APPENDIX PHASE 1 GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE FRAMEWORK KANSAS MISSOURI
CONTENTS A DATA WISHLIST 4 B PRECEDENTS 7 C WORKSHOP MATERIALS 13 D ANALYSIS PROCESS 124 E ATLAS & PLAYBOOK DETAILS 156 F POLICY ANALYSIS 165 2 MARC GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE FRAMEWORK
APPENDIX 3
ADATA WISHLIST Geographic data regarding local ecological systems, transportation and infrastructure, land use, and social systems were collected and analyzed to evaluate the current state of the region, as well as to identify areas of need and proximity within the regional plan framework. Moving forward, future analysis can be better informed with the inclusion of additional data which is currently unavailable from current stakeholders. The following lists additional data to be collected and/or compiled from potentially existing sources, followed by the geographic data requested and used in the development of this plan. DATA NEEDED FOR FUTURE STEPS Environmental Accurate air quality data Non-point pollution sources Wildlife ranges for key animal species, inluding: Monarch butterfly Deer Bat species Birds species Source Water Protection Areas Current and planned restoration projects- Forest, wetland, stream, meadow, etc. Current and planned stormwater management projects/ treated drainage areas Grassland priority areas Social + Cultural Health Indicators for children and youth under age 18 4 MARC GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE FRAMEWORK
GEOGRAPHIC DATA REQUESTED Environmental Air quality Hydrological features, including streams and lakes Floodplains Watershed boundaries Natural Resources Inventory Land Use and Land Cover Classifications Natural Resources Inventory Conservation + Restoration Priorities EPA identified impaired streams EPA identified toxic discharge facilities Brownfields Topography Accurate and reliable air quality data Non-point pollution sources Wildlife ranges for key animal species Source Water Protection Areas Transportation + Infrastructure Highways and major roads Railroads Transit level of service Funded and unfunded current and upcoming transportation projects Existing and planned trails MetroGreen priority trails SmartMoves priority corridors Social + Cultural Demographic data at the block group level of geography from the U.S Census Population counts and density Income Poverty Age Zero-car households Commuting patterns Disability Employment data from the U.S. Census Job to worker balance Political boundaries Food deserts Land Use Current land use Anticipated future land use Parks Vacant parcels Urbanized area Institutional and cultural facilities Hospitals Police Facilities Colleges Schools Health Indicators Obesity Diabetes Asthma Lead poisoning Cancer APPENDIX 5
GEOGRAPHIC DATA USED IN ANALYSIS Environmental Hydrological features, including streams, lakes, and wetlands Floodplains Watershed boundaries Natural Resources Inventory Land Use and Land Cover Classification* Natural Resources Inventory Conservation + Restoration Priorities EPA identified impaired streams EPA identified toxic discharge facilities Brownfields Impervious surfaces Kansas Aquatic Ecological Focus Areas Glades Cave and karst landscapes Topography Transportation + Infrastructure Highways and major roads Railroads Transit level of service Funded and unfunded current and upcoming transportation projects Existing and planned trails MetroGreen priority trails*** SmartMoves priority corridors Activity Centers** Social + Cultural Demographic data at the block group level of geography from the U.S Census Population counts and density Income Poverty Age Zero-car households Commuting patterns Disability Employment data from the U.S. Census Job to worker balance Political boundaries Food deserts Land Use Current land use Anticipated future land use Parks Vacant parcels owned by the Kansas City, MO and Kansas City, KS Land Banks Urbanized area Institutional and cultural facilities Hospitals Police Facilities Colleges Schools Health Indicators for adults over age 18 Obesity Diabetes Cancer Partners and Capacity KC Native Plants Initiative project sites Urban Waters Federal Partnership project sites Renew to the Blue project sites * Concerns with herbaceous land cover data being a ecological high value area would need to be further discussed with MARC's GIS specialist to better understand that data **Further discussion with MARC's GIS specialist needed to update activity centers and reflect a more accurate represetnation. ***Expanision of trails data needs to be acquired as it was not in data recieved originally 6 MARC GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE FRAMEWORK