Book Review

Book Review: Design for Ecological Democracy by Randolph T. Hester                       

                           Design for Ecological Democracy is a must read for anyone who has an interest in urban design, planning, or the history of American city development. Hester defines fifteen urban design principles that our cities should follow to achieve ecological democracies within our communities and that society as a whole needs to build a sustainable future.  He weaves design principles studied for centuries, fifty years of personal and professional experience, and heavy doses of ecological common sense into a book that looks at urban design from an environmentalist point of view.

                        The fifteen principles that Hester explores are: centeredness, connectedness, fairness, sensible status seeking, sacredness, particularness, selective diversity, density and smallness, limited extent, adaptability, everyday future, naturalness, inhabiting science, reciprocal stewardship, and pacing.  He explains;  in order to attain sustainability in our society we need not just a democracy that considers and incorporates the needs of all people in our society, but a democracy that considers and designs for the needs of our environment.  Ecological design has sustained humans for as long as we have been on earth.  Examples of urban design that harmonize with our environment are abundant throughout or nation’s landscape and history, and Hester testifies to many of projects that he has helped to shape over the years. He has worked  all over the world with many different people and  has discovered that people working together and the issues that arise in doing that, is probably the number one obstacle to establishing an ecological democracy.  The “American Dream” that we in this country have strived for in the past century, presents values that are hard to reconcile with a sustainable environment, Hester explains” The difficulty of working together to improve habitation is exacerbated by at least five powerful and deeply held American values- mobility, affluence, standardization, technology, and specialization, each of which produces side effects that affect city life”.

            The sustainable design techniques that Hester recommends are not revolutionary but more evolutionary. He takes urban design principles that seemed to be lost or discarded, and applies them to current city planning and design. The common problem that He found in most of the projects he has worked on is  when it comes to community building, people have a hard time working together.  Even when people in a community want the same thing, the class, racial, and power structures in our society often leaves us divided and isolated. Hester argues that isolating and divisive social structures leads to isolating and divisive urban design which leads to broken cities and environmental hazards. 

          I think the most interesting part of the book is Hester’s anthropological observations of democracy in parts of our society and the lack of it in other parts. The United States history of oppression and bigotry has, and still shapes the way we design our cities and lives, a fact that many designers actively ignore and society wants to forget. Hester not only explains how this erodes our societal democracy, but connects this to our current ecological and sustainable issues. Hester takes a holistic and interdisciplinary approach to urban design that does not cherry pick our history to fit our current need to be politically correct. He is not afraid to examine our past to help shape our future, and not repeat new patterns of unsustainability.

Bibliography

Randolph T Hester,” Design for Ecological Democracy”, MIT Press 2006

Conclusion of my winter 2011 contract research

Big City Sustainability       Conclusion                                             

                                                                                     

                         My research of sustainable efforts of six big cities in the United States has shown me the importance of ecological democracy regarding sustainability .  We are at an environmental point of reckoning in this country and the municipalities of America’s big cities are gearing up to lead us into a sustainable future.  They all have similar goals: the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, develop local economy, and energy diversification.  They also have concerns about the current economic crisis in this country, and how it is taking its toll on municipal budgets.  It is going to take more than just financial sacrifice, strong leadership and bold moves  to meet the goals necessary for sustainability in these big cities. It’s going to take a shift in cultural values, and respect for the needs of others to motivate real environmental change.

                         Of the six cities I researched, three stood out as models for other cities around the country. New York and Chicago both have powerful mayors with abilities to organize and execute municipal plans like CEO’s of major corporations. They also run cities with vast municipal resources and residents who can afford and are willing to pay for the implementation and maintenance of sustainable systems. Denver also has a powerful municipality that is making bold moves to become an urban environmental example. The city’s call to switch from coal-fired power plants to natural gas is provocative and shows that Denver is willing to make the tough choices needed to combat climate change. All three cities are using their unique qualities to not only help them become greener, but help build their individual municipal economies. Chicago is becoming an international hub for wind energy companies, New York’s dense neighborhoods and boroughs are attracting tourists and residents exponentially, and many cities will use the climate change policies of Denver as a roadmap to reduce global warming.  These cities are competing with each other to become the country’s leader in urban sustainability.

                 New Orleans, Phoenix, and Oakland are three cities that I found to have issues that override their sustainable efforts. Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans hard and has stalled not only its efforts to become greener, but has wiped out basic municipal services altogether. Phoenix has a long history of progressive sustainable efforts that have been part of its municipality for decades. However, the recent housing bust and political upheaval are threatening the future of Phoenix’s municipal programs. In spite of Oakland’s strong leadership, historical urban sustainable systems, and a recent economic boom, the city’s economic and racial injustices still overshadow any environmental progress.  New Orleans, Oakland, and Phoenix each have solar energy programs that have potential, but these cities are playing catch up when compared to the other cities I have researched. They don’t have the money, leadership, and overall public will to implement any real progressive sustainable municipal system. These three cities are relying on major help from their local state and the federal government to get them through their respective budget crisis.

             When I began my research of these six cities, I thought I would come across a new and revolutionary state of the art technology that could be implemented across the country for a greener future. I did not find the sustainable magic bullet, but I did learn more about the people of America than I anticipated. I have come to realize that if we don’t have a substantial level of social and economic justice, there is no way we can achieve true ecological democracy. The technology to reduce global greenhouse emissions and provide cities with diversified sustainable energy has been around for decades. The cities I have researched either have the technologies, or access to resources that can dramatically update their infrastructure and improve their sustainability efforts. Real ecological democracy however, requires fairness, adaptability, and connectedness with each other.  These values are in sharp contrast to current trends of rigid idealism, social injustice, and societal needs for larger, more exclusive personal spaces.  I’m starting to find correlations between human rights and the rights of nature. Our collective goals and the way we treat each other reflects the way we treat our environment. I’m curious to visit the cities I researched and meet the people who live in them. I will be able to see the municipal plans in action, and see for myself where these cities are in achieving their individual sustainable goals.     

Oakland

Big City Sustainability:   Oakland                                              

             Oakland California is a patchwork quilt made from pieces of American culture, sewn together with the threads of prosperity.  Oakland is rooted in cultural diversity, respect for the environment, and the pursuit of the “American Dream.” Oakland also has become a national symbol of the “inner city blues”, and its negative influence on big cities in the United States.  Over the past decade, big business, cultural issues, and politics have been woven into Oakland’s thread of sustainability. Unfortunately, economic and racial injustices still seem to be a part of the fabric of the city.

          Sustainable Oakland is the city’s official program for sustainability and was established by the city council in 1997. It is housed in the Environmental Services Division of the city’s Public Works department. The Sustainable Oakland program supports the city’s sustainability efforts by facilitating collaborative approaches for improving city sustainable performance. It also tracks, reports, and promotes Oakland’s sustainable progress. Oakland also has drafted a climate action plan to reduce the city’s greenhouse gas emissions. The “City of Oakland Draft Energy and Climate Action Plan” was presented to the city council on March 1, 2011 for consideration. The plan has a 2020 goal to reduce municipal GHG emissions by 36% below 2005 levels, and solar energy is a key player in Oakland’s efforts to do this. Oakland resides in Alameda County, which has more solar power than any other county in the country. Oakland is also home to California’s largest corporate solar electric system. FedEx at Oakland Airport installed 5,700 photovoltaic modules on 81,000 square feet of roof ( almost 1 megawatt of electricity, enough to power 900 homes) which meets 80% of FedEx’s peak electricity needs. I particularly like the way the municipality and the corporation work in tandem to make a positive impact on the environment, and model sustainably responsible big business practices. Many big cities could use this system as a model to help them utilize municipal properties for corporate sustainability. It can potentially create healthier urban environments, and much needed economic and job development. Oakland also has many community outreach programs designed to help the residents reduce, reuse, and recycle. The city also has building codes (LEED certification), and residential and business incentives to motivate and regulate the public and private sectors regarding sustainable practices. On paper, Oakland is one of the most sustainably progressive cities in America, and in the past decade experienced a urban renaissance driven by former Mayor Jerry Brown. Like most powerful big city mayors, he has garnered praise and criticism for management of one of the country’s most diverse cities.

    To say Jerry Brown is a born and bred career California politician would be an understatement. His father was Governor of California from 1959-1967, Jerry was Governor from 1975-1983 and in 2011 was sworn in for a third term in that office. He also was California Secretary of State from 1971-1975 and 2007-2011, and lost three presidential bids(‘76,’80,’92) and a senate race(‘82). When he announced he wanted to become mayor of Oakland, critics accused him of using the troubled city on the bay to resurrect his political career. Undaunted, Brown ran on a campaign of fixing the school system, lowering crime, and continuing the previous mayors city’s “10k” plan to bring 10,000 new residents to Oakland’s downtown areas. In 1999, Brown was elected mayor and set out accomplishing the goals. Mayor Brown’s success has proved to be good a mixed bag by all accounts. By his own regard, the efforts to improve the Oakland school system were “largely a bust.” The efforts to reduce crime did not go well either. During his tenure, Mayor Brown introduced almost a half a dozen crime initiatives, and for a while the crime rate in Oakland began to recede. During his final year in office however, the crime rate spiked an alarming 57%.  Mayor Brown’s success mainly lies in his revitalization of Oakland’s downtown areas, the Port of Oakland and London Square most notably. He attracted over 12,000 new residents downtown and around 1 billion dollars in investment.  Critics have said Brown’s revitalization of Oakland has left it with gentrified neighborhoods and threatens the cultural structure of the historically African American downtown. Although some African Americans have left the city for the more affluent suburbs, many are being forced out due to tax increases and “urban renewal”.

       In spite of the chronic problems of race and equality that plague Oakland, it still has the building blocks that can make it one of the country’s model sustainable cities. The city is dense, culturally diverse, and has a progressive West Coast attitude. Oakland also has an infrastructure (BART, solar energy, etc.) and a big sister city across the bay that can help support its ongoing efforts to achieve social equality and environmental sustainability.

References:

City of Oakland “ City of Oakland Draft Energy and Climate Plan” City of Oakland. February 22, 2011

Websites: www2.oaklandnet.com www.wikipedia.org www.oaklandpw.net

Phoenix

Big City Sustainability:  Phoenix                                                 

    Phoenix Arizona has grown in many ways over the past decade. Its population has grown by 25%, the cities deficit has ballooned, and the Republican influence in the local government has grown exponentially. These factors combined have led to the shrinkage of what used to be a politically progressive municipality.  For better and worse, Phoenix became a ‘red’ state during the Bush administration, and now the city is suffering the consequences. The municipal sustainability plan is designed to attract funding for the overgrown, underfunded oasis in the dessert.

  The city’s official sustainability plan has two components: The AZ Climate Action Plan (AZCAP) and Phoenix Environmental Sustainability Program (PESP). In 2005, Governor Janet Napolitano commissioned the AZ Climate Action Plan Advisory Group to study potential climate change impacts in Arizona. Based on their recommendations, she set a statewide goal to reduce GHG emissions to the 2000 levels by 2020, and 50% below the 2000 levels by 2040.  The city’s main environmental goal is to cut GHG emissions. AZCAP spells out the city’s plans to become energy efficient using the municipal resources (land, buildings, vehicles, etc.) and how the city has a long history of environmentalism. The PESP is a link on the city’s official website designed to help residents of Phoenix become more sustainable in their homes and daily lives. The overall sustainability plan the city has is disappointing. The AZCAP and PESP is not user friendly and downright confusing. The AZCAP clearly is designed for environmentalists; however, I found the document hard to read and the recommendations weak. The PESP is aimed at residents but the information it gives is pedestrian at best. The most progressive sustainability plan the city has, is to capture methane gas from landfills and wastewater plants and supplement the gas in areas that currently use electricity. Unfortunately, the budget crisis the state is dealing with has put this project in limbo. Harsh budget cuts have pushed sustainability down the city’s priority list. The city is going through economic and cultural upheaval that many cities in the U.S. are currently going through, taking the resources and attention away from environmentalism.

     Phoenix is the fifth largest city in the United States and has grown by twenty five percent since 2000. Las Vegas is the only city that has grown faster. In the last decade, Phoenix experienced a construction boom that led to large suburban sprawl, and a housing collapse that has left many residents in financial crisis. Arizona has simultaneously become one of “the reddest” states in America. The political landscape in Arizona has been a powder keg for years, and recently has become deadly. The Tea Party has taken a strong hold in Arizona and its ideology is influencing the state’s political leadership. These factors are creating the perfect storm for environmental failure in Phoenix. Sustainability plans the city has are thinly veiled tools designed to garner funds from federal environmental and stimulus programs. The projects that these programs are supposed to fund get stopped in the Phoenix beaurocracy, and the funds are ultimately used to balance the states budget. The current Republican leadership in Arizona is Tea Party led, and determined to make government smaller by defunding programs to balance the budget. Sustainability requires vision to long for the short- sited leadership of the current Bush- era influenced Republican leadership. Unfortunately for Phoenix and America, we have leaders that can’t see as far as the next election. Cutting programs from the state budget exponentially is just as harmful as spending the same way. Phoenix’s long history of environmental programs, are being eroded by its current budget shortfalls and political leadership. The attitudes in Arizona are attitudes that are sweeping the country and jeopardizing sustainability programs, and ultimately putting our environment at risk. 

References:

City of Phoenix “Climate Action Plan for Government Operations” City of Phoenix and ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability, October 2009

City of Phoenix “Phoenix: Living Like it Matters! Environmental Sustainability Program” City of Phoenix, January 2009

Wong, Scott “ Gordon to unveil lofty 17-point green plan for Phoenix” The Arizona Republic, March 11 2009

Websites: www.phoenix.gov  www.phoenix.gov/publicworks/sustain/index.html.  www.wikipedia.org

Denver

Big City Sustainability:    Denver                                         

                   I associate Denver with clean. Clean air, clean people, clean living.  After investigating Denver’s municipal plans to achieve sustainability, I learned quickly that people in Denver have no problem getting dirty; some people in Denver get down and dirty. As for the living, Denver ‘seems’ to escape the problems that plague big cities in the United States. As for the air, Denver is home to the third largest airport in the world (lots of planes), but burning carbon- based fuels does more for Colorado than some residents are comfortable with. Denver is making bold moves to fight global warming however, and making big waves that are rippling throughout the state and country.

          Denver’s official climate action plan is named Greenprint Denver. In October of 2007, the final recommendations were made to Mayor John Hickenlooper by the Greenprint Advisory Council. Climate change is Denver’s main focus when it comes to sustainability.  The effects of global warming results in reduced snow packs that threaten water supply and tourism.  The secondary effects of global warming like the rise in the Mountain Pine Beetle, have done massive destruction to thousands forest acres along the Rocky Mountains. Denver’s plans for residents and the municipality itself are literally carbon copies of what works for other cities around the globe. As far as the plan goes, if it works in London, or Seattle, or any other city that’s “sustainable” then it will be good for Denver.  The residential plans to reduce, reuse and recycle are not groundbreaking. The municipality has a mandate that requires twenty percent of all public works projects use high performing concrete ( fly ash), and the Denver Botanic Garden created a Sustainability Management Program that sets goals to increase the overall sustainability of Denver. Other than that, Denver’s sustainability plans for its citizens are adequately keeping up with the big city Jones.

                     The real news is Denver’s plan for big business in the state. The Greenprint Denver plan wants the city to become a leader in establishing a diversified economy based on the combined use of traditional and alternative sources of energy.  It also wants the city to eliminate the need for one coal- fired power plant (equivalent to 260,000 cars off the road), and goes further to suggest Denver reduce emissions equivalent to over half a million cars off the roads by 2020.   Corporations and environmentalists saw these suggestions by the city as a cannon ball aimed at the mining and energy corporations based in Colorado.  In order to reach these environmental goals, the city may be biting the hands that have been feeding it for decades.  In the short term, it has the local coal mining and natural gas companies fighting over public utility business rites, and Colorado’s largest public utility company scrambling to adjust to strict regulations. In the long term, Denver wants the state’s economy and infrastructure to help combat climate change.

           The industries that primarily make up Colorado’s economy are some of the biggest culprits involved in global warming. Colorado is the tenth largest producer of coal in the United States. It also is home to Xcel Energy, a corporation that sells electricity and natural gas to public utilities in over seven states in the U.S. The company is caught between the coal rich southern region of the state, and the gas rich northern region.  The state legislature passed the Clean Air Clean Jobs Act that was aimed at helping Colorado meet federal clean air rules, and has forced Xcel to make infrastructure changes, like coal to natural gas. The company has coal-fired power plants that the state wants to either close or retrofit in some ways. The company has agreed to close five plants in Denver and Boulder, add emissions controls on units in brush and Hayden, and switch one coal-fired plant to natural gas. The state wants Xcel to switch one more.  All of this wrangling has made many in Colorado wonder if the folks in Denver are looking out for the rest of the state. As demand for coal shrinks, the jobs and industry loss rises in Colorado.  If Denver becomes the national catalyst for coal-fired power plant reduction in municipal infrastructure, it could have devastating long term effects on the coal industry.

                   Denver’s other carbon offender is also the city’s sustainable flagship. Denver International Airport is the largest airport in North America. It is a facility that was designed, built, and is being maintained by state of the art sustainable technologies. From the fabric used to construct the tent-like roof, to the way waste is mitigated, the building is a testament to modern sustainability. It is also one of the largest employers in the state. The only problem with DIA is the machines it facilitates:  airplanes.  Anyone who has looked in the sky and seen a jet fly by can see the pollution it leaves in its trail. DIA has up to 50,000 flights arriving and leaving every day of the year.  No matter how green the building is, an airport (especially one of the world’s biggest) is bound to have negative environmental impacts, particularly on the atmosphere.

          Denver is a good example of how big cities are struggling to address climate change and transition into a sustainable future.  Collectively people in the U.S. know it’s something we need to do, but the rate and speed we do it at is being debated by many.  Environmentalist and progressive politicians think we are way behind and must accelerate our efforts before it’s too late.  Corporations and working people think jobs trump conservation and we should ease environmental legislation.  The “mile high” city’s quest to truly become sustainable and lessen the impact of global warming is attainable, however, it might tarnish the city’s green image in the process and expose cultural strife that lie not too far beneath the city’s surface.

References:

City and County of Denver, Department of Environmental Health

“Greenhouse Gas Inventory for the City and County of Denver”

City of Denver Department of Environmental Health May 2007

Greenprint Denver Advisory Council “ City of Denver Climate Action Plan” www.GreenprintDenver.org , October 2007

Websites:

www.denvergov.org   www.greenprintdenver.org  www.xcelenergy.com  www.wikipedia.org

New Orleans

Big City Sustainability: New Orleans             

                  If you were to listen to the media reports, you would think that New Orleans is a hot bed of sustainable ideas and the city might be leading the way in sustainable building. However, after investigating what is really going on in New Orleans, I’m left with mixed emotions and more questions than answers. Hurricane Katrina not only wiped out the land and its structures, it erased the local municipality and its capacity to govern.  New Orleans is a natural disaster area and the only thing that the local government can focus on is getting help.

        The city does have an official plan called GreeNOLA which was created by The Sustainable Energy and Environmental Task Force. The task force is made up of local city leaders and business people who want the cities recovery efforts to be as green as possible. GreeNOLA  has a plan to achieve sustainability goals in six broad program areas: Green buildings and Energy Efficiency, Alternative Energy, Waste Reduction Reuse and Recycling, Transportation and Clean Fuels, Environmental Outreach and Justice, and Flood Risk Reduction. The Transition New Orleans Task Force is a similar group that has given Mayor Mitch Landrieu a list of recommendations for the city that they think his office should achieve in 100 days. Some of the recommendations are: Create an office of sustainability and resiliency, mandate 30% energy use reduction in all municipal buildings by 2020, coordinate energy and environment agendas with the city council, mandate and enforce a LEED Silver design level requirement for all new and major renovations of city buildings that cost more than $100,000, just to name a few. The city uses examples set by other big cities (New York, Chicago) to shape its plan and to motivate the residents.  As I read the plans, I realized that the city is starting from square one.  One of the recommendations to the mayor is to re-establish recycling at city hall.  Most of the basic services (electricity, garbage, sewer, etc.) that we take for granted in America( let alone a big city) are still not available to some residents in New Orleans.  The local government in New Orleans short and long term goals are simple: get as much help from whomever they can get it from.

           Federal government agencies seem to be helping the local government out the most. The Department of Energy’s Solar America City program named New Orleans one of its 25 solar cities in America, and has given grants to the city to help accelerate the adoption of solar technology. The city has also seen a host of non-profit organizations that have set up shop in the city to make the recovery effort a green one. One organization getting a lot of attention is Global Green. Global Green is a national organization based in Los Angeles and has superstar Brad Pitt as its spokesperson. The organization works with low income families through greening affordable housing, creating sustainable neighborhoods, and advancing climate solutions that work for communities. .  The organizations showpiece is the Holy Cross Project which is located in New Olean’s infamous lower ninth ward neighborhood. The project is to include an 18 unit apartment building and a community center.  The goal is to achieve zero energy usage, be carbon neutral, and LEED platinum certified. Home Depot and famed New York City energy consulting firm Think Energy are major sponsors of the project.  The city of New Orleans is in definite need of help; however, the lack of city oversight and the true intentions of the organizations “giving” to the city makes me wonder about the cities long term sustainability.

          Some in the United States have likened New Orleans to a “third world country”, the title westerners have given to places with no resources, no laws, and no hope. The title is definitely a slur, and unfortunately fits what New Orleans is going through right now.  The sustainable plans that the city has are indefinite.  With no real resources to implement and enforce the plans (or anything else), and the population at a devastating low, the city stands in a collective limbo.  The municipality is relying on the federal government and outside organizations to become the driving forces that bring the city back from the brink. As the feds and private agencies become more involved with shaping the city, the more power and influence they have in the local government.  A big question on a lot of residents minds are who they are selling the keys to the city to and at what cost to whom.

Bibliography

City of New Orleans, GreeNOLA””, City of New Orleans 2008, Web Jan 19, 2011.

Habitat for Humanity,” Katrina & Rita: Five Years Later”, Habitat for Humanity 2010, Web jan 19, 2011

City of New Orleans, Carbon Footprint Report July 2009, One New Orleans 2009, Web jan19 2011

Transition New Orleans Task Force, “Sustainable Energy and Environmental”, Transition New Orleans Task Force 2010, Web jan 19, 2011

U.S. Department of Energy, “Solar Powering Your Community: A Guide for Local Governments. Second Edition”, U.S. Department of Energy 2011, Web jan 19 2011

Web Sites: www.GlobalGreen.org

                   www.nolazed.com

                   www.TransitionNewOrleans.com

Chicago

Big City Sustainability :  CHICAGO                        

  

A0/nfMZTq2Nb_Y/s320/chicago_skyline.jpg" width="320" />

          Chicago is one of the biggest cities in the United States and the world.  The city is a mix of polar opposites; big city pace and Midwest values, home of America’s most famous corporations and most infamous gangsters, and has fostered racial division, Oprah, Jordan, and Obama.  Chicago has a reputation for strong personalities and “pull yourself up by your bootstrap” mentality.  The focus on community and the willingness to work long and hard have benefitted the people in Chicago throughout its history. The “Machine” that many people associate Chicago politics and bureaucracy, is the driving force behind the city’s environmental plans and big business is the vehicle to take it into the future.

          The Mayor of Chicago is Richard M. Daley, son of Richard J Daley, the former larger than life mayor of the city who cast a long shadow and left big shoes for future mayors of the city. His son however, has plans to fill those shoes with an environmental plan that will make Chicago a model of big city sustainability. Mayor Daley commissioned the Chicago Department of the Environment; a large agency with broad environmental mandate and divisions that include: Natural Resources and Water Quality, Urban Management and Brownfields, Redevelopment, Permitting and Enforcement, and Community Programming and Education Outreach. In 2009, the DOE in cooperation with Julia Parzen of Urban Sustainability Associates, and The Center for Neighborhood Technology published the Chicago Climate Action Plan ( CCAP). The guide is a comprehensive environmental resource for the citizens and businesses of Chicago regarding energy, green building, transportation, energy use, infrastructure, and resource management.  Mayor Daley uses the bureaucratic web of the DOE and guidelines set by the CCAP to test sustainable systems and ideas using city properties and resources. The three areas that the city wants to focus on is green building construction and retrofitting, storm water runoff and urban heat reduction, and attracting green business’s to set up shop in the windy city.

           Chicago’s skyline is famous for being dense with skyscrapers, most notably the Sears Tower, the former tallest building on earth.  Construction is seen as one of the city’s most valuable assets and the buildings that arise from that should be efficient and sustainable models for 21^st century form and function. Since 2004, all new Chicago municipal buildings have been constructed to meet LEED Certification. City buildings that undergo renovation must also meet LEED standards. 70% of greenhouse emissions in Chicago are due to energy usage in buildings, 61% in the metropolitan area alone. The municipality uses community programs and government incentives to help residents implement sustainable systems to their homes and neighborhood buildings to improve energy efficiency, reduce storm water runoff and urban heat.  The biggest example of green building is the 20,000 square foot green rough on top of city hall. The city hall building kicked off the cities Green Roof Project. The Green Roof Project has led to more than 80 green roofs in the city totaling more than 2.5 million square feet of green on top of the city. The city provides $5,000 in green roof instillation grants for small scale commercial and residential properties. The city also has a Green Alleys Program that installs permeable pavement in residential alleyways and encourages residents to disconnect downspouts, install rain gardens, and use rain barrels. The reason why Chicago is so concerned with its run off is due to its combined sewer overflow system which was constructed in 1856. The system combines storm water runoff and waste water that flows into the Mississippi river. Flooding of the system has been a source of city contamination for decades.  The city has implemented the Tunnel and Reservoir Plan (TARP) in stages over the past twenty years, and it will be completed in 2019. When completed the tunnel will store runoff and sewage until it can be sent for treatment instead of being sent out into the city. 58% of the city is covered by impervious surfaces.  Creating a green canopy by planting more trees and creating more porous surfaces reduces water runoff and “urban Island” heat and increases energy efficiency. The city also wants to be the nation’s headquarters for green technology and business. The DOE is used as an incubator for new green ideas and the city uses tax and other incentives to lure green tech companies to the city. The windy city is home to fourteen wind company headquarters which makes it the largest hub for wind technology in the world.

      Chicago’s plans for urban sustainability are no more or less ambitious and complex as any other big cities plan. The city uses its vast municipal resources to research, plan and implement a host of sustainable systems that range from simple tips to help residents become more efficient, to big municipal systems created to improve existing structures and make sure future structures will be “sustainable” over  time. It’s hard to find an argument against Chicago’s (or any cities) plans for sustainability on paper. The only way to see how Mayor Daley’s plans are unfolding is to visit the city itself. Researching articles and reading the official city papers gives you a sense that everyone is on the same page and all is equitable in Chicago’s quest for a greener future, however, the city’s history of ethnic segregation, shady municipal politics, and big egos more than likely has a stronger hand in the process than anyone would dare to say.

Bibliography

The City Of Chicago Department of Environment, “Chicagos Guide to Completing an Energy Efficiancy & Conservation Strategy”  The City of Chicago 2009 Web jan 19 2011

Web pages:   www.CHICAGOCLIMATEACTION.org

                        www.Think-GreenChicago.htm

                        www.CityofChicago.org

                       www.roosevelt.edu/ETS/Sustainability Studies

Big City Sustainability:     New York City                                              Paris Yates

                     The first city in the series of cities in my big city sustainability study is New York City; the big apple, with big lights, big business, and big attitude.  New Yorks municipal plan for sustainability is a 150 page document that was commissioned by Mayor Mike Bloomberg. It is a comprehensive “PLAN” that is written and presented to New Yorkers as if they are stockholders in one of the world’s fortune 500 companies; CEO Bloomberg will lead them to exponential growth, high investment returns, and number one status in the big city sustainability market.  The plan plays to the big dreams and ambitious spirit that have driven the city for the past century. It also addresses the problems that face the city now, and ones looming on the horizon.

                    The official title of New Yorks sustainability plan is PLANYC, and was published in the fall of 2007.  It is the city’s action plan to sustain its resources, and adapt to challenges presented in the next two decades. The plan was put together by the Mayor’s Sustainability Advisory Board with help from Earth Institute at Columbia University, New York University, City University of New York and community input from people throughout the five boroughs. The plan has 10 goals it wants the city to meet by 2030: create, improve, ensure, develop, reach, provide, reduce, achieve, clean, and open. The plan also addresses what it thinks are the three issues that challenge the city the most: growth, an aging infrastructure, and climate change. The plan points out five key dimensions of the city’s environment and what should be done to maintain and improve them for present and future New Yorkers. Land goals: create homes for almost a million more New Yorkers, while making housing more affordable and sustainable, ensure that all New Yorkers live within a 10 minute walk from a park, and clean up contaminated land in the city. Water goals: open 90% of waterways for recreation by reducing water pollution and preserving natural areas, develop critical backup water network to ensure long-term reliability. Transportation: improve travel times by adding transit capacity for millions more residents, visitors, and workers, reach a full “ state of good repairs “ on New York city’s roads, subways, and rails for the first time in history. Energy: provide cleaner, more reliable power for every New Yorker by upgrading the energy infrastructure. Air quality: achieve the cleanest air quality of any big city in America. The plan also has a climate change goal to reduce the cities emissions by 30%. Global warming is a big issue concerning the city because New York has one of the most urbanized coastlines in the U.S.  This makes it vulnerable to rising sea levels, and rising temperatures affect air quality and can produce smog and a probability of disease. The city wants to absorb 900,000 new residents in the next two decades and simultaneously prevent 15.6 million metric tons of greenhouse gases from being released into the atmosphere. The goals are well researched with every angle studied by all experts and every resident’s opinion has been factored into the equation.  Although the plan is big, it is easy to comprehend and the implementation seems to be simple, common sense actions that have built and sustained the city throughout its history. The City has come out with a PLANYC progress report every year since the original plan came out in 2007. The report reads like an annual stockholders report that systematically lists the companies (City’s) assets and investments, and breaks down in milestone percentages where the is in achieving each goals of its plan.  According to the 2010 progress report the city has met between 30-40% of its overall goal for 2030.

                 The sustainable actions that New Yorkers are taking are not revolutionary in the ideas or systems to implement those ideas: In fact, they are common principles of efficiency, density, diversity, and respect for the environment that has guided sustainable principles for millennia.  The plan tells the great history of sustainable systems in New York, and how they have shaped the city and the world.  It also stresses that in order for New York to continue to lead the world it has to make bold moves.  Most importantly, it has to be willing to pay for these changes now in order to mitigate monetary and other costs in the future. Reading the plan was inspiring and made me a believer in Mike Bloomberg. He is the 11^th richest person on earth who owns one of the world’s most successful companies and runs one of the world’s most successful cities. He knows how to get results and expects to see them in a timely matter. The only way to see the results of the plan is to visit New York and it’s communities.  No annual progress report can show the impact true sustainability has on the environment and its people.  PLANYC boasts to be the model on which all big cities organize municipal sustainable goals, and vows to continue to be the leader throughout the next century. In the coming weeks I will compare PLANYC to other big cities plans for sustainability and see the similarities and differences between plans. I hope other cities give New York the stiff competition it wants and needs.

Bibliography

The City of New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, “PLANYC: A Greener, Greater New York. The City of New York 2007, Web Jan10, 2011

The City of New York mayor Michael R. Bloomberg/ NYC Council Speaker Christine C. Quinn, “ The City of New York Greener, Greater, Buildings Plan” , The City of New york 2007. Web Jan10, 2011

The City of New york Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, “PLANYC Progress Report 2009&2010” 2009 &2010, The City of New York. Web jan10, 2011

New Rochelle Press, “City presses ahead with sustainability plan”, New Rochelle Press 200-2010. Web jan10,2011

Web Pages: www.nyc.gov

                       www.livablecity.org

                     climatechange.westchestergov.com