On these summer days when I commute by bike, I drink in the stunning views of Lake Michigan and the Chicago River. These assets make our city unique, yet I’ve become increasingly concerned with the future of these natural resources. When the Metropolitan Planning Council hosted a U.S. Senate candidates forum last month, there were clear differences of opinion between Alexi Giannoulias (D) and Mark Kirk (R). Their opposing viewpoints – which made headlines again this past week in the Chicago Sun-Times– made me realize how infrequently the issue of preserving our water resources is discussed.
Commissioned by the Illinois Dept. of Natural Resources, the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning(CMAP) released its Water 2050 plan in January to assess and provide recommendations to address region-wide water supply issues. CMAP conducted a detailed study of water demand scenarios and determined that without effective water planning and management “water demand could increase as much as 64 percent by 2050, creating potentially serious shortages.” The report provided more than 200 recommendations.
None of them will be effective without political will and coordination.
A sign of federal political will came in April when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that states must adopt smart growth principles when programming the $3.3 billion in federal funding it allocates each year. Alec MacGillis of The Washington Post wrote a fascinating article on May 5 that discusses the support and criticism the new policy has generated. I was pleased to see the EPA’s Office of Water quoted as saying “We’re interested in supporting the infrastructure where people already live. It’s a focus on making infrastructure sustainable and reviving those communities, reviving cities as attractive places.” Reading “sustainable” and “infrastructure” is refreshing.
The Urban Land Institute’s Infrastructure 2010: Investment Imperative report examines the specific water issues and concerns facing 14 metropolitan regions throughout the United States; MPC Associate Josh Ellis and I were interviewed for insights on Chicagoland’s water challenges. The four proposed solutions could be adapted to any region:
First, governments should get their acts together; coordination across all three levels of government is imperative.
Second, embrace collaboration on water solutions, something Chicagoland has begun to do on a variety of issues.
Third, face the reality of change. Extensive education campaigns can help inform the public about the realities of water shortages, potential rate hikes, etc.
Fourth, take a “fix it first” approach, giving priority to repairing leaks and upgrading existing systems.
Prompted by the Illinois Senate candidates’ responses—and all the resulting media coverage — Josh Ellis addressed the growing water concerns throughout the region in his latest article on MPC’s web site, “Charting a new course for the Chicago River.” He provides five necessary and realistic goals to guide preservation of the quality of Chicagoland’s water.
The key takeaway is that the debate over re-reversing the Chicago River is not solely about Asian carp. And it’s not only about river water quality, tourism, freight movement, or any other single issue. It’s about what we want our region to be in 100 years.