4 Public Outreach 40 4.3.5 Educational Partnership 41 4.3.6 Natural Area Stewardship 41 4.3.7 Natural Area Monitoring and Management 42 4.3.8 Ecosystem Restoration and Enhancement 43 4.3.9 Information Management 43 5.0 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 45 5.1 PLAN OBJECTIVES 45 5.2 IMPLEMENTATION 45 6.0 APPENDICES 47 6.1 DATA FORM S 47 6.2 GIS FILE STRUCTURE 52 8.0 REFERENCES 59

ABBREVIATIONS ABBREVIATION DEFINITION_____________________________ ac ..................................................... acres ADID ............................................... Advanced Identification wetlands BMP ................................................ best management practice BOD ................................................ biological oxygen demand b.p. .................................................. before present cfs .................................................... cubic feet per second CWA ................................................ Clean Water Act dbh .................................................... diameter at breast height ft ....................................................... feet GIS ................................................... Geographic Information System GPS .................................................. Global Positioning System ha ..................................................... hectares (2.471 acres) IDNR ............................................... Illinois Department of Natural Resources IEPA ................................................ Illinois Environmental Protection Agency in ...................................................... inch km .................................................... kilometer (0.6241 miles) m ...................................................... meter (39.37 inches) mi ..................................................... mile NIPC ................................................ Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission NRCS ............................................... Natural Resources Conservation Service pH .................................................... hydrogen ion concentration psi .................................................... pounds per square inch sq mi ................................................ square mile (640 acres) UFRB ............................................... Upper Fox River Basin USACE ............................................ United States Army, Corps of Engineers USDA .............................................. United States Department of Agriculture USEPA ............................................. United States Environmental Protection Agency USFWS ............................................ United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS ............................................... United States Geological Survey

1

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Village of Algonquin, Illinois and the Woods Creek watershed lie 72 km (45 mi) northwest of Chicago in rapidly urbanizing southeastern McHenry County and northeastern Kane County. The watershed is tributary to the Upper Fox River (Figure 1). The creek flows northeasterly draining an area of more than 1200 ha (2,965 ac) before emptying into Lake in the Hills. Nearly 950 ha (2,347 ac) of the watershed including the headwaters are within Algonquin’s planning jurisdiction. The remaining 300 ha (741 ac) are within the Village of Lake in the Hills. Algonquin is rapidly changing from a rural agricultural based community to a residential and commercial center. The population in 1990 was 11,663. By the 1998 special census, the population had nearly doubled to 21,400. The Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission (NIPC) forecasts the Village population will reach 38,211 by the year 2020 (Dieber 1997). Employment is projected to increase by a factor of four from 2,369 in 1990 to 8,521 in 2020. Similar trends are expected in Kane and McHenry Counties. The 1990 Kane County population was 317,471 and will reach 552, 944 by year 2020. McHenry County will double from 183,341 in 1990 to 361,598 in 2020. In the late 1980s, the Woods Creek watershed was intensively farmed. Areas were cropped with a corn/soybean rotation and locations with unproductive soils were used as pastures for small dairy farms. Within the past decade, much of the lower watershed, especially in Lake in the Hills was converted to single family and multi-family residential uses. Algonquin’s current land use plan recommends that nearly 60 percent of the watershed be estate, low density and medium density suburban residential uses, 20 percent institutional, business park and light industrial uses and 10 percent commercial development (Teska & Associates 1999). The plan also shows more than 10 percent as dedicated open space (Figure 7). Today, a large portion of the watershed in Algonquin remains agricultural with some residential, commercial and institutional uses. Much of the creek is straightened and channelized to improve drainage. The stream is degraded by loss of cover, high sediment loads, and rapid response to rain events typical of agricultural watersheds. The watershed has significant relief with a high elevation of 286.5 m (940 ft) above mean sea level (msl) in the southeast near Randall Road and a low elevation of 256.6 m msl (842 ft) at the Algonquin Road Bridge. Bluffs flank the creek and slopes exceed 10% at some locations. The floodplain is underlain by Ridgeville sandy loam and Harpster silt loam. Harpster soils are hydric and develop in areas with high groundwater tables and seeps (USDA 1999, Ray and Wascher 1965). Ridgeville soils generally are not hydric and often overlay well-drained subsoils. Drummer silty clay loam, a hydric soil, is found in drainageways and swales and also on slopes up to 7% where groundwater seepage occurs. Elliott silt loam, a poorly drained upland soil, and Varna silt loam, a well-drained upland soil, are common in the watershed. Many wetlands in the watershed were drained for agriculture and much of the floodplain was farmed. Despite agricultural conversions, at least four temperate-zone fens, one of regions most unique wetland types lie within the watershed. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)

2

Figure 1 Location of the Woods Creek Watershed. Scale - 1:250,000 TopoQuads 1999 © DeLorme

3

estimated that only 100 ha of fens remain in the Chicagoland area (Mengler 1997). Nationally, fens and peat forming wetlands are rare in the warm humid continental climates of the temperate zone. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources estimates that only 730 ha of fen exist in the state. The problems in the Woods Creek watershed mirror those in the Upper Fox River Basin (UFRB). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) index of watershed indicators for the basin identifies issues such as wetland loss and failure to attain designated uses as key problems in the UFRB (Table 1). Agricultural runoff and population increases are the greatest potential threats to watershed improvement (USEPA 2000). The aquatic habitat of Woods Creek is degraded by loss of cover and high sediment loads typical of agricultural watersheds with erodable soils on steep slopes and streams near large construction sites. Water quality is deteriorating in the creek and turbidity, high nutrient levels, and low dissolved oxygen levels are reported at the outlet in Lake in the Hills.

The natural resources in the watershed are threatened by urbanization. Direct loss and, equally as important, the loss of groundwater recharge areas threaten fens and other wetlands. Thorman and Bayley (1997) found that low decomposition rates are a significant factor in peat accumulation in fens. Temperate zone fens need continuous saturation by groundwater during the growing season to retard decomposition (Mitsch and Gosselink 1993, Halsey et al 1997). Algonquin’s land use plan adopted in 1997 recognized that the watershed and the entire western planning limits of the Village contained valuable natural resources. The plan accommodated the known resources, such as floodplain and mapped wetlands into open space and parkland but did not include strategies for conserving or managing the resources. The Village recognized the need to develop a comprehensive watershed protection plan to improve water quality in the creek, protect wetland and aquatic resources, and preserve the rare fens. The stream corridor is an amenity that benefits the quality of life by providing opportunities for recreation and education, open space, wildlife habitat, and a visual resource. Although Algonquin gave special consideration to the watershed, instituting a strict release rate from detention storage to ameliorate downstream flooding and retaining a consultant to review projects that impact wetlands, there was not a coherent plan with stated goals that catalogued and prioritized the watersheds resources and specified mechanisms to protect them. This plan allows development in the watershed and conserves the natural resource values of the creek, floodplain, and wetlands. In 1998, Algonquin applied to Region 5 of the USEPA for funding under the Wetlands Protection Development Grants program to develop a management and protection plan. The application acknowledged the need for an assessment of the watersheds resources and to involve the watershed stakeholders. The application emphasized expedited plan formulation because of the rapid development within the watershed. In October of 1999, USEPA awarded the Village a grant to develop a management and protection plan. Algonquin retained EquiPoise, Inc. as the technical consultant for the project.

4

TABLE 1

Watershed Condition Indicators

Watershed Condition

Fox River Woods Creek

Watershed Vulnerability

Fox River Woods Creek

Designated use attainment

2

2

Wetland/aquatic species at-risk

1

2

Fish contamination Insufficient data

Insufficient data

Toxic loads exceeds permits

0

0

Source water condition

1

2

Conventional loads exceeds permits

0

0

Contaminated sediments

1

Insufficient data

Urban runoff index

Insufficient data

2

Water quality – toxics

0

0

Agricultural runoff index

2

2

Water quality – conventional

1

1

Population change

2

2

Wetland Loss

2

2

Hydrologic modification

1

2

Scores range from 0 (good) to 2 (poor) Source: USEPA Plan development was divided into six tasks. The first was to identify watershed stakeholders and form a steering committee. A primary role of the committee was to formulate goals for the plan. Village staff evaluated the planning objectives, land use plan, and growth potential.

Watershed stakeholders include: residents, business owners, developers, school districts, state and federal agencies, and downstream communities. The steering committee was structured to represent stakeholders’ interests and work effectively to protect the rapidly urbanizing watershed. The committee includes: Village planning consultant, a developer, a watershed resident, the U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers (USACE), USFWS, Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), and a representative from the Village of Lake in the Hills. The committee established thirteen goals in three categories: ecological, societal, and policy. The second task was evaluating existing protection measures. The technical team reviewed and assessed the effectiveness of local, state, and federal regulations at protecting the resources in the watershed. Several weaknesses in the existing regulatory framework emerged. First, although Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, as implemented by the USACE, Chicago District is effective at preventing the direct loss of high quality wetlands, it is less effective in preventing indirect impacts to wetlands and aquatic resources resulting from construction and land use conversion. Second, because construction proceeds quickly monitoring of development is not done consistently and frequently enough to prevent violations of permit conditions and minimize damages. Third, enforcement of regulations is ineffective because the response is too slow to prevent damages to the ecosystems. Fourth, the planning approval process is reactionary because a reliable meso-scale inventory of resources for the watershed does not exist despite surveys for the National Wetland Inventory, McHenry County ADID study, and other inventories. Fifth, the overall regulatory framework does not adequately protect wetlands and aquatic resources against indirect impacts. Sixth, wildlife habitat is not well protected by current

5

regulations. Fortunately, Algonquin’s 1997 comprehensive plan provides flexibility to incorporate management and protection measures without major revision. The third task is inventorying and evaluating the natural resources in the watershed. This task starts with the compilation of the existing data resources. These included information from the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), IEPA, NRCS, USFWS, NIPC, and others. The Village also searched its own archives for information. Field investigators collected information on cover type, species lists, habitat quality, soil and groundwater information, and other natural resource data. Emphasis was placed on identifying wetland and aquatic resources, groundwater recharge areas, and sensitive upland habitat. The fourth task was developing a Geographic Information System (GIS) database that incorporates the findings from field investigations with those from other agencies. Algonquin is creating an ArcView/ArcInfo GIS database for the entire Village and the watershed information will be incorporated into this GIS. Ultimately, data from monitoring wells, wetland delineations, and monitoring reports will be incorporated into the database. Plan Development is the fifth task and Algonquin benefits from its location in Chicagoland. NIPC conducted extensive studies and evaluations of watershed management practices (Dreher, et al 1988 and Dreher, et al 1989) and developed watershed-planning tools (Dreher & Price 1992, Dreher & Mariner 1994, and Price & Dreher 2000). Regionally, there are other watershed protection initiatives such as the recently completed plan for the Nippersink Creek watershed in McHenry Counties. The team evaluated plans from developments, such as Prairie Crossing. Some environmentally sound elements of these plans were adapted to the unique conditions in the Woods Creek watershed. Plan implementation is the final task. Because the watershed is developing rapidly, Algonquin is already taking interim measures to protect the watershed. Many of these measures are part of this plan. The Steering Committee reviewed and commented on this plan prior to submission to the Village Board for approval. Following public participation and acceptance by the Board this plan will be appended to Algonquin’s comprehensive plan.

6

2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.1 OVERVIEW Throughout the 90’s Algonquin experienced unprecedented growth and by 1997 it was apparent to Village officials that an overall plan was needed to protect and conserve natural resources throughout the Village and especially in the rapidly developing Woods Creek Watershed. The watershed contained rare temperate zone fens that although impacted by agriculture still retained significant ecological features and functions. The creek itself supported benthic and aquatic populations that made it a valuable resource. The Village Land Use Plan provided a valuable starting point but did not contain inventories and assessments of the resources, nor specific management recommendations targeting resource conservation. 2.1.1 Plan Development This section discusses the process of plan development including the grant, funding, schedule and deliverables. 2.1.1.1 Funding The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) under Section 104 of the Clean Water Act offers several assistance programs to local governments to fund the development of watershed protection plans. The Village identified a potential funding source through the USEPA and was optimistic of the chance of funding since the watershed lies within the UFRB. The Fox River is designated as one of the nations most threatened rivers and protecting the watershed is critical to protecting the river. In fall 1997, the Village submitted a proposal to the USEPA to develop a watershed and wetland protection plan for the Woods Creek watershed. USEPA appraised the Village in spring 1999 that the grant proposal was accepted for funding based upon available money. The grant application was completed in May 1999 and official notification of the award was received in September 1999. The grant provided federal matching funds to pay for outside technical experts to assist Village staff in developing the protection plan. 2.1.1.2 Scope of Work The effort to develop the plan was divided into six major work tasks. The success of the overall plan depends upon the integration of the results of each of these tasks. Task 1: Identification of Problem and Plan Goals A team of technical experts was assembled to evaluate existing water resource problems and their causes within the watershed. Threats to the watershed due to changing land use also were evaluated. The Village identified the stakeholders within the watershed and their interests. The stakeholders included: land owners and developers, local, state, and federal resource and regulatory agencies, downstream and adjacent communities, Village and watershed residents, and Jacobs High School. The Village created a Woods Creek Watershed Steering Committee to represent the interests of the watersheds’ stakeholders in the plan. A major role of the committee was the formulation of goals for the plan. These goals guided the technical team throughout the development of the plan.

Task 2: Evaluation of Existing Protection Measures Federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous overlapping regulations designed to improve water quality, prevent flooding, preserve wetlands, and protect threatened and endangered species. The Village and project technical team evaluated the effectiveness of these regulations protecting the resources within the Woods Creek watershed. Both the intent and the regulations stemming from policy were evaluated but particular emphasis was placed upon the effectiveness of enforcement and the problems associated with policing and enforcing the regulations. Task 3: Inventory and Assessment of Watershed Resources Wetlands and aquatic resources in the watershed were inventoried. Additionally, soils, recharge areas, cover type, and topography were studied to determine their importance to groundwater movement and the protection of wetlands, especially fens, in the watershed. Terrestrial ecological communities were assessed to determine their role in the hydrology of the creek. Cultural resources and infrastructure were also assessed. The results of these inventories were incorporated into a geographic information system (GIS) and database. Task 4: Geographic Information System and Database The Village recognized the need for baseline information to assess the performance of the protection plan, to assist Village staff in land use planning, and to assist property owners in site design. Algonquin is developing a village-wide GIS. However that system will take about 30 months for completion. The plan, which covers only a portion of the Village, will contain a GIS in ArcView format that will be compatible with the overall system and will be integrated into the system. Until the village-wide system is ready the project GIS and database will serve planning needs. The GIS includes stream feature mapping obtained using a global positioning system (GPS) and information from the NRCS, USEPA, IDNR, NIPC, and other sources. Task 5: Plan Development Village staff and their consultants developed a draft watershed protection plan that builds upon the Village land use plan and existing federal, state, and local regulations. The draft plan incorporates Best Management Practices (BMP’s), administrative procedures, and site design requirements. Staff reviewed the plan to insure that the strategies are

ewed the plan

Caltha palustris or Marsh Marigold

consistent with the overall goals of the Village. The Steering Committee also revi

7

to assure that it achieved the ecological, societal, and policy goals for the plan. Task 6: Plan Adoption The revised plan will be sent to the Village Board of Trustees for adoption. The plan adoption process includes public involvement. The plan will be presented to the public for question and comment. Following the public involvement process the Village Board of Trustees will take action to adopt or amend the plan.

8

2.1.1.3 Project Deliverables There are three required outputs from this watershed planning process. The first is a GIS and database of resources in the watershed that may be incorporated into the larger Village-wide GIS. The GIS contains information about soils, wetlands, recharge areas, natural resources, and Woods Creek itself. It is intended to be a resource tool for the Village staff and officials, developers, and resource managers. The product is in ARCView/ARCInfo compatible format and incorporates information from secondary sources such as the NRCS and IDNR and primary sources such as the GPS files from the stream survey and watershed inventories. The second output is the participation and presentation of the project at a national water resources conference. The technical team presented a poster at the International Conference on Riparian Ecology and Management in Multi-Land Use Watersheds sponsored by the American Water Resources Association during August 2000 in Portland, Oregon. A peer reviewed paper entitled: Watershed Management in the Woods Creek Watershed, Illinois was published in the conference proceedings. A watershed management and protection plan is the final output from the process. The plan will identify resources within the watershed that should be conserved and protected for future generations. The plan also recommends practices and policies that insure Algonquin meets the goals of the project and are compatible with the existing Village planning objectives. This document will form the basis for ordinances and policy guidelines to be adopted by the Village Board of Trustees. 2.1.1.4 Project Schedule The Woods Creek watershed rapidly is being transformed from rural and agricultural land uses to higher density uses. From the beginning of the grant process the Village recognized that the major challenge was to complete and approve the management plan before substantial portions of the watershed were developed and vital resource areas lost. A condition of the grant is the completion of the plan within 18 months. The Village compressed the schedule to 16 months. The following chart shows the work tasks, deliverables, and key meetings for the project (Table 2). The target date for plan adoption by the Village Board is March 2001. The public information process will begin in early 2001 and will afford Village residents an opportunity to become familiar with the proposed plan. 2.1.2 Project Organization Even in small watersheds, planning requires the skills of many different professionals to integrate natural resources, engineering, social, and economic issues into a workable plan. 2.1.2.1 Stakeholders and Steering Committee Algonquin knows that there are diverse and sometimes competing interests in the Woods Creek watershed. At the same time the Village realized that to produce a viable management plan the planning process must recognize these interests and give them a means to voice their concerns. Large landowners and developers are concerned about the affect of the plan on the development potential of their land and property values. Residents within the watershed are concerned about

9

TABLE 2 Project Schedule and Milestones

Woods Creek Wetland Protection PlanProject Schedule

1st quarter 2nd quarter 3rd quarter 4th quarter Year 2MONTH

Task DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MARNeed & proj. goals #### #### #### 11st Steering Comm. Mtg. *Exist. protection meas. #### #### ####Assess watershed res. #### #### #### #### #### #### ####2nd Steering Comm. Mtg. *Data base #### #### #### #### #### 23rd Steering Comm. Mtg. *Plan development #### #### #### #### #### 3 ####4th Steering Comm. Mtg. *Plan adoption & implement. #### #### #### #### 4

DELIVERABLESGoal statement: 1

Resource inventory(GIS dbf): 2Draft plan 3Final plan 4

quality of life and aesthetics. State and federal resource agencies are interested in the protection of fens, wetlands, aquatic and riparian zones, habitat for threatened and endangered species, improved water quality, and flood reduction. Municipal government is concerned with revenues, land use, public facilities, and tax burden. The Village identified the following stakeholders from the watershed:

STAKEHOLDERS

Local Governments: State and Federal Governments: McHenry County U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Kane County USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Village of Lake-in-the-Hills U.S. army, Corps of Engineers Village of Huntley U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Village of West Dundee Illinois Environmental Protection Agency City of Carpentersville Illinois Department of Natural Resources School Districts 158 and 300 Illinois Historic Preservation Agency Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission Private Citizens: Village of Algonquin: Watershed residents Community Development Department Large Landowners in watershed Public Works Department Village residents Parks and Forestry Division Fox River Ecosystem Partnership Conservation/environmental groups Commerce: Developers Retail Trade Other Business

10

Large committees are unwieldy and have difficulty reaching consensus or compromise on issues. It also is difficult to schedule meetings when large groups of volunteers can meet. Algonquin chose to form a smaller Steering Committee comprised of members that represented the diverse interests within the watershed rather than have each stakeholder group represented. The Steering Committee was comprised of the following members: Jeffrey J. Mihelich Village of Algonquin, Community Development Robert Mitchard, II Village of Algonquin, Public Works Michael Hoffman Village of Algonquin, Planning Consultant Gail Miller Village of Lake in the Hills Chuck Curran Resident, Village of Algonquin Planning and Zoning Commission Paula Beckman Pulte Homes, Inc. Dave Brandt USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Jeffrey Mengler U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Brian Smith U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers The Steering Committee met four times over the course of the project. During the initial meeting, on January 26, 2000 the committee established the goals and objectives for the watershed plan. At the second meeting on September 6, 2000 the committee was briefed on the progress of the technical team and the findings from the inventory. At the third meeting the draft plan was reviewed and the committee recommended additions, changes, and improvements. The plan will be reviewed at the final meeting and endorsed by the committee for presentation to the Village Board of Trustees. 2.1.2.2 Technical Team The Community Development Department is the lead agency for plan development and the Director Jeffrey J. Mihelich is the overall project manager. Community Development is supported by sister departments such as Public Works and contract specialists such as the Village engineering consultant, Scheflow Engineers and the Village planning consultant, Teska Associates. EquiPoise, Inc. was retained by the Village to prepare the grant application and provide technical expertise for the project. Dr. J. Marshall Eames and Dr. James A. Montgomery supervised the studies and the plan preparation. 2.2 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Human influences in the Woods Creek watershed were evident before the first European settlers arrived. The first human settlement of the Fox River area can be traced back 12,000-14,000 b.p., shortly after the last glacial period. Early natives were hunters and gatherers but by 3,000 b.p. there is evidence that some native crops were being cultivated. By the time French traders arrived in the 17th century, the Potawatomi tribal groups camped on both sides of the Fox River in what is now Algonquin. They fished the river and hunted along trails now known as Pyott Road and Illinois Route 14.

11

The first European to permanently live in the county was Samuel Gillilan, who broke soil for cultivation in the spring of 1835. This marks the beginning of major alteration to the land use in the Woods Creek watershed. Gillilan and his family settled on the northern bank of the Fox, in Section 23 of the present Algonquin Township. The death of his 15-year-old daughter on August 26, 1835 is the first recorded death in the county. McHenry County was named for Major William McHenry, who led troops in battle against Chief Blackhawk and the Potawatomi.

From the hills and bluffs along the Fox River, the Gillilans could see a grand, rolling landscape of prairie interspersed with oak groves. In one grove, they counted seventy deer. Wolves and lynx lived in great numbers along the river.

Algonquin Township was known as Fox Township until Samuel Edwards suggested the name Algonquin, after a ship on which he had sailed in his youth. The name was approved, and the name has since remained. The Village of Algonquin was first called Cornish’s Landing and then Osceola before officially taking the name Algonquin on December 23, 1847.

Flooding occurred along the Fox River, often due to heavy snowfall and April rains. One of the first documented events was recorded in 1881. In 1898, heavy rains flooded Rat Creek, which flows behind the present Village Hall, past Neubert Elementary School, and southeast to the Fox River.

The first village water works, now the site of Pioneer Park, was installed in 1896 relying on an artesian well to provide water from “a strong (80 psi) spring of the best drinking water to be had anywhere in Illinois.” This highlights the historical importance of groundwater to the Village. Besides changes in watershed land use, Woods Creek was directly influenced by human endeavors. Lake in the Hills, now known as Woods Creek Lake, was “formed prior to 1923 by the creation of an earthen dam across one of the tributaries of the Crystal Lake outlet that leads into the Fox River” (Nye). The tributary was actually Woods Creek.

A map in the History of McHenry County, Illinois (Special Authors and Contributors 1922) does not show Woods Creek as a stream south of Algonquin Road. The area south of present day Algonquin Road was a large wetland fed by springs, seeps, and fens along the slopes of a shallow valley that drained to the north. This wetland complex was the headwaters of Woods Creek that began just north of Algonquin Road

A 1939 aerial photograph, taken of the Woods Creek watershed, shows agriculture is the primary land use in the area (Figure 2). A defined channel already was evident south of Algonquin Road. The increased runoff from agricultural land and the use of tiles and drainage channels turned the wetland into an intermittent stream south of Algonquin Road

By 1954, nearly the entire watershed was under tillage. South of Algonquin Road much of the creek was dredged straightened and replaced by a trapezoidal drainage channel. Drainage tiles probably were installed to drain the fields surrounding the stream. The “natural features” described in the 1922 history book, the small lakes and ponds, prairies, peat beds, and clay, had been altered for human use. The wetlands and fens clearly evident in the 1939 photograph are now planted in row crops (Figure 3). Clay was used to make drain tiles, and the prairie and peat soils were fertile planting ground once drained.

A 1967 aerial photograph shows many of the parcels that had been farmed in 1954 were reverting back to wetlands (Figure 4). The grain surpluses of the 50s and 60s may have made

12

farming marginal land uneconomical. An island north of what is now Bunker Hill Drive was formed by the dredging of the north-south channel to the west of the original meandering channel.

Figure 2. A 1939 aerial photograph showing the northeastern portion of Woods Creek Watershed.

Since 1967 the changes in the watershed have been more dramatic and irreversible. Land is being converted from agriculture to residential, institutional and commercial uses. The amount of impervious cover is increasing and with it the potential for increased runoff and changes to the creek’s hydrology. Areas that recharged the groundwater that fed the springs and seeps are now paved or under buildings. The water that supported fens and other wetlands is captured in storm sewers and diverted to detention basins.

13

Figure 3. A 1954 aerial photograph showing the northeastern portion of the Woods Creek watershed. Straightened channels extended as far south as County Line Road.

14

In 1900 the population of Algonquin was approximately 550 by the 1998 special census the population rose to 21,415. The population growth follows a similar trend in Kane and McHenry Counties (Table 3).

TABLE 3

Population Trends

YEAR KANE Co. McHENRY Co. ALGONQUIN

1900 80,000* 35,000* 550

1910 90,000* 36,000* 642

1920 100,000* 36,000* 693

1930 130,000* 36,000* 866

1940 140,000* 40,000* 926

1950 150,000* 45,000* n/a

1960 210,000* 80,000* 2014

1970 245,000* 110,000* 3515

1980 275,000* 140,000* 5834

1990 317,471 183,241 11,663

1998 n/a n/a 21,415

Source: Illinois Department of Natural Resources – Critical Trends Assessment Program * Approximate

At the same time population increased the population density rose in the counties and the entire Fox River basin. In 1870 the population density in the Fox River area was 49.2 persons/sq mi and by 1990 this rose to 338.9 persons/ sq mi (Table 4).

As population and density increased the area in Kane and McHenry counties devoted to farming declined from the peak years in the 1940s. In Kane County 298,489 acres were devoted to farming in 1945 in part due to the demands of the Second World War but by 1992 only 203,590 acres were under agriculture (Kane County 1996). Similar trends occurred throughout the Fox River basin and the Woods Creek Watershed. By 1990, 22% of Kane and 14% of the McHenry County land was considered urban. This compares with 13% in the Fox River area and 6% for Illinois as a whole (IDNR 1997).

A 1997 color aerial photograph of the watershed shows the extent of the change in land use within the Woods Creek Watershed (Figure 5). If strong economic growth continues the entire watershed will be developed within the next 10-15 years. The Village has developed a land use plan that seeks to balance residential, commercial, institutional land uses with public open space devoted to resource conservation. This plan affords the flexibility to formulate a protection plan for the Woods Creek watershed.

15

Figure 4. A 1967 aerial photograph showing the northeastern portion of the Woods Creek watershed. Many marginal areas farmed in 1954 are now abandon and are “naturalizing.”

2.3 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Although the fundamental endpoint of a watershed protection plan is to preserve and improve water quality and aquatic resources there are many paths that a government body may follow to reach that endpoint. The primary responsibility of the Steering Committee was to establish goals

16

for the plan. The goals must be achievable, must follow sound scientific, engineering and planning principles, and must reflect the interests of the Village and its residents.

TABLE 4

Trends in Population Density (persons/ sq. mi)

REGION 1870 1910 1950 1990

Kane Co. 75.1 176.4 288.8 609.7

McHenry Co. 39.3 53.8 83.8 303.3

Fox River Area 49.2 85.7 146.0 338.9

Illinois 45.7 101.5 156.8 205.7

Source: Illinois Department of Natural Resources – Critical Trends Assessment Program The Steering Committee established goals for the plan in three broad categories: environmental, societal, and policy (Table 5). The goals reflect the unique resource and the opportunities a management plan afford the Village. At the same time, the goals preserve the Village’s desire for responsible growth within the watershed. 2.3.1 Ecological Goals These goals strive to improve or protect the physical and biological resources within the watershed. 2.3.1.1 Improved Water Quality There are seven ecological goals for the plan. The first goal is to improve water quality in Woods Creek and downstream Woods Creek Lake. The success in achieving this goal may be measured by evaluating the improvement in water quality parameters such as turbidity, dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, BOD, and others. The creek should ultimately meet and exceed the state’s standard for primary contact and potable water supply. Meeting this goal will provide excellent water quality for aquatic species and will enable other management and restoration efforts to improve aquatic habitat. 2.3.1.2 Reintroduce Native Vegetation Reintroducing native vegetation into the watershed’s landscape is the second goal established by the committee. The area within the watershed maintained or converted to native plant communities may measure success. It also may be measured by the willingness of developers to use native plant materials in their landscape plans. Native plant communities provide habitat for threatened and endangered species, hold water on the landscape and are drought resistant. They provide areas of high infiltration that replenish the shallow groundwater. They reduce the peak flows and increase the low flows in Woods Creek making a more suitable habitat for aquatic

17

Figure 5. 1997 Color aerial photograph showing much of the Woods Creek Watershed.

18

resources. Native plant communities hold and trap soil better than turf grasses and exotic landscapes and improve the quality of runoff reaching streams.

TABLE 5

Goals for the Woods Creek Watershed Protection Plan

ECOLOGICAL

SOCIETAL

POLICY

Improve water quality in Woods Creek

Provide educational opportunities Create a model plan for other communities

Re-introduce native vegetation into the landscape

Increase recreational opportunities Develop ordinance to conserve natural resources & protect environmentally sensitive areas

Protect & enhance fens and high quality wetland resources

Provide a natural aesthetic setting within the Village

Form a “Conservation community” with neighboring villages

Protect the integrity of hydric soils

Increase usable wildlife habitat

Preserve & replenish aquatic resources

Protect and preserve the floodplain

2.3.1.3 Protect and Enhance Fens and Wetlands Protecting and enhancing fens and high quality wetland resources in the watershed is the third goal. Success may be determined by measuring the area and quality of wetland resources in the watershed. Wetlands provide habitat for many threatened and endangered species, improve water quality, and reduce flooding. Protecting wetlands within the watershed is more complicated than just preventing the direct loss due to filling or land conversion. The water for many wetlands is supplied from the shallow groundwater. Activities that diminish the recharge area for shallow groundwater will indirectly affect the wetlands. 2.3.1.4 Protect Hydric Soils The fourth goal is to protect the integrity of hydric soils within the watershed. Measuring the area of intact hydric soils provides a means of evaluating this goal. Protecting hydric soil integrity goes hand in glove with protecting wetlands, since one characteristic of wetlands is the presence of hydric soils. In the Woods Creek watershed more than one-third of the area is underlain by soils classified as hydric but many of these areas are drained to increase agricultural productivity. 2.3.1.5 Increase Wildlife Habitat Increasing usable wildlife habitat is important to maintain diversity and increase the functional resiliency of the ecosystems within the watershed. Ecological inventories conducted by state and federal agencies and as part of this project demonstrate the presence of many unusual and rare plant and animal species within and nearby the watershed. The watershed fixes carbon and

cycles nutrients and water. Wildlife survived in the watershed despite intensive pressure from agriculture. Urban landscapes are even less hospitable and protecting and connecting patches of habitat are key steps in preserving diversity and ecosystem function. Direct measurement of habitat area and inventories of functional guilds may monitor progress toward achieving this goal. Ecological restoration especially of areas with hydric soils is one approach to increase wildlife habitat. 2.3.1.6 Preserve and Replenish Aquatic Resources Despite the impacts of more than a century of farming and agricultural impacts Woods Creek retains remnants of a diverse and healthy aquatic ecosystem fed by groundwater. Although fish and invertebrate diversity have declined the stream has the potential to regain a diverse assemblage of plants and animals. Sampling benthic and aquatic invertebrates and fish in Woods Creek provides a measure of progress for this goal. 2.3.1.7 Protect and Preserve the Floodplain Public ownership of the Woods Creek floodplain and its use as public open space and a wildlife corridor is a goal of the plan. Floodplains are significant in removing pollutants, reducing flood peaks, providing wildlife habitat and habitat for threatened and endangered species, and offering opportunities for outdoor recreation. The Village acquires this land in fee as donations from developers. The success in achieving this goal is measured by the proportion of the 100 yr floodplain in public ownership. 2.3.2 Societal Goals

nquin and the

Silphium perfoliatum or Cup Plant.

These goals are directed at improving the quality of life for residents of Algo

19

Woods Creek watershed. 2.3.2.1 Provide Educational Opportunities Woods Creek and the surrounding watershed offer unique opportunities for primary and secondary schools and colleges and universities to teach students about the life sciences and the environment. There also are great opportunities for both formal and informal public education. DePaul University and Roosevelt University already use Woods Creek as a location for teaching

Beaver dam and a flooded meadow

environmental analysis, ecology, aquatic biology, and limnology. Jacobs High School is approximately ¼ mi from the stream and students are actively monitoring water quality. The number of educational programs utilizing the stream and other natural resource areas within the watershed may measure achievement. 2.3.2.2 Increase Recreational Opportunities The Steering Committee recognized the need for outdoor recreational opportunities within the Woods Creek watershed. Certain recreational activities and facilities are compatible with ecological goals. Carefully planned paths and bikeways allow citizens to enjoy the public open space and preserve its other functions. Walking, jogging, birding, nature photography, painting and drawing, and other activities can be enjoyed in areas set aside and managed for these activities. The achievement of this goal can be measured by a census of trail use. 2.3.2.3 Provide a Natural Aesthetic Setting Natural areas and open space contribute to the quality of life in a community. Algonquin set along the bluffs of the Fox River and its tributaries such as Woods Creek, has relief not typical of the Chicagoland region. The protection of the creek, the riparian corridor, and other natural areas coupled with the provision of eco-corridors enhances the visual environment of the Village and creates a desirable environment for residents and businesses alike. Measuring success meeting this goal is less straightforward than other goals. The proportion of lots adjacent to natural areas and eco-trails may be used as a measure of success. Similarly the proportion of lots that have a vista overlooking a natural area may measure success. 2.3.3 Policy Goals The aim of these goals is to provide tools for local government to effectively manage the natural resources within their jurisdiction. 2.3.3.1 Create a Model Plan Watershed management and protection are critical issues in the Fox River basin and the USEPA, the State, and the Fox River Partners recognize these. Algonquin is one of the first communities

t just regional

to undertake a watershed management plan, at the local level, that addresses no

20

water quality and flooding issues but also incorporates the land use and economic goals of the community. The plan should become a template for other communities to use in managing and conserving resources within small watersheds. 2.3.3.2 Develop a Conservation Ordinance The formulation and adoption of a conservation ordinance is the culmination of the grant and the measure of the achievement of this goal. The ordinance must reflect the concerns of the

21

stakeholders in the watershed, the wishes of the citizenry of Algonquin, and practicality of implementation and enforcement. The ordinance should also afford protection and conservation of the unique natural resource in Woods Creek and its watershed. 2.3.3.3 Form a Conservation Community Woods Creek flows northward into Lake in the Hills and to Woods Creek Lake. The outlet from the lake, Crystal Creek reenters Algonquin and discharges into the Fox River. Six neighboring communities, Carpentersville, Cary, Crystal Lake, Gilberts, Huntley, and Lake in the Hills share interest in the greater Woods Creek watershed. A conservation community provides support for mutually advantageous conservation initiatives. Area-wide efforts can produce greater benefits than purely local efforts. The measure of success meeting this goal is the proportion of communities joining the effort. 2.4 EXISTING PROTECTION MEASURES There is myriad federal, state, and local laws and regulations intended to protect natural resources such as wetlands, floodplains, and water quality. The application and effectiveness of these laws and regulations have been reviewed in numerous studies and reports (Wiginton, Jr. and Beschta 2000, Salvesen 1994, Kusler and Daly 1989, Kusler, Quammen, and Brooks 1986). The most important regulations applicable to the Woods Creek watershed are listed in the Table 6. The efficacy of these regulations in protecting Algonquin’s natural resources and in promoting the Village planning objectives has not been reviewed.

TABLE 6

Resource Protection Regulations Affecting Woods Creek

REGULATION JURISDICTION TARGET RESOURCE Section 404, Clean Water Act Federal Wetlands, Waters of U.S. Threatened & Endangered Species Act Federal Rare plant and animal species and habitat Illinois Stormwater Management Act State Floodplains Illinois Farmland Protection Act State Prime agricultural land McHenry Co. Stormwater Management Ordinance

Local Floodplain and wetlands

Kane Co. Stormwater Management Ordinance Local Floodplain and wetlands Village of Algonquin Comprehensive Plan Local Open Space Village of Algonquin Tree Protection Code Local Large trees A review of the key regulations affecting the Woods Creek watershed reveals that there are five major shortcomings in their application to resource protection in the watershed. First, not all the resources valued in the watershed are covered by regulations or they are not adequately protected from direct loss. As an example, the preservation of hydric soils is a goal of this plan. Existing regulations only tangentially protect these areas through Section 404 of the Clean Water Act or the Illinois Stormwater Management Act. Locations with hydric soil that are not wetlands or within the 100-year floodplain are afforded no protection.

Similarly, it is a goal of this plan to preserve and replenish aquatic resources such as benthic invertebrates that serve as food for fish and other higher species. Existing regulations do little to maintain stable hydrologic conditions within the creek, prevent changes in water chemistry, or limit changes in the ambient water temperature that change the stream habitat. There are no state regulations that prevent the destruction of woodlands or prairie ecosystems unless they afford habitat for threatened or endangered species. Nor are there regulations that protect aesthetic resources such as view-sheds or solar access. The Village has a tree preservation code that protects large diameter trees (>10” dbh) and clear cutting. The Village Comprehensive Plan also designates open space areas allowing the Village to prevent development in these areas. A second shortcoming is the ineffective protection of natural resources from indirect impacts. For example, the rare fens in the watershed depend upon shallow groundwater to maintain saturated soil conditions. Section 404 of the CWA protects the fens from filling or direct loss. However, recharge of the shallow groundwater occurs by infiltration of rainfall in pervious upland soils. As land is converted to urban uses impervious surface area increases and less water soaks into the ground. The construction of storm sewers and other underground utilities further reduces shallow groundwater. The result is a permanent change in the hydrology of the fen and an irreparable loss of a valuable resource. Other indirect impacts include light spillage from commercial development, encroachment by adjacent property owners, runoff contaminated with lawn chemicals or oil and grease from parking lots, and the reduction in supporting ecosystems. Most ecosystems function together with other ecosystems or units in a landscape. When these landscape units are changed or destroyed the effects are felt throughout the landscape. In order to protect valued natural resources, the system must be evaluated as a whole. Third the planning and approval process is reactionary because there is no comprehensive

usly available

Rolling farmland in watershed.

database to use when evaluating projects and development. Much of the previo

22

information was at a resolution too coarse to be of value when evaluating land use changes in a small watershed. Fortunately, new technologies are making environmental data available at a scale useful for decision-making at a small watershed level. The challenge is to compile the information for Woods Creek watershed quickly enough to make sound decisions to protect the resources in the watershed.

23

The Village has taken the initial step in providing planners with a tool by initiating the development of a Village-wide GIS database. The next step is to augment this with meso-scale environmental data from watershed and stream inventories. Fourth, enforcement of existing laws and ordinances is not effective. Violations of Section 404 often go unnoticed or are unreported until the damage is irreversible. The speed that development takes place and the limited resources available to the USACE make it unlikely that this will change without a local initiative. Even when permits are issued the conditions imposed on the applicant are often ignored. Silt fences and erosion control measures are not repaired promptly and equipment operators regularly damage protected areas through careless operation. Finally, natural resources of local value are not protected. These resources may include wildlife habitat, recharge areas, local natural heritage areas, or valuable outdoor recreation sites. These resources are best protected at a local level in the context of an overall land use plan. The wishes of the local citizenry can be fully considered when adopting ordinances and guidelines.

3.0 WATERSHED RESOURCES 3.1 METHODOLOGY Developing a watershed protection plan requires a defined geographic unit. The hydrologic boundaries of the Woods Creek watershed within the Algonquin planning jurisdiction are approximately Algonquin Road, Randall Road, Huntley Road, and Square Barn Road. However there were significant areas east of Randall Road and west of Square Barn Road that are in the watershed. Also a small portion of Rat Creek watershed lies west of Randall Road. Further, the exact boundary would be indeterminate without detailed topographic mapping. Administering a plan for an area with a meandering boundary is difficult for the Village and presents landowners and developers with the possibility of having different requirements for parcels of land straddling an irregular watershed boundary. To avoid these problems the Village defined the Woods Creek Watershed planning area. This area is bounded by Algonquin Road to the north, Randall Road to the east, and the portions within the planning jurisdiction of the Village north of Huntley Road. The area extends west of Lakewood Road to the planning limits of Algonquin (Figure 6). Approximately 1520 ha (3750 ac) are encompassed within the watershed planning area. The inventory of resources depended heavily upon studies and information from federal, state and local sources. To the extent practicable information was verified and supplemented by field reconnaissance. Detailed topographic mapping, soil borings, tile studies, hydrologic and flood plain analyses, wetland delineations, and other studies were researched from plans submitted to the Village by developers. To the extent practical the results of the inventory have been incorporated into a watershed GIS. In the future this information will be included in the village-wide GIS presently underdevelopment.

Stream inventory using GPS technology.

3.1.1 Woods Creek

24

The technical team conducted an inventory of the morphological and biological features of Woods Creek from its headwaters just north of County Line Road to the bridge at Algonquin Road using the procedure developed by the Lake County Forest Preserve District. This procedure notes significant physical features such as streambed material, bar formation, bank erosion, pools and riffles, and discharge locations. For consistency, one scientist inventoried the entire stream length.

25

Figure 6. Future Land Use Plan for the Woods Creek Watershed.

26

The physical and biological conditions within Woods Creek were mapped using GPS technology. A global position system (GPS) was used to locate key physical features including field tile discharges, pools and riffles, and detention basin outfalls. This information was incorporated into GIS database for mapping and permanent record. Woods Creek is an ungaged stream. Stream flow and discharge data are not available. Several studies and revisions by engineers have mapped the approximate elevations of the 10 year and 100-year flood elevations south of Algonquin Road. However, a coherent study from Algonquin Road to the headwaters has not been done. Further, several projects proposed in the watershed may require modification of the floodplain to provide roadway crossings and wetland mitigation. This information eventually will be incorporated into the Village-wide GIS database. 3.1.2 Watershed Resources The technical team relied upon historical and current aerial photography from the NRCS and NIPC and field reconnaissance to identify potential natural resource areas. Additionally, wetland and aquatic resource areas were located using the National Wetland Inventory (USFWS 1980), Illinois GIS (IDNR 1997), McHenry County ADID maps (NIPC et al 1998) and recent soil survey information. Locations of highly erodable soils, steep slopes and potential recharge areas were located using digital soils information for McHenry County (USDA 1999) and the Soil Survey for Kane County (Goddard 1979) and USGS topographic maps. 3.2 INVENTORIES AND GIS Environmental data and information for planning, monitoring and even research is readily adaptable to GIS and database technologies. These technologies are changing the way we analyze and apply information and making sophisticated and formerly time consuming analyses available to smaller municipalities. Recognizing these changes, the work done in the Woods Creek watershed is adapted for inclusion in the Village-wide GIS. We have linked reports, species lists, and photographs to sites in the watershed. Specific recommendations are made to extend the utility of the GIS. These include submission of reports, plans, studies, and other documents in a digital format so that they may be linked to sites contained in the GIS. Groundwater monitoring wells, stage gages, temperature monitoring sites, and water quality sampling stations all will be located and contained in the GIS. Figure 8 shows a sample output from the GIS. The output depicts wetlands, soils, and the relationship to Woods Creek in the northeastern portion of the watershed. Information and displays such as these can be effective in identifying valuable natural resource areas, in this case probable locations for the recharge of shallow groundwater. Appendix 6.1 provides a file tree and list of coverages for the interim GIS created as part of this project. Appendix 6.2 provides the metadata for the coverages included in the project.

27

Figure 7. A sample output from the interim project GIS.

3.3 PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION This section discusses the existing problems in Woods Creek and their relationship to changes in the watershed. It also identifies threats to the future health of Woods Creek. 3.3.1 Existing Problems There are no long-term comprehensive ecological, water quality, or hydrologic studies of Woods Creek in the Village of Algonquin. A study for the Village of Lake in the Hills documents water quality in stream entering Woods Creek Lake but has not been made available to Algonquin. Physical and biological inventories and discrete measurements of field parameters suggest that Woods Creek is impacted in the same way that other small Northeastern Illinois streams by agriculture and urbanization. Woods Creek is prone to rapid increases in flow after storm events. This causes Woods Creek Drive to flood several times each year. This type of hydrology is common in agricultural watersheds where there are moderate to steep slopes and runoff reaches the stream too quickly. Channel cutting and excessive bank erosion occur throughout the length of the creek. Slumping and other mass wasting occur at locations where deep-rooted vegetation cannot stabilize the banks. Creeks are dynamic systems and a healthy stream will meander and alter its bed and floodplain over time. Problems occur when the processes are speeded up by human activities in the watershed. Excess sediment and turbidity are problems in Woods Creek. The sediment is a result of soil carried off agricultural fields and in-stream erosion. More recently, residential and commercial development has contributed to the sediment load in the creek when erosion control measures are not properly maintained or are ignored. The most obvious sediment accumulations in-stream are a direct result of recent construction of Bunker Hill Drive and a developers stormwater outfall that was not constructed according to conditions of their Section 404 permit.

aul University

Woods Creek at bankfull stage near Algonquin Road.

Despite the streambank erosion and sediment loads, a preliminary study by DeP

28

showed healthy invertebrate populations in the upstream reaches of the creek and moderately healthy populations downstream. The decline in invertebrate health appeared directly correlated with excess sediment accumulations. Woods Creek has a permanent flow to approximately 200 m (650 ft) upstream or south of Woods Creek Drive. Further upstream the flow becomes intermittent. Juvenile Bluegills and other fish have been found approximately 150 m (500 ft) south of Woods Creek Drive. Larger fish (150

mm) have been observed immediately north of Bunker Hill Drive. Great Blue Heron use the reaches downstream of Bunker Hill Drive for fishing. A limited number of dissolved oxygen (DO) measurements and temperature measurements were made and do not indicate that low DO is a problem. Under base flow conditions in-stream temperatures reflect the dependency on cool groundwater. The partially closed canopy provides shade and reduces solar heating. Recently, the canopy has been breached at three locations: first for the extension of Bunker Hill Drive, second for a stormwater outfall 100 m (300 ft) north of Woods Creek Drive, and finally for a storm sewer crossing 150 m (500 ft) south of Algonquin Road. Development in the downstream portion of the watershed has altered the balance between surface water and groundwater entering the stream. Impervious surface has increased and infiltration has been reduced. Runoff is directed to detention basins and released to the stream as surface water. Woods Creek fen and the Meadows fen are already impacted by reductions in the volume and duration groundwater discharge. The altered hydrology will result in shifts in species composition and habitat within the fens over time. The most important change may be the lack of peat accumulation that is part of the definition of a fen. Some preliminary measurements show that the surface water released to Woods Creek is 10° C warmer than groundwater. Surface water in detention basins was measured at 23° C in early September and groundwater discharges were 13°. The in-stream water temperature was approximately 17° C. Increased ambient stream water temperature can result in lowered DO levels and changes in stream biota. Construction impacts to Woods Creek and the wetlands in the watershed are common. Despite widespread knowledge of permit requirements for wetlands and erosion control there have been four violations within the watershed and near Wood Creek in the last 18 months. In two cases

Bank failure on Woods Creek caused by rotational slumping.

29

the damage was unintentional but avoidable. In the other two cases the cause is unclear. Observations by the technical team during the past 18 months suggest that many more violations went unreported and unabated. The failure to maintain erosion control measures such as silt fences was the most common violation observed. This leads to heavy sediment loads in the creek after storm events.

3.3.2 Threats to the Watershed Presently, Woods Creek depends upon groundwater, discharge from field tiles, and seeps to maintain the permanent flow. In the future nearly 90% of the watershed will be developed and sewered. The amount of impervious surface will increase as will surface runoff. Woods Creek will become increasingly dependent on the controlled release of detained surface water for its flow. The creek will be threatened by altered and potentially less stable hydrology. Equally as important as the creek are the wetlands within the watershed that depend on groundwater discharge for their hydrology. The Cove fen in particular still appears to be accumulating peat. Reduced infiltration may alter the hydrology so that the fen is not saturated throughout the growing season. Although the area may remain a wetland it would no longer function as a fen and would become similar to a sedge meadow or wet prairie. A less obvious but no less severe threat will be the potential for increased ambient temperature as the proportion of groundwater and surface water contributions change. Lowered DO levels may be a future problem. Overall stream health may be threatened by degraded water quality. Problems with urban streams have been well documented in Northeastern Illinois and the Midwest since the early 80s (Hey and Schafer 1983, Waschbusch, Selbig and Bannerman 2000). Stream degradation will occur unless measures are taken to insure that stormwater runoff receives treatment before being discharged to the creek. Encroachment by residents and businesses and other indirect impacts will threaten all the natural resources in the watershed unless buffers are provided. Lawn and garden chemicals reach sensitive natural areas through runoff, excessive application rates, and overspray. Buffers and physical barriers may reduce the impact. Experience in other communities shows that adjacent property owners inadvertently or intentionally use public lands for sheds, playground equipment, gardens, and extended lawns unless a physical barrier is provided.

Stormwater detention basin near Woods Creek.

30

4.0 WATERSHED PROTECTION STRATEGIES Successful watershed protection starts with a holistic approach to management. The Village recognizes that meeting the desired growth and protecting the resources even in a small watershed requires a spectrum of strategies and the flexibility to apply the appropriate strategies to each site. Blanket regulations often unfairly burden development where impacts are minimal. At the same time they fail to adequately protect the most sensitive resources. Most effective watershed protection starts with sensitive site design. This plan recommends strategies in three categories, site design, structural, and administrative. The categories are not rigid and there is considerable overlap between them. The strategies or BMP’s were selected from proven practices, tested in communities both local and across the United States. These practices were adapted to meet the needs of Algonquin. 4.1 SITE DESIGN STRATEGIES Environmentally sensitive site design is a critical first step in protecting and conserving natural resources in an urbanizing watershed. It is especially important in the Woods Creek watershed where wetlands, fens, and the stream hydrology depend upon shallow groundwater. Measures aimed at protecting these resources solely by isolating the resource area will not effectively conserve the resource. Loss of recharge areas, reduction in habitat size, and increased human interaction will result in loss of the resource through indirect impacts. Site design can minimize the direct and equally as important the indirect impacts of development. 4.1.1 Eco-corridors The inventories of the resources within the watershed located wetlands, streams and other sensitive natural resources. These resources are often isolated by agricultural land and lack connectivity. This diminishes the functional performance of the resource. Agriculture, however, does not represent as great an impact to connectivity as more intense urban land uses. Eco-corridors expand on the concept of wildlife corridors by allowing compatible

uses within the corridor. Corridors are

31

planted and maintained in native vegetation, typically prairie, savanna, or open woodland. Pedestrian and bicycle paths, drainage swales, recharge trenches/basins, and underground utilities are allowed within the corridor. Street lighting, permanent structures, active recreation areas, playfields, parking lots, and other uses are not allowed.

An eco-corridor with a bike path and savanna restoration in Highland Park, Illinois.

32

Corridor widths greater than 100 m or about 300 ft are optimal for wildlife. However, corridors of this width often prohibit effective use of the land. Very narrow corridors, less than 30 m or 100 ft, are ineffective as wildlife conduits and provide inadequate space for paths, swales, and native vegetation. Further maintenance of narrow corridors is difficult. Within the watershed eco-corridors connecting significant resource areas with Woods Creek should be greater than 150 ft (45 m). This allows adequate width for an eight-foot path with two feet of clear zone on each side, a vegetated swale or infiltration trench, and native vegetation. Eco-corridors should be located to protect natural drainageways and small tributary channels to Woods Creek. Eco-corridors also should be used to protect stands of trees and other remnant patches of native vegetation. Connectivity is a ecological design principal that increases the functional value of natural ecosystem units by providing naturalized corridors that allow for the free migration of wildlife from one landscape unit to another. Eco-corridors should be required between all natural landscape units within the watershed. There are other tangible benefits to the Village citizenry by using the corridors for trails and passive recreation areas. They also may serve as buffers between incompatible land uses. For example, studies show that 100 feet of forested buffer provides a noticeable reduction in traffic noise. Corridors should be clearly identified and separated from adjacent land uses to prevent incidental encroachment and diminished functionality. Signs every 150 feet or preferably a split rail or other decorative fence should define the corridor. Figure 8 shows a conceptual eco-corridor and resource protection plan for the watershed. 4.1.2 Clustered Housing The climate and terrain of Northeastern Illinois makes mass clearing and grading of residential development sites economical and tempting to homebuilders. Site plans often are too dense and spread across the entire parcel without consideration for sensitive landscape areas. Open space is targeted specifically toward active recreational uses. The result has been an ongoing loss of important natural resources, increased reliance on structural solutions for stormwater management, a loss of natural pollutant abatement, and erosion of the natural heritage of the region. NIPC identified five categories of sensitive areas within the region: ! Stream corridors ! Shorelines ! Wetlands ! Woodlands ! Steep slopes (>8%)

Within the Woods Creek watershed two other categories are considered important, recharge areas and areas with hydric soils. It also is clear that to protect wetlands and other sensitive resources, land planners must address indirect impacts to the resource as well as the direct loss.

33

Figure 8. The map shows the approximate locations of eco-corridors and important resources to be protected in the watershed. The map was generated from information in the project GIS.

Environmentally sensitive site design can reduce the loss of these significant resources and their valuable functions. Simultaneously, the aesthetic value of the development and quality of life within the Village can be enhanced. Clustered housing allows developers to retain overall site density and preserve and even enhance sensitive areas. There are cost savings to the developer including reduced infrastructure costs. The GIS developed for the Woods Creek watershed identifies the location of sensitive areas, stream channels, and potential recharge areas. The design of clustered housing should result in increased open space being maintained in native grassland, savanna, woodland, and wetland vegetation. Clustered housing is consistent and compatible with other strategies in this plan including eco-corridors, environmental buffers, native landscaping, and the acquisition of floodplain and natural areas. Clustered housing should be the strategy of choice to conserve recharge areas, hydric soils, woodlands, and other sensitive resource areas within the watershed. 4.1.3 Reduced Street Widths The reduction in permeability associated with the conversion of land from native plant communities to agriculture and finally to higher density urban uses creates challenges for stormwater management, water quality, wetland and natural resource management. Traditional approaches have relied upon storage and controlled release from dry or wet basins. Studies have shown that reducing the impervious surface area in a watershed can be effective in reducing the volume of stormwater and can improve water quality. A result is the reduction in peak stream flows and an increase in stream base flow stemming from increased groundwater discharge to the stream. This is beneficial to the aquatic and benthic communities in the stream and reduces streambank erosion and improves dissolved oxygen levels in the stream. Reducing the widths of low traffic volume residential streets is one strategy to reduce impervious area. Narrower streets reduce construction costs and maintenance cost to the Village. The standard width for residential streets in the watershed should be 27 ft from back of curb to back of curb. This allows for two twelve-foot wide travel lanes and 1-foot wide gutter flags. Overnight on-street parking is restricted in the Village and the 30-foot front yard setback allows for storage of vehicles in driveways. 4.1.4 Natural Resource Buffers Effective conservation of natural resources requires not only the protection of the resource from direct loss but also efforts to minimize indirect impacts from higher

density land uses. The magnitude of the

34

impact to the resource depends not only on proximity but also on terrain, the land use activity, and the sensitivity of the resource. Buffers are widely used as a means of reducing indirect impacts to natural resources. However, selecting a single A buffer community between golf course and wetlands.

buffer width, the one-size fits all approach, may not produce the desired degree of protection and can inflict excessive restriction on the use of land. As an example, a 20-foot buffer may provide adequate protection for woodlands near low-density estate residential development where drainage is away from the woodland. However, this same width buffer would afford little protection for a sensitive fen next to a large commercial development with large parking lots, high-mast lighting, and steep sloped ornamental landscape areas draining into the wetland. At this location 100-foot or wider buffers would be appropriate. Buffers should be provided around all sensitive natural resources within the Woods Creek watershed. The buffer width should average 50 feet and at no location should it be less than 20 feet wide. The buffer widths at specific locations will be determined through consultation with the Village. Buffers will be planted in native vegetation, usually prairie, savanna or woodland. Eco-trails, interpretive signs, vegetated swales, fences, and recharge trenches are permissible in buffers. Permanent structures, ornamental landscaping, lighting, and commercial activities are not allowed. Signs placed around the perimeter will identify buffers to prevent encroachment by adjacent property owners. At locations where buffer widths are less than 50 feet a decorative fence will be installed to prevent encroachment. Although detention basins isolate sensitive areas from more intense land use they do not always provide the optimal transition landscape. Detention basins may be counted up to 50% of the buffer width and developers should be encouraged to locate detention storage between sensitive areas and more intense land uses. 4.1.5 Native Landscape Materials Most of the landscape we see in Algonquin and Northeastern Illinois is covered with Eurasian plants. These plants, brought to the region by the earliest settlers represent species that are adapted to an environment manipulated and maintained by human efforts. In many locations these species thrive and perform beneficial functions of fixing carbon, cycling nutrients, stabilizing soil, and providing food and fiber for human consumption.

35

However, many species we see are not well adapted to the warm humid continental climate of Chicagoland. The typical landscape plants and turf grasses have shallow roots and high transpiration rates. These plants are annuals or shallow rooted species that require regular watering during the hot summer months. These plants do little to retain water in the landscape and because of their small root structure they do not improve the tilth and fertility of the soil.

Chelone glabra or Turtlehead a wetland forb.

36

In contrast, our native grasses and forbs often are deep-rooted perennials capable of withstanding all but the most severe drought without watering. These native plants capture and retain precipitation in the landscape by increasing the rate of infiltration and improve the quality of the soil. They also provide habitat for birds, mammals, butterflies, and other fauna. Since native landscaping requires less human effort to maintain it has other less tangible benefits such as improved air quality and reduced energy consumption. Buffers, eco-corridors, and detention basins should be planted in native vegetation. Open space that is not used for active recreation also should be planted with native vegetation. The Village should provide information to homeowners and residents on the advantages and use of native vegetation for landscaping their private lots. Developers should not use highly invasive or aggressive cultivars within the Woods Creek watershed. 4.1.6 Rooftop and Rear Yard Runoff Rooftops and turf grass lawns reduce the effective infiltration of precipitation. Shallow groundwater is vital to many of the watersheds wetlands and to the physical and biological quality of Woods Creek. Roof drains and rear yards should not drain to storm sewers. Where possible, water from these areas should be directed to dry wells, infiltration basins, recharge trenches, grassed swales, or rain gardens. Design guidance for these BMP’s can be found in several recent NIPC publications (Price and Dreher 2000, Dreher and Mariner 1994, Dreher and Price 1992). At some locations runoff may be dispersed and directed across filter strips or buffer zones before reaching waterways or wetlands. 4.2 STRUCTURAL STRATEGIES 4.2.1 Wetland Detention Design Urban runoff has been shown to be a significant factor in the degradation of stream water quality and aquatic habitats. Studies clearly show that detention basins planted with wetland vegetation improve the quality of stormwater released from the basin when compared with dry detention and typical wet detention (Price and Dreher 2000, Harbor et al 2000). Nutrients such as nitrate nitrogen and phosphorous may be reduced by as much as 90%. Suspended solids and turbidity are reduced by settling and mechanical filtration by the wetland plants. The degradation of water quality downstream in Woods Creek Lake and the Fox River have been linked with agriculture and with the increasing urbanization of the Upper Fox River basin. Preliminary studies in Woods Creek show that although the creek is degraded a valuable resource still exists and that with proper management can be improved (Mitsch and Jorgensen 1989, Moshiri 1993). Within the watershed all detention storage should be designed as permeable bottom wetland basins. These basins should be sized to provide extended storage with a release rate of 0.05 cfs/ac. Guidance for basin design may be found in Urban Stormwater Best Management Practices for Northeastern Illinois (Price and Dreher 2000).

4.2.2 Vegetated Swales and Filter Strips Vegetated swales and filter strips are effective means of reducing the pollutant load carried by urban stormwater. However, these BMP’s are not appropriate in all settings. In Algonquin swales and filter strips are appropriate in rear yards, clustered residential development, business parks, commercial centers, eco-corridors, buffer strips, and public open space. Swales are not allowed for roadway drainage. Swales should be trapezoidal with a minimum bottom width of 3 feet. Side slopes should be 5:1 horizontal to vertical or flatter. The depth of channel will depend upon conveyance requirements however in no case should the swale exceed 4 feet in depth. Swales must be planted with native prairie grasses and wetland vegetation. Swales should be designed with slopes of approximately 2% and not greater than 10%. In cases where slopes are less than 2% the design must include an underdrain and infiltration system to prevent ponding. In exceptional cases slopes may exceed 10% for short distances provided the design, limits velocities to prevent scour and erosion. Design guidance can be found in Urban Stormwater Best Management Practices for Northeastern Illinois. Filter strips coupled with level spreaders and other diffuse release outlet should be used to provide added treatment and infiltration for stormwater before it reaches Woods Creek. Point source outfalls should be discouraged to Woods Creek and its tributaries. 4.2.3 Infiltration Trenches and Basins Decreasing runoff volume and increasing infiltration is beneficial to water quality and stream hydrology. The fens and other wetland resources in the Woods Creek watershed depend upon shallow groundwater for survival. Urbanization and the associated loss of infiltration and recharge result in the loss of these valuable natural resources. Infiltration trenches and larger basins offer a means to partially offset the loss of pervious surface area. These basins are compatible with eco-corridors, public open space, industrial and commercial development, and clustered development. Design should follow guidance in the Urban Stormwater Best Management Practices for

Infiltration trench and buffer zone in Highland Park, IL.

Northeastern Illinois.

37

4.2.4 Eco-trail Design Bicycle and pedestrian trails afford opportunities for outdoor recreation and may reduce the dependency on motor vehicles for short trips. These trail often pass through or near sensitive resource areas giving people a chance to observe and enjoy nature. In these locations, designers must take special care to minimize adverse impacts to the resource.

Maintaining both surface and subsurface drainage is critical to wetland resources. In other sensitive landscapes the use of inert materials is important. Boardwalks may be a design options to minimize impacts when crossing wetlands. In wooded areas the design and construction should minimize compaction and damage to root systems. The Village discourages longitudinal encroachments in wetlands. Specific designs for paths should be negotiated with the Village during the design review. 4.2.5 Signs and Fencing Wetlands, wildlife habitat, recharge areas, and other valuable natural resources in the watershed are at special risk during construction. Equipment operators frequently knock down silt fences, drive heavy equipment through wetlands and prairies and otherwise damage these areas. Often the operators are unaware of the protected status of the resource or the reason for the fencing. A high visibility construction fence should surround all wetlands and sensitive resource areas in the watershed for the duration of construction. This fence is in addition to silt fences or other erosion control measures. Additionally, the contractor should post clearly visible signs indicating the limits of construction at intervals not less than 150 ft around the perimeter of the critical resource. 4.3 ADMINISTRATIVE STRATEGIES 4.3.1 Watershed Protection Fee The conservation and management of natural resources is not without costs to the Village. A means of providing funding for ongoing management of these resources is through an impact fee paid by developers as land is converted from agriculture or undeveloped condition to a higher use. This fee is invested in an endowment to fund future activities. 4.3.1.1 Residential Fee Residential development should be assessed on a density basis. We recommend a rate of $250/dwelling unit.

Erosion from construction site in Woods Creek.

38

fee ($) = number of dwelling units * $250 4.3.1.2 Commercial Property Commercial property has the potential for even greater impacts to resources at the same time sound site design can reduce impacts. We recommend a rate based upon the size of development and the percent impervious surface area. This encourages developers to adopt sound site design

principals. The base rate should be $2000/ac for commercial, industrial, and institutional uses. The watershed protection fee would be multiplied by the fraction of the site that is impervious surface using the following equation: fee ($) = site area * fraction impervious surface * 1.035(Present year – 2000) * $2,000 For this calculation impervious surface will include areas that are planted in turf grasses and non-native ornamental species that do not encourage infiltration or interception storage. Areas planted in native grasses, forbs, and trees will be considered pervious area. 4.3.2 Construction Inspection Construction activities have the greatest potential for acutely impacting ecosystems. Woods Creek, nearby wetlands, and other natural resources in the watershed are not an exception. Inspection and enforcement are identified as one of the major weaknesses in the existing regulations. The USACE expressed interest in developing a cooperative inspection program. Village inspectors visit construction sites more frequently than those from the USACE and NRCS. Also the Village is the usually the first government body to receive complaints from watchful citizens. Village inspectors should check sites for compliance with erosion control measures, for unpermitted activities in wetlands, and other violations of environmental regulations. Two actions must be undertaken to implement this strategy. First, agreements or memos of understanding should be arranged with the USACE and other resource agencies. Second Village personnel should be trained to conduct the inspections. 4.3.3 Floodplain and Natural Area Acquisition Algonquin has accepted and encouraged donations of natural areas, floodplain and wetlands from property owners and developers where the acquired property supports the Village land use plan. Much of the Woods Creek floodplain and riparian corridor has been acquired as well as the bulk of the Woods Creek fen, the Meadows fen and part of the Cove fen. Algonquin also has acquired parkland and other

open space in the watershed.

39

Property owners and developers are often willing to donate wetlands and floodplain to the Village because of restrictions on their use. However, upland sites that may provide groundwater recharge or have valuable upland habitats are not likely candidates for donation. Protection of these areas is

Springtime high water along the Woods Creek floodplain.

40

important to the overall functioning of wetlands, riparian and aquatic communities, and the wildlife that utilize the watershed. The Village should identify and prioritize key resource areas for acquisition through donation or purchase with state or federal grant funds. These areas should include parcels necessary to complete the bicycle and pedestrian trail system and parcels that provide for connectivity of resource areas. Natural resources especially ecological resources have diminished functional value when they are isolated landscape units. Providing wildlife or eco-corridors enhances their functional value and their benefits to society. As part of this plan a preliminary list of sites was developed and prioritized (Table 7). The technical team established criteria for inclusion and ranking sites. These criteria included: ecological factors such as diversity, habitat, and connectivity; physical factors such as flood potential, soil conditions and recharge potential; and planning factors such as consistency with land use plan, recreational opportunities, and management costs. 4.3.4 Public Outreach Lack of information and understanding is often the biggest obstacle to effective watershed planning and management. The functions and values of the resources in the Woods Creek watershed are little known outside of the resource and planning professionals working with the Village.

TABLE 7

Open Space Acquisition Priority RANK DESCRIPTION LOCATION/SIZE STATUS

1 Woods Creek riparian corridor Algonquin Rd. – County Line Rd., 75 ac. Partially acquired. 2 Woods Creek Fen 42.1737! N, 88.3449! W, 20 ac. Donated to Village 3 Cove Fen 42.1587! N, 88.3560! W, 22 ac. Donated to Village 4 Meadows Fen 42.1703! N, 88.3439! W, 18 ac Donated to Village 6 Headwaters Fen 42.1530! N, 88.3485! W, 10 ac Private ownership 7 Western tributary 42.1740! N, 88.3502! W, 10 ac Private ownership

16 Boyer Rd. wetlands 42.1470! N, 88.3485! W, 8 ac. Private ownership 17 Randall Rd. wetland 42.1531! N, 88.3372! W, 5 ac. Private ownership 8 Square Barn Rd. Marsh 42.1630! N, 88.3744! W, 40 ac. Private ownership

13 Gravel Pits 42.1484! N, 88.3653! W, 30 ac. Private ownership 11 Huntley Rd. wetland 42.1508! N, 88.3747! W, 5 ac. Private ownership 10 Lakewood Rd. wetlands 42.1577! N, 88.3872! W, 8 ac. Private ownership 15 Milne wetlands 42.1560! N, 88.3445! W, 5 ac. Under negotiation 5 Toboggan Hill prairie 42.1616! N, 88.3522! W, 15 ac. Acquired 9 South Marsh 42.1546°N, 88.3800°W, 12 ac. Private ownership

12 West Marsh 42.1650°N, 88.3667°W, 12 ac. Private ownership 14 Exner Marsh Connection 42.1734°N, 88.3796°W, 10 ac. Private ownership

Algonquin has two public libraries, an easily accessible village hall, and an Internet web site. The Village should include information on the Woods Creek watershed plan at these locations and on the web site. Information also should be included as a regular feature in the Village

newsletter. The content should include: recommendations on the environmentally sound use of fertilizers and lawn care chemicals, the value of using native landscape materials, and landscape alternatives that reduce runoff and require minimal watering. In addition to being environmentally sound practices they save homeowners money. Additionally, the Village should provide signs and kiosks along the paths and public trails within the riparian corridor and protected natural areas. The signs and kiosks would inform and educate the public about plants, animals, communities, ecosystems and functions, and physical processes. In many cases the cost of these signs can be passed through to the developer donating the land to the Village. 4.3.5 Educational Partnerships Woods Creek affords a unique educational opportunity for students at all levels from the primary grades through high school and even at the university level. The physical processes found in larger rivers and streams are well represented at a smaller scale in Woods Creek. The stream although impacted by human activities in the watershed still supports aquatic plants, invertebrates and fish. The floodplain and fens provide wildlife habitat and populations of plants that are rapidly become rare in the Chicago landscape. Several universities are undertaking research projects in the watershed. The Village should encourage non-invasive research in the watershed since it provides a better understanding of the physical and biological functions within the stream and the relationships between land use and stream quality. This information is crucial to effective watershed management. Programs that partner environmental professionals with faculty and students from local universities and especially Jacobs High School should receive special consideration. 4.3.6 Natural Area Stewardship Local stewardship groups are often very effective at providing the hands on care for restoration and DePaul University students collecting aquatic

enhancement projects. These groups work best invertebrates in Woods Creek.

41

when their efforts are part of an overall plan and professionals provide direction. The plan recommends (Section 4.3.7) on going monitoring and management of the resources in the watershed and provides a source of funding. The Village should identify interested groups or organizations to be involved in stewardship projects. The annual monitoring and management report should identify projects that may be undertaken by the local stewards.

4.3.7 Natural Area Monitoring and Management Presently the Village has acquired or is committed to acquire more than 75 acres of open space that will remain in a natural condition. By year 2020 more than 325 acres may be in natural area within the watershed. These areas are less expensive to manage than open space that supports active recreation. These areas require normal housekeeping activities and management activities that control exotic and invasive species, improve wildlife habitat, increase diversity, and enhance ecosystem functions. A plan should be prepared that specifies the procedures, locations and schedules for monitoring the watershed. The natural areas, detention basins, and eco-corridors should be inspected in late spring and again in late summer and a report should document the condition of all the natural areas. The assessment should evaluate floristic diversity, wildlife habitat, and physical conditions. Woods Creek should be inspected and problems such as excessive erosion, bank failure, and water quality problems should be documented. Wetland areas should be assessed to insure that there are no losses in wetland functions. Locations with steep slopes or highly erodable soils should be watched carefully to insure that erosion and soil loss are minimized. To effectively monitor the watershed a recording stage gage should be located at Algonquin Road to collect data on stream flow. A weather station should be located at Jacobs High School to record precipitation, temperature, humidity, wind velocity, solar insolation and other parameters necessary to develop a hydrologic budget for the watershed. Both these installations also provide educational opportunities for students at Jacobs High School. Shallow wells are monitored at several locations as a condition of permits issued under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Information from these wells and any additional wells established by the Village should be routinely incorporated into the annual monitoring report. Temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, and conductivity should be measured in-stream no less than seasonally and preferably on a weekly basis.

Shallow groundwater monitoring well.

42

The Village should establish the monitoring procedures and schedule so that the results from the annual inspections can be compared and progress measured over time. The report should include specific management activities, a prioritized list of recommendations, and a cost estimate. The Village should implement the recommendations based upon available funding.

4.3.8 Ecosystem Restoration and Enhancement During the 40s and 50s nearly all available lands in the watershed was converted to agriculture. By the late 60s, marginally productive land was no longer farmed and owners allowed these lands to naturalize. In the intervening 35 years some areas regained moderate diversity and habitat quality. Recently many of these areas are threatened by both direct and indirect impacts from urban development. The Village will take the lead in restoring and enhancing native ecosystems on public open space. Native ecosystems retain water, reduce heat island effects, improve water quality, provide valuable wildlife habitat, provide recreational opportunities, and are an aesthetic amenity. Restoration is the reestablishment of a documented native ecosystem on land that has been used for agriculture, mining or other uses that have completely removed native communities. Areas that retain sufficient physical properties to make it likely that native ecosystems may be restored will be considered as candidate sites. Goals for restoration include high species diversity, recreation of wildlife habitat, and other ecological function. Success should be based on standard ecological measures Enhancement is the improvement of ecosystem function in areas that have been impacted by human activities but retain some ecological function. Enhancement will focus on improving specific ecosystem functions such as habitat or species richness. The Village should maintain a prioritized list of sites and actions so that projects may be undertaken as grant and other funds become available. Rank should be determined based upon the advancement of the plans goals, ecological benefits, available funding, and likelihood of success. The list should be updated annually as the Village acquires new open space. Table 8 presents a preliminary list based upon the results of the watershed inventory and ownership status.

4.3.9 Information Management

d limited. As

In 2000, agriculture is the major land use in the watershed.

The available information on the natural resources in the watershed is imperfect an

43

land is developed detailed topographic mapping becomes available and wetlands and aquatic resources are precisely mapped. The locations and boundaries of wetlands and aquatic resources should be provided to the Village in a digital format compatible with ARCView/ARCInfo GIS. Locations of monitoring wells, soil borings, and other environmental data should also be provided as compatible digital files. Soil reports, wetland investigations, and other environmental investigations should be

44

provided to the Village in paper and digital format (MS Word). This information can then be linked to the GIS for future reference.

TABLE 8

Preliminary Restoration and Enhancement Activities RANK LOCATION ACTIVITY

1 Woods Creek Drive Floodplain forest restoration. Canopy closure over stream to reduce in-stream water temperature.

2 Algonquin Rd. Floodplain forest restoration. Canopy closure and habitat improvement.

3 Woods Creek Fen Remove adventive vegetation and plant native species. Increase diversity and improve habitat.

4 Glen Meadows floodplain Remove adventive vegetation and plant native species. Increase diversity and improve habitat in wet prairie and sedge meadow.

5 Woods Creek – lower reach Stream restoration. Improve habitat for invertebrates and fish. 6 Toboggan Hill Prairie Restore mesic prairie. Improve water quality, increase

infiltration, increase habitat. 7 Woods Creek – Community Park Bank stabilization, stream restoration, and wetland restoration.

Reduce sediment loads, improve water quality, and increase habitat.

8 Golf Course tributary Remove adventive vegetation and plant native species. Increase diversity and improve habitat.

9 Headwaters Fen Restoration Algonquin should maintain the GIS database and linked files as a planning tool. Existing and future file references should be included to facilitate monitoring and resource management in the watershed.

45

5.0 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 5.1 PLAN OBJECTIVES Village staff and the Watershed Steering Committee reviewed the plan. The recommendations in the plan represent a distillation of current watershed best management practices balanced against engineering, design, and maintenance considerations, and the overall Village land use objectives. Conserving and enhancing the valuable natural resources while providing high quality of life and the amenities desired by Village residents was the underlying goal of the plan. A watershed plan such as this should not be a static document. It should be incorporated into the Village plan by ordinance to insure that development and management of the watershed adheres to the prescribed measures. The plan must also be flexible to accommodate new technologies and changes in the land use objectives of the Village. As a policy, the Village should review and revise this plan every five years. This plan provides the Village with a set of design strategies that will reduce the impacts of urban development on the natural resources in the watershed. These strategies as part of the Village subdivision ordinance give the development community clear direction for acceptable residential, commercial and institutional design in Algonquin. The environmental protection process becomes proactive and not reactionary. Direct acquisition of resources such as floodplain, wetlands, and sensitive habitat areas insures these resources will be protected and enjoyed by future generations. The educational component of the plan not only focuses on the youth of the Village but on residents of all ages who are interested in nature and the environment. Finally and perhaps the most significant aspect of this plan is the provision for long-term stewardship of the watershed resources. The impact fee proposed for development in the watershed reduces the cost to the municipality for maintaining these resources. Ongoing monitoring and management of the resources is critical to conserving their ecological and societal values. The steering committee adopted thirteen objectives for the watershed plan. The plan successfully addresses these objectives as well as meeting the practical realities of managing and maintaining the infrastructure of a rapidly expanding Village. There are many more protection strategies than were recommended in this plan. These were not included because they were impractical or did not meet the needs of the Village. Future revisions should weigh the utility of emerging strategies against the plan’s objectives and the overall goals of the Village. 5.2 IMPLEMENTATION The Village should undertake the following steps to implement the recommendations of this plan. These steps will establish the plan as policy and give it the force of law to protect the resources in the Woods Creek watershed.

46

1. The plan will be publicly presented for acceptance and adoption through a resolution by

the Algonquin Village Board. Prior to adoption, the plan will be available to the public for review at the Village Hall, local libraries, and through the Village Web site at www.algonquin.org.

2. The Village of Algonquin Comprehensive Plan should be amended and a special section

added summarizing the watershed protection plan. The special section will include the adoption resolution and maps showing the locations of natural resource areas and eco-corridors.

3. The third measure should be the addition of a special regulations section to the Village of

Algonquin Subdivision ordinance. The special regulations would reflect the management strategies in the plan and would apply to all developments within the watershed.

4. The Algonquin Zoning Ordinance should be amended to make every development in the

Woods Creek Watershed a PUD due the environmental sensitivity of the area. This gives the Village the tool to work with the development community to balance growth in the watershed with the conservation and enhancement of valuable natural resources.

5. The fifth measure is to incorporate the GIS databases and information collected during

the development of this plan into the Village-wide GIS when it is developed. This will provide the long-term planning and management tool to guide development and resource protection in the watershed. It also serves the development community by giving them an early warning of critical resources as they develop site plans.

6. Finally, the Village should develop a monitoring and management plan for the public

open space in the watershed. This open space will ultimately include most of the critical natural resource areas including floodplain, fens and wetlands. The monitoring program allows the Village to assess the efficacy of the protection strategies and to direct the resource management activities to areas that are most needy.

47

6.0 APPENDICES 6.1 DATA FORMS

WOODS CREEK WATERSHED FEATURES DATA FORM

Field Investigator(s): Date: Legal Description (Location): County: Owner: Log # / Name: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

General Description of Feature: Any Significant Disturbance? Explain: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

VEGETATION Dominant =/or Unusual Plant Species Indicator Status Stratum 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. General Plant Cover: Outstanding Invasives: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SOILS Series / Phase: (as mapped) Subgroup: Is the soil on the hydric soils list? (as mapped) Is the soil a Histosol?: Histic epipedon present? Is the soil: Mottled? Gleyed? Matrix Color: Mottle Color(s): Other hydric soil indicators: Is this same soil as mapped? If not, best alternative: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HYDROLOGY Is the ground surface inundated? Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Depth to free-standing water in the pit / soil probe hole: List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: How is feature mapped by gov’t agencies (NRCS, IDNR, etc.)? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wildlife noted: Land use for this area as determined by Village of Algonquin:

48

49

50

51

52

6.2 GIS FILE STRUCTURE

AlgonquinProj 98018WoodsVol1_GIS

Aqmb300 Adf &Log files…

Aqmb500 Aqmbg500 Aqmsg Bedgeo Bedtopo Catunits H2osup Horizont Info

Dir, nsp, dat, nit files Kane

County Adf &log files…

Fldzones Info

Dir, nsp, dat, nit files Roads

Adf &log files… Streams Township Wells Wtldsln Wtldspt Wtldspy

Mchenry County

Adf &log files… Fldzones Info

Dir, nsp, dat, nit files Roads

Adf &log files… Streams Township Wells Wtldsln Wtldspt Wtldspy

Moraines Adf &log files…

Quatgeo Wells95

98018WoodsVol2_GIS Cemetery Fedland Info

Dir, nsp, dat, nit files Intstate Kane

53

Airports Adf &log files…

Archmod Census90 County Info

Dir, nsp, dat, nit files Landcov Munbnd Rails Roads Towns Township Utility

Landfill Mchenry

Airports Adf &log files…

Archmod Census90 County Info (Dir, nsp, dat, nit files) Landcov Munbnd Rails Roads Towns Township Utility

Natarea Natareat Natpres Stconsrv Stforest Stfwa Stparks Stroutes Ushways

Hotlinks Bitmaps, tifs, gifs

il111tab tab

“files…” (soil data) MetaData

DRGs Fgd files

WoodsCreekGIS DBF, SHP, SHX, SBN files

WoodsCreekSoils Cov

Il111_a Il111_b Il111_l Il111_p Il111_q Info

54

S4208835 S4208835.000 S4208835.001 S4208835.002 S4208835.003 S4208835.004 S4208835.005 S4208835.006 S4208835.007… S4208855.002

Doc Metadata File

Out EOO files, numeric extension files

Tab Attribute files (soils)

WoodsVol3ADID ADIDData

County DBF, SHP, SHX, SBN files Adidanno

Adf, tat, txx files, etc. Info

Dar, dat, nit files; zip files DRGs

10a, 10b, 10c, etc., through 26, 27 a,b ,then 9a-d; each has tfw file, tif image doc.

Reports Text doc’s with ADID site info (plant lists, etc.)

Coverages Info Streams Wetlands

Documentation Adobe

MetaData DRGs

55

WOODS CREEK WATERSHED: Navigating the GIS files The preliminary GIS developed for the Woods Creek watershed was created from information from many different sources. To the extent possible the information has been reconciled to provide an internally consistent tool. In some cases source files were incomplete or poorly documented. Metadata for sources often did not follow standard convention. In other cases projections were different or data were not stored as decimal degrees. Attribute tables frequently use state and county codes for information categories. In many but not all cases the “readme” from the source explain the conventions adopted for the database.

AlgonquinProj This folder contains many shapefiles (*.shp) often with duplicate information but with different names. The majority are of that portion of the McHenry County Soil Survey that intersects the project area boundary. Some of these soil files are clipped to the project area boundary. Other files in this folder are as follows: • Gps.shp: includes one gps point located on the island north of Bunker Hill Drive; probably

one of the Christopher Burke wells. • Kanesoil.shp: This shapefile is not projected and there is not a functioning attribute table.

This serves as a place holder until USDA digital soil maps and files are available for Kane Co.

• Reports.shp: Includes 2 point files which are linked to ADID data reports. One is at the proposed sledding hill site, one is the fen at Creekside.

• Study area.shp: The polygon shape that is project area boundary. Table includes area, perimeter, county code (s#) for McHenry County.

• Worksites.shp: Contains 5 .tif files linked to points. 98018WoodsVol1_GIS

Adf (atribute data files) & Log files… (All files in folders under WoodsVol1_GIS are adf and log unless otherwise specified). Complete descriptions are found in the metadata and readme files for the Illinois Geographic Information System. Some of the more recognizable and useful files are identified below.

Aqmb300 Aqmb500 Aqmbg500 Aqmsg Two legend categories: one in study area, two in IL. Bedgeo (bedrock geology) Table gives names of geological units. Bedtopo (bedrock topography) Catunits H2osup (water supply) Point file. Horizont Moraines (glacial moraines) Table gives names. Quatgeo (quartenary geology) Table gives names under unit. Wells95 (groundwater and other wells) Info

Dir, nsp, dat, nit files Kane

County Adf &log files… Shows county table, = perimeter, total population. Fldzones (flood zones and floodplains) Info Dir, nsp, dat, nit files

56

Roads Adf &log files Streams Township Wells (water and other wells) Wtldsln (wetlands shape file) Table by NWI codes. Wtldspt (wetlands – point file) Table by NWI codes. Wtldspy (wetlands shape file) By NWI codes; each has id#.

Mchenry (same naming convention as Kane Co.) County Fldzones Info Roads Streams Township Wells Wtldsln Wtldspt Wtldspy

98018WoodsVol2_GIS

Cemetery Table gives information about cemeteries. Fedland (federal lands) None in study area or vicinity. Info Intstate (interstate highways) Kane

Airports Archmod (archaeological sites) Table lists ID numbers and rank. Census90 County Info Landcov (land cover) Munbnd (municipal boundaries) Table lists town names. Rails (railroads) Roads Towns Point files. Township Point files. Utility

Landfill McHenry (Same naming convention as Kane Co.)

Airports Archmod Census90 County Landcov Munbnd Shows outdated Village of Algonquin boundaries.

57

Rails Roads Towns Township Utility

Natarea (natural areas) Natareat Shows only Exner Marsh and LITH Fen. Natpres (nature preserves) Stconsrv (state conservation areas) Stforest (state forests) Stfwa (state fish and wildlife management areas) Stparks (state parks) Stroutes (state highways) Ushways (U.S. highways)

Hotlinks Bitmaps, tifs, gifs. il111tab

Tab Folder with no contents. Some SSURGO data was incomplete.

MetaData DRGs

Fgd files No shapefiles this folder. WoodsCreekGIS

DBF, SHP, SHX, SBN files Algonpln.shp (=boundary outline) Algosoil.shp = whole county (avoid opening) Does not include full attribute table.

WoodsCreekSoils Cov

Il111_a County-wide soils. Il111_b Whole county is one polygon. Il111_l Il111_p Point files: CSP, DEP, ERO, GPI, MUC, WET are some fields.

58

Il111_q USGS Quad Maps. Info S4208835 S files give message: “Error in opening table for feature source”. S4208835.000 S4208835.001 S4208835.002 S4208835.003 S4208835.004 S4208835.005 S4208835.006 S4208835.007… S4208855.002

Doc Metadata File Out EOO files, numeric extension files Tab Attribute files (soils)

WoodsVol3ADID (Advanced wetland identification files)

ADIDData County

DBF, SHP, SHX, SBN files Adidanno

Munis.shp: possibly more updated than ILGIS. Section.shp, sections.shp: these may be the same. Wetlds.shp: (attribute table is not complete.) Wsheds.shp: table gives names of watersheds.

Adf, tat, txx files, etc. Info Dar, dat, nit files; zip files

DRGs Reports Text doc’s with ADID site info (plant lists, etc.)

Coverages Info Streams Wetlands

Documentation Adobe (*.pdf files)

MetaData DRGs

59

7.0 REFRENCES Algonquin Historic Commission. 1995. Once Upon a Town... Algonquin, Illinois: The First 160 Years. Village of Algonquin, IL. Algonquin Historic Commission. 1935. Algonquin the Beautiful: A History of its Pioneers and Settlement. Village of Algonquin, IL. Arnold, T.L. et al. 1999. Environmental Setting for the Upper Illinois River Basin and Implications for Water Quality. U.S. Geological Survey, Urbana, IL. Dabney, S.M. 1998. Cover Crop Impacts on Watershed Hydrology. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 53:207-213. Dieber, M., 1997. Population, Household and Employment Forecasts for Northeastern Illinois 1990 to 2020. Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission. Dreher, D.W., R.D. Mariner and C. Hunt, 1988. Stream and Wetland Protection: A Natural Resource Management Priority in Northeastern Illinois. Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Chicago, IL, 117 pp. Dreher, D.W., G.C. Schaefer and D.L. Hey, 1989. Evaluation of Stormwater Detention Effectiveness in Northeastern Illinois. Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Chicago, IL, 135 pp. Dreher, D.W. and T.H. Price, 1992. Best Management Practice Guidebook for Urban Development. Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Chicago, IL, 54 pp. Dreher, D.W. and R.D. Mariner, 1994. Environmental Considerations in Comprehensive Planning. Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Chicago, IL. Fennessy, M.S. 1992. Sedimentation (Vol. IV). The Des Plaines River Demonstration Project. Chicago, IL. Gordon, N.D., T.A. McMahon and B.L. Finlayson. 1992. Stream Hydrology: An Introduction for Ecologists. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Chichester, U.K. Halsey, L., D. Vitt, and S. Zoltai, 1997. Climate and Physiographic Controls on Wetland Type and Distribution in Manitoba, Canada. Wetlands 17(2):243-262. Harbor, J. et al. 2000. Using constructed wetlands to reduce nonpoint source pollution in urban areas. Proceedings of the National Conference on Tools for Urban Resource Management & Protection. Chicago, IL. Hey, D.L. and G.C. Schafer. 1983. An Evaluation of the Water Quality Effects of Detention Storage and Source Control. Nationwide Urban Runoff Program, USEPA, Washington, D.C.

60

Illinois Department of Conservation. 1986. Management of Small Lakes and Ponds in Illinois. State of Illinois, Springfield, IL. Illinois Department of Natural Resources. 1998. Fox River Area Assessment, (Volumes 1 thru 4). State of Illinois, Springfield, IL. Kane County Development Department. 1996. 2020 Land Resource Management Plan. Kane County, Geneva, IL. Kusler, J.A. and S. Daly. 1989. Proceedings of an International Symposium: Wetlands and River Corridor Management, July 5-9, 1989, Charleston, South Carolina. ASWM, Berne, NY. Kusler, J.A., M.L. Quammen, and G. Brooks. 1988. Proceedings of the National Wetland Symposium: Mitigation of Impacts and Losses. ASWM Technical Report 3. ASWM, Berne, NY. Leopold, L.B., M.G. Wolman, and J.P. Miner. 1964. Fluvial Processes in Geomorphology. W.H. Freeman & Co., San Francisco, CA. 522 pp. Lindstrom, M.J., T.E. Schumacher, N.P. Cogo, and M.L. Blecha. 1998. Tillage effects on water runoff and soil erosion after sod. J. Soil & Water Conservation 53:59-63. Livingston, E.H. 2000. Lessons learned about successfully using infiltration practices. Proceedings of the National Conference on Tools for Urban Resource Management & Protection. Chicago, IL. McHenry County Regional Planning Commission. 1993. McHenry County Land Use Plan, Year 2010 Update. McHenry County, Woodstock, IL. Meyer, S.C. 1998. Ground-water studies for Environmental planning, McHenry County, Illinois. Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign, IL. Mengler, J., 1997. Personal communication. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Chicago Metro Office, Barrington, IL. Mitsch, W.J. and J.G. Gosselink. 1993. Wetlands (2nd ed.) Van Nostrand Reinold Company, Inc. New York, NY, 627 pp. Mitsch, W.J., J.K. Cronk, and M.S. Fennessy. 1992. Carbon, sediment and phosphorus budgets in experimental wetlands – comparison of the first two years. The Des Plaines River Wetlands Demonstration Project, Chicago, IL. Mitsch, W.J. and S.E. Jorgensen. 1989. Ecological Engineering: An Introduction to Ecotechnology. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY. 472 pp.

61

Moshiri, G.A. 1993. Constructed Wetland for Water Quality Improvement. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL. 632 pp. NCWPC. 1998. Nippersink Creek Watershed Plan. Nippersink Creek Watershed Planning Committee, Woodstock, IL. NIPC. 2000. 1998-1999 Water Quality Activities. Northeastern Regional Planning Commission, Chicago, IL. NIPC. 1999. Digital Map of the Region (Ver. 1.0). Northeastern Regional Planning Commission, Chicago, IL. NIPC et al. 1998. Advanced Identification (ADID) Study McHenry County, Illinois: Final Report. Northeastern Regional Planning Commission, Chicago, IL. NIPC. 1998. McHenry County Advanced Identification of Aquatic Resources (Ver. 1.01). Northeastern Illinois Regional Planning Commission, Chicago, IL. NIPC. 1998. McHenry County’s Wetlands, Lakes, and Streams. Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Chicago, IL. Nye, L.A. (Ed.). 1968. McHenry County, Illinois, 1832-1968. McHenry County Board of Supervisors, Woodstock, IL. Price, T.H. and D.W. Dreher, 2000. Urban Stormwater Best Management Practices for Northeastern Illinois. Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Chicago, IL, Ray, B. W. and H. L. Wascher, 1965. McHenry County Soils. Soil Report 81, Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, IL, 132 pp. Rogner, J.D. 2000. Chicago Wilderness: Toward an urban conservation culture. Proceedings of the National Conference on Tools for Urban Resource Management & Protection. Chicago, IL. Salvesen, D. 1994. Wetlands: Mitigating and Regulating Development Impacts. Urban Land Institute, Washington, D.C. Satterland, D.R. and P.W. Adams. 1992. Wildland Watershed Management, 2nd Ed. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, NY. Special Authors and Contributors. 1922. History of McHenry County, Illinois. Munsell Publishing Co., Chicago, IL. Teska & Associates, 1997. Future Land Use Plan. Village of Algonquin, Algonquin, IL. The Conservation Fund. 1999. Pilot conservation development evaluation system (Revised Draft). The Conservation Fund, Great Lakes Office, Chicago, IL.

62

The Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group. 1998. Stream Corridor Restoration: Principals, Processes, and Practices on CD-ROM. National Technical Information Service, Washington, D.C. Thormann, M.N. and S.E. Bayley, 1997. Decomposition Along a Moderate-Rich Fen-Marsh Gradient in Alberta, Canada. Wetlands 17(1):123:137. Trimble, S.W. 1997. Contribution of Stream Channel Erosion to Sediment Yield from an Urbanizing Watershed. Science, 278:1442-1444. USDA-NRCS. 1999. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Data Base. National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, NE. Goddard, T. M. 1979. Soil Survey of Kane County, Illinois. USDA-SCS, Il Ag. Exp. Stn., Urbana, IL. USEPA, 2000. Watershed Information Network. www.epa.state.il.us/water/water-quality/fact-sheet-03.html. Walton, W.C. 1965. Ground-Water Recharge and Runoff in Illinois. Illinois State Water Survey, Urbana, IL. Waschbusch, R.J., W.R. Selbig, and R.T. Banneman. 2000. Sources of phosphorus in stormwater and street dirt from two urban residential basins in Madison, Wisconsin, 1994-95. in Proceedings of the National Conference on Tools for Urban Water Resource Management and Protection. EPA/625/R-00/001, USEPA, Washington, D.C. Wiginton, Jr. P. J. and R. L. Beschta. 2000. Proceedings of the International Conference on Riparian Ecology and Management in Multi-Use Watersheds, August 28-31, 2000, Portland, OR. AWRA, Middleburg, VA. Yoder, C.O., R.J. Mitner, and D. White. 2000. Using biological criteria to assess and classify urban streams and develop improved landscape indicators. Proceedings of the National Conference on Tools for Urban Resource Management & Protection. Chicago, IL. Zielinski, J., D. Caracao, and R. Claytor. 2000. Comparative nutrient export and economic benefits of conventional and better site design techniques. Proceedings of the National Conference on Tools for Urban Resource Management & Protection. Chicago, IL.