Identifying High-Value Greenspace Prior to Land Development

Article Figures & Data

Download figure
Open in new tab
Download powerpoint
Figure 1.
Parcels with the greatest ecologic, recreational, and aesthetic value as greenspace in the greater Stevens Point, Wisconsin, growth area and indications of areas currently protected under zoning and public ownership. Map by Jill Mahon, December 1998.

Table 1.

Parcel ranking based on proximity to waterways and recreation trails.

Proximity	Ecologic score	Aesthetic score	Recreational score
Distance from intermittent stream or marsh
<10.67 m	5	4
10.67-21.03 m	4	3
21.04-32.00 m	3
Distance from perennial stream/river/lake
<30.48 m	5	4
30.48-60.95 m	4	3
60.96-91.14 m	3
Distance from existing recreation trails
<30.48 m			5
30.48-60.95 m			4
Undeveloped land parcels accessible from trail
Parcel accessible within 30.48 m of trail			5

Table 2.

Parcel ranking based on land cover and vegetation cover type.

Land/vegetation cover type	Ecologic score	Aesthetic score
*Land cover*
Wetland	5	5
Forest	5	5
Pine plantation	3	4
Mowed under canopy	3	3
Mowed under scarce canopy	2	2
Grass/brush	2	2
Mowed grass	1	2
*Rareness of vegetation type by percentage of land cover*
Pinus sylvestris (0.03%)	5	3
Acer saccharum-Tilia americana (0.05%)	5	3
Picea glauca (0.07%)	5	3
Thuja occidentalis (0.11%)	5	3
Robinia pseudoacacia (0.14%)	5	3
Fraxinus nigra-Ulmus americana-Acer saccharinum (0.21%)	5	3
Quercus alba (0.49%)	5	3
Pinus strobus-Quercus rubra-Acer rubrum (0.92%)	5	3
Quercus rubra (1.62%)	5	3
Larix laricina (4.36%)	3	1
Pinus strobus (5.21%)	3	1
Acer saccharinum, Ulmus americana (6.56%)	3	1
Populus tremuloides (7.33%)	3	1
*Parcel size of contiguous cover type*
>30.35 ha	5
24.28-30.34 ha	4
18.21-24.27 ha	3
12.14-18.20 ha	2
6.07-12.13 ha	1