Sustainable Cities

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

IVSP420| SPRING 2015| ADAN RAMOS

| PAGE 1

PAGE 2 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

IVSP420| SPRING 2015| ADAN RAMOS

| PAGE 3

PAGE 4 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS SUSTAINABLE CITIES

For their mentorship and conversation over the past semester.

Dr. Jim Cohen Dr. Rachel Berndtson

For their support in this research.

Dr. Byoung-Suk Kweon Luis Quir贸s

For Providing me with this tremendous opportunity.

The Individual Studies Program _ University of Maryland Dr. Joan Burton Lori Praniewicz

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

| PAGE 5

CONTENTS

SUSTAINABLE CITIES INTRODUCTION

SUSTAINABILITY IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

08 -09

- WHAT IS SUSTAINABILITY? - THE THREE CATEGORIES OF SUSTAINABILITY

WHAT? WHAT PROBLEMS ARE CITIES FACING?

16-21

- ENVIRONMENTAL CATEGORY -PROBLEMS -COMPONENTS - DRIVERS

- ECONOMIC CATEGORY -PROBLEMS -COMPONENTS - DRIVERS

- SOCIAL CATEGORY -PROBLEMS -COMPONENTS - DRIVERS

- SHARED GOALS - CONFLICTING GOALS

HOW?

22-23

HOW ARE PROBLEMS ADDRESSED - ACTION PLANS - GOALS - METRICS - STRATEGIES

-NEW URBANISM -SMART GROWTH

PAGE 6 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

WHO?

24-25

WHO IS CAPABLE AND RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTING STRATEGIES? - RESILIENCY - CAPACITY

THEORY

26-29

THEORIES ON WHAT SHOULD BE DONE AND WHO SHOULD DO IT - REINVENTING FIRE - TRANSITION MOVEMENT - THE GREAT DISRUPTION - THE LONG EMERGENCY

PRECEDENT

30-35

SUSTAINABLE CITIES IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD - COPENHAGEN, DENMARK - PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA

BALTIMORE

36-39

BALTIMORE’S SUSTAINABILITY ACTION PLAN - BALTIMORE’S CURRENT STATE - WHAT IS CURRENTLY BEING DONE IN BALTIMORE - AMENDMENTS TO THE BALTIMORE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN

CONCLUSION

40-41

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

CONTENTS

| PAGE 7

INTRODUCTION SUSTAINABLE CITIES

Sustainability has been given many different definitions. The subject is interdisciplinary, meaning a variety of things to an even greater variety of professions. Even more ambiguous, the contemporary use of the term “sustainability” can relate to biological resource use, agriculture, carrying capacity, energy, society, economy, and/or development. All of these perspectives and more come into play when studying sustainability in the context of the built environment (Portney pg1-4). This paper will seek to clearly outline what it entails for a city to be sustainable with an emphasis on postindustrial American cities.

The term sustainable development appeared for the first time in the 1972 book Limits to Growth, but the concept was not widely applied by urban planning and architecture until the early 1990s. However, the planners of the mid twentieth century inadvertently promoted profoundly unsustainable practices. The expansion of freeways and other automobile infrastructure, the bulldozing of vibrant older urban neighborhoods in favor of bland modernist apartment blocks, the destruction of natural landscapes, including wetlands, decentralization of cities, and the segregation of racial or socioeconomic groups through zoning, are just some examples. Jane Jacobs’ 1961 book, The Death and Life of Great Americans Cities began to raise questions on current modes of urban planning. The 1970’s bestseller, Limits to Growth, raised greater awareness of the movement. Written by a group of MIT scientists led by Aurelio Peccei, the book marked the first time computer technology was used to analyze the human future. But it was not until nearly the last decade of the century that the sustainability movement began to command attention. In 1987 the World Commission on Environment and Development brought together a group of twenty-one nations to hold public hearings on five continents. The resulting report, commonly known as the Brundtland Commission, defined “sustainable development” (for the first time) as: “development that meets the needs of the present without jeopardizing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Wheeler 53). In 2005, this definition was expanded upon at the World Summit on Social Development, to include the three pillars (often called the three E’s) of sustainability: the Environment, the Economy, and Social Equity.

Environmental sustainability deals with the conservation of the ecosystem in terms of sources and sinks. It is important to ensure that the sourcing of materials and resources used in the built environment do not deplete existing supplies of resources or harm habitats of plants and animals. On the other side of the life cycle, one must ensure that production, use, and disposal minimize pollution into the environment.

Materials and resources can consist of wood, glass, plastic, energy, and land. Economic sustainability acknowledges that our current economy is in conflict with its own support system and attempts to decouple economic growth from the overconsumption of ecosystem services that currently fuel growth. Social sustainability focuses on human aspects, such as social justice and quality of life. In the built environment, that implies access to basic amenities such as food and water, but also safety, health, and sense of place. While there are many books dedicated to just one of the three categories and the general public understands “sustainability” to mean environmental sustainability, it is important to note the relationship between the three concepts.

The three categories of sustainability, environmental, social, and economic, must be viewed as an interconnected set of concepts. Failing to acknowledge the inherent relationship between these categories by creating goals and strategies for only one, could lead to catastrophe in all three areas. An article by Jonah Lehrer titled, Trials and Errors, provides an analogy for how these concepts must be treated. The article reports on a story about a drug called torcetrapid, designed to increase HDL (good cholesterol) and decrease LDL (bad cholesterol). Pfizer, the largest pharmaceutical company in the world, assumed that lowering LDL and raising HDL levels would result in improved cardiovascular health. The corporation invested $1 billion PAGE 8 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

in the development of the drug and $90 million to expand the factory as the drug entered Phase III of clinical trials, the phase before filing for FDA approval. But on December 2, 2006 Pfizer announced that Phase III would be canceled before it even began. The drug had been found to actually “trigger higher rates of chest pain, heart failure and a 60% increase in overall mortality.” That week, Pfizer’s value dropped $21 billion. The assumption that “understanding a system’s constituent parts means we understand the causes within the system” was the fatal step in the design of torcetrapid. There is an inherent relationship between the parts of a whole. Understanding these links allows us to problem solve effectively and efficiently. the other two.”

The triple bottom line must be viewed the same way. In some cases, the relationship can kill two birds with one stone. For example, lowering greenhouse gas emissions can both prevent damage to artic habitats and protect human health. But in other cases, an improvement may have some unwanted effects.

The outsourcing of industrial manufacturing in the mid 1900’s contained many short-term benefits. The use of foreign resources, moving pollution away from the city, and cheap labor, provided initial environmental gains for the city and economic benefits to owners of large companies. But the decline in local jobs had negative long-term social, environmental, and economic implications. Many postindustrial cities in America have become disinvested communities with high vacancy rates… (sprawl decaying embodied energy ect.)

(Conclude with reiteration about drug)This example also shows the relationship between the different scales of sustainability in the built environment. Benefits at the building scale allow a former factory to be turned into office space or a Barnes and Noble, as seen in the Baltimore Inner Harbor. But at the urban scale we see a suffering society and economy. Lastly, at the global scale outsourcing to factories with lesser environmental regulations and employee rights is not sustainable in any sense of the word. For sustainability to be successful it is necessary to avoid the trap Pfizer fell into and understand the deep-rooted interconnection between the triple bottom line and the scales of the built environment. It is imperative when addressing any problem to not only understand the constituent parts of the problem but also the relationships between the parts. The home page for the Sustainability Studies Minor for the University of Maryland simplifies this concept stating: “For years, gains in one of these three sectors have often seen losses in the other two.”

Throughout this paper, the balance in the triple bottom line will be analyzed with a focus on the urban scale. As stated before, this paper will seek to explain what it entails for a city to be sustainable with an emphasis on postindustrial American cities. This analysis will consist of five stages, three examining how a city creates a sustainability plan and two implementing these findings on the city of Baltimore, Maryland.

The first stage will view WHAT problems postindustrial American cities are facing, incorporating a brief history on suburbanization. The second stage will outline HOW the problems in stage one are being addressed.

This stage will outline both how cities are setting quantifiable goals, and developing potential strategies for reaching these goals. Thirdly, the question of WHO has the capacity to enact change will be examined.

Again, the final two sections will study Baltimore Maryland in terms of sustainable communities.

INTRODUCTION

| PAGE 9

WHAT?

WHAT PROBLEMS ARE CITIES FACING?

In order to understand the problems that prevent sustainability it is important to clearly comprehend it’s overall goal. The Brundtland Commission definition, “development that meets the needs of the present without jeopardizing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” is a human centered definition. Suggesting that the environment and economy are simply systems to support the wellbeing of mankind. In order to meet our needs sustaining the environment and the economy is imperative, if either were to collapse so would humanity. While this statement is true it is also important to note that regardless of our inherent dependence on the natural resources man’s responsibility to protect the environment remains.

Through this logic one can infer that the goal of sustainability is to sustain and improve all forms of life on earth and the economy must be structured in order to do so. Problems cities are facing include environmental, economic, and social. This section will outline each of these issues, their components, and what drives the problem.

ENVIRONMENTAL CATEGORY

Environmental ISSUES can be categorized into two areas: resource use (sourcing) and pollution (sinks). Resource use entails the sourcing of raw materials from the environment such as wood, metals, or even water. Pollution includes two processes. First, the emotions associated with the life cycle of materials and the disposal of the materials at the end of their useful period. The components of the life cycle analysis of materials put the two categories of environmental degradation into perspective. Both recourse consumption and pollution occur throughout each of the following stages: extraction, production, distribution, construction, operations, and disposal (Short).

The primary AREAS of consumption and emissions in the built environment include construction, operations, and transportation. Construction of structures, infrastructure, and vehicles involves the extraction and production, of all kinds of materials. Harvesting and producing wood, metals, plastics, glass, and other materials also involves a great deal of emissions into the air and water. Operations in a city include energy for the heating and cooling of buildings, electricity for lighting, and gasoline for cars. Energy production involves some of the most environmentally damaging practices known to man. Fossil fuels are sourced through damaging methods such as mountain top removal, fracking, and drilling. Consumption of energy also accounts for a great deal of carbon (CO2) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. But operations are not limited to providing energy to the city; they also involve maintenance of buildings and infrastructure, which requires further material production and use (Short).

Increased consumption and pollution in cities is primarily DRIVEN by six factors: population growth, increased efficiency, economic growth, obsolescence, externalities, and sprawl. Population has grown at an alarming rate in recent years, contributing to increased environmental degradation. Although efficiency has increased along with population this may in fact exacerbate the problem. In 1865, William Stanley Jevons, an English economist, observed that technological improvements that increase the efficiency of coal to produce energy resulted in increased consumption. This phenomenon, known as Jevons paradox, can be applied across resource economics. When efficiency goes up, cost goes down, and consumption increases.

Economic growth plays a similar roll. Economic growth is quantified as Gross Domestic Product (GDP) or GDP per person. GDP is the monetary value of a county’s production. Thus economic growth entails more production and greater environmental degradation. Since World War II, large companies began to implement a strategy known as planned obsolescence. The goal of this tactic was to make products either break or become obsolete after a short period of time. This would force consumers to discard and buy products PAGE 10 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

more often. The government supports this tactic as it stimulates the economy, and strengthens GDP, but environmental impacts of increased production are not taken into account. The unaccounted for environmental impacts in the cost of products are known as externalities.

The next factor contributing to increased environmental degradation is sprawl. In the 20th century, the advancement of the automobile created the opportunity for families to live father away from the city and commute to work. This combined with the outsourcing of industrial jobs in cities led to suburbanization.

Decreasing density results in an increase in materials needed for infrastructure, and greater pollution from longer commutes to work (Short).

ECONOMIC CATEGORY

Economic sustainability acknowledges the ISSUES seen in our current economy. Today’s economy is in conflict with its own support system. Decoupling economic growth from the overconsumption of ecosystem services that currently fuel growth will prevent economic collapse. Currently, economic growth of a city is what determines standard of living. Cities struggle to improve standard of living for two reasons: resource depletion can undermine their economy, and growth is rarely equitable. For example, when coal runs out in a mine so does the economy, but even when the mine was profitable, hundreds of miners suffered poor wages and work conditions while the few at the top of the corporation reaped the financial reward. The AREAS of economic sustainability should include equity and conservation of ecosystem services (Brown) (Heal).

These problems are DRIVEN by the definition of economic growth itself. Economic growth is defined as Gross Domestic Product (GDP), meaning monetary value of goods and services produced over a period of time, typically a year. Measuring growth in terms of production and consumption fails to account for economic equity, and resource conservation. Economic development, on the other hand, takes into account both quantitative and qualitative changes. Economic development refers to the development of natural capital, social inclusion, health, safety, and literacy among others. Communities that only focus their attention on qualitative growth are in effect a ticking time bomb (Brown).

Take for example the ancient civilization of Easter Island. This island in the southeastern region of the Pacific Ocean had a thriving civilization in the first millennium C.E. The leaders of this civilization were consumed with erecting immense monolithic statues. These sculptures, averaging thirteen feet tall, were rolled into place using tree trunks. Because so many statues were erected and so many trees were chopped down, the island’s biodiversity was soon beyond repair. With the extinction of the plants and animals of the island came the end of their civilization (Easter Island). The leaders were focused only on producing more of something that benefited only a few, ignoring equity and natural capital. Postindustrial American cities experienced a similar fate. When the industrial jobs of cities like Detroit were outsourced, the economy plummeted and while the members of the city scrambled for survival, the corporations benefited from the cheap labor and lack of environmental regulations in countries like Mexico and China. The American economy has grown, but the distribution of the wealth is sourly lacking. This disparity spells a time of decline in standard of living despite the apparent growth in GDP per person or economic growth. In conclusion, the goal of the economic category should not be to achieve economic growth but rather economic development. Striving for equity and consideration for the ecosystem will sustain the economy. In future sections strategies for development rather than growth will be examined (Brown).

Further Details on the Difference between Growth and Development:

“Economic growth occurs when market value of goods and services in an economy increases in one period compared to another.” (Economic Dev.). Real GDP is a measure of how fast the economy is expanding and GDP per capita is the ability of people to purchase goods and services. Measuring percentage change in real GDP and GDP per capita rather then a numeric increase negates any impacts inflation may WHAT | PAGE 11

have when calculating economic growth. In short, economic growth is based on an increase in the production and consumption of goods and services.

Michael Todaro, an American economist in the 1960’s and 70s and co-author of “Economic Development” defines Economic Development as an increase in standard of living which can be measured by the Human Development Index (HDI). HDI takes literacy rates and life expectancy into account Both factors directly affect productivity and thus have the potential to foster economic growth. More importantly these concepts also create opportunities in education, healthcare, and employment. Economic Growth does not take the depletion of natural resources into account . Resources are necessary for Economic Growth, and their consumption is associated with pollution and diseases, which may decrease productivity. However, Economic Development takes these factors into account. In conclusion the scope of growth is only to increase the output of the economy resulting in quantitative change while economic development is concerned with a structural change in the economy, which allows simultaneous qualitative and quantitative improvement (Economic Dev.).

The structural change economic development seeks to make is contingent on the decoupling of economic growth and the depletion of resources. Many authors, such as Lester Brown, question whether or not this direct relationship can be broken. Michael Green, economist and creator of the Social Progress Index, provided an alternative perspective on the discussion in his 2014 TED talk. Green stated that the concept of using GDP to quantify quality of life began in 1939 when Simon Kuznets, an American economist, presented the concept to Congress. This statistic provided data that could aid the United States to escape the clutches of the Great Depression, but Simon Kuznets himself warned that GDP should not be used to quantify quality of life, writing in his report; “The welfare of a nation can scarcely be inferred from a measurement of national income”. Despite this warning today every country in the world uses GDP for exactly this purpose.

During the 2008 recession in the United States, politicians boasted their action plans to raise GDP when in reality economic growth is not directly related to improved quality of life. Michael Green proves this with his new statistic, the Social Progress Index, which measures basic human needs, foundations of wellbeing, and opportunity. Using this statistic, Green shows countless examples of countries with high GDPs and low Social Progress Indices. Thus,to meet needs of current and future generations, economic growth or increased production and consumption is not necessary. Instead, the economy should work towards economic development or Social Progress (Economic Dev.).

SOCIAL CATEGORY

Social sustainability focuses on the human ISSUES and can be summarized as addressing the lack of opportunity in some communities. Lack of opportunity stems form two AREAS, access to goods and services, and environmental justice. In the built environment, access to basic amenities such as food and water, but also safety, health, racism, religious intolerance and sense of place must be addressed. All cities suffer from social injustice to some degree as a result of either resources allocation or resources scarcity. Resources are allocated where there are financial resources and other resources, meaning where the residents are wealthy and the economy is strong. The poor cannot afford to live in these areas and thus low-income housing is located where there is scarcity of resources. It is the nature of a city to offer low-income housing in areas that are unsafe in terms of crime, health, maybe even food and water security. The real estate market is driven by location and thus cost of living is directly related to quality of life. But the real paradox lies in the cycle of poverty and gentrification (Short).

This is where environmental justice plays a heavy role. While one can argue that prejudice may never be completely eradicated, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 removed segregation institutionally. Simply the structure of society today prevents certain individuals and communities from escaping poverty. There are three primary resources that influence social equity: employment, education, and equal rights. A community PAGE 12 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

of individuals lacking these resources struggle to escape poverty, generation after generation, creating a cycle of poverty. Funding schools and other community improvements with income and property tax creates a struggle to improve the area, but even if a neighborhood were to improve, as soon as there are good schools, jobs, and or safety in an area, property cost inflates and low-income families are forced to relocate.

This phenomenon is known as gentrification and is the greatest obstacle to overcoming social inequity (Short).

Lack of opportunity in America today was DRIVEN by events in the late 1970s. After World War II the American economy began to transition sharply form a manufacturing economy to a service economy. The decrease in industrial production after wartime coupled with globalization and the availability of cheap labor abroad pulled thousands of jobs away from many American cities. At this time production and growth was almost entirely focused in the building of the suburb’s buildings, roads, and infrastructure. The result was a growing disparity between lower and upper income communities and a shrinking middle class, a trend that continues today. This paper has determined that inequity stems from resource allocation and resource scarcity resulting in a cycle of poverty for many communities. Globalization has resulted in a service based national economy, “allocating” the resources of employment towards those with access to higher education resulting in job “scarcity” for millions of Americans. The minority groups that have historically lacked access to equal rights, jobs and education such as African Americans and women, are caught in the cycle of poverty. This aligns with the three resources that contribute to poverty: scarcity of education (or training), employment, and equal rights. Methods to provide access to these vital resources to low-income families without gentrifying the community will be outlined in future sections (Short).

SHARED GOALS

As stated in the introduction, these categories of sustainability do not standalone. A great deal of overlap exists between them, some positive and some negative. The byproduct of an improvement in one category can result in an improvement or a setback in another category. It is important to understand these relationships in order to tackle the problems facing cities. When describing the primary problems of each category, this overlap becomes even more evident. In retrospect, one can note that each category was described in terms of the other two categories. The environmental problems were described in terms of social equity and the economy. Environmental degradation is influenced socially by poverty increasing pollution and inefficiencies. The environment is influenced economically by increased GDP per capita (economic growth), increased efficiency, and negative externalities. Economic problems were outlined in terms of society and the environment. Economic development is prevented environmentally by degradation of ecosystem services, and socially by lack of equity in standard of living. Lastly, social problems can be described through the lenses of the economy and the environment. Social issues stem form the lack of environmental justice and economic opportunity. It is imperative to understand this interrelationship between these categories before analyzing strategies for solving these problems.

There are positive relationships between all of the categories. These overlaps in goals can be seen as a series of feedback loops. For example, economic development strengthens human capital and vice versa.

Human capital is defined as the collective skills, knowledge, or other intangible assets of individuals that can be used to create economic value for the individuals, employers, or the community. Economic development can provide jobs and skills strengthening human capital. Conversely, methods to strengthen human capital through access to education and health can strengthen human capital and in turn can strengthen the economy. The economy and environment share a similar feedback loop. Strategies to create economic development rather than growth, conserve ecosystem services for the sake of sustaining the economy but also sustain the environment. Conversely, a byproduct of methods to sustain natural capital can sustain the economy. Lastly, the environmental and social categories can also support one another. Pollution prevention and environmental protection can improve the health and quality of life for humans. Similarly creating safe, WHAT | PAGE 13

clean, efficient communities can mitigate pollution and consumption in the environment. Furthermore, an attempt to improve one category can benefit all three. With economic strategies, economic development seeks to preserve the environment while improving equity. With environmental strategies, sustaining natural capital protects the economy and human health. Lastly, with social strategies, creating safe, clean, and healthy communities of opportunity result in pollution prevention and a healthier and smarter work force.

Examples of how the problems seen in the three categories of sustainability can be addressed simultaneously will be seen in the HOW? Section of this research.

CONFLICTING GOALS

The three categories of sustainability can also be in conflict with one another. Scott Campbell depicts the three categories of sustainability as points on a triangle, exemplifying their potential to be in tension with one another. What Scott Campbell terms the “Property Conflict”, states that the economic point can be in conflict with the social point. The economy is in conflict with its support system, the working class. When professionals gentrify the long-time residents in a community they are removing the human capital needed to keep their business running, both through employees and potential customers. Industry must also “curb” their profit seeking tendency to reduce wages in order to ensure the health and in some cases survival of its employees. The “Resource Conflict” explains the tension between economics and the environment. Business resists regulation on the exploitation of nature in order to keep profit margins up. In both the property conflict and the resource conflict industry must leave enough of its support system (whether human labor or nature) unexploited to ensure the resources will survive. Lastly, the “Development Conflict” illustrates the conflict between society and the environment. There is a direct conflict between development or increased standard of living and environmental preservation. This raises the questions of how one raises social equity while maintaining the environment. Industrialization can pull third world countries out of poverty, but have tremendous environmental ramifications. Scott Campbell’s award winning article exemplifies exactly why achieving sustainability seems impossible at times (Campbell).

BALANCE

Many diagrams exist outlining the relationship between the three categories of sustainability yet none truly capture the variety of possible relationships. The three categories can all work independently to support sustainability like pillars but can also work together in areas, as seen in the venn diagram. Yet another illustration shows that in many instances they can work against one another. All of these relationships are true and exist simultaneously. For this reason the relationship of the three categories of sustainability can be illustrated most accurately though a rubik’s cube. Through this diagram we see that there are four potential relationships. First a condition can support all three categories; some improve two categories, others can improve one category while hurting another, and others can negatively impact all three categories. A balance must be found in these relationships. As seen in the cholesterol example understanding the relationship between the constituent parts of a problem is imperative for discovering how the problem should be addressed.

PAGE 14 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

E BUILT ENVIRONMENT

Jose Ramos

y CE

E S

menndiajor cess Ee reS mens dendimary ajor with cess and. e redemary with come and.

y CE

Work Workindependently independentlyinin supportofofsustainability sustainability support

Work Work inin tension tension against against Work Work towards towards Work independently Work in tensionoverlapping against Work towards each each other. other. in overlapping goals goals

rk tension against against Work Work towards towards each other. overlapping goals support of sustainability ndependently independently in inininintension Work Work inin tension tension against against Work Work towards towards york lyininintension Work Work tension against against Work Work towards Work independently Work against Work towards Work independently in in tension Work in towards tension against Work independently inin tensionWork against Work towardsWork towards Work Workindependently independently in in Work Work inin tension tension againstgoals Work Work towards towards each other. overlapping goals support of sustainability ch other. other. overlapping overlapping goals goals eachagainst other. overlapping goals support of sustainability support of sustainability each other. overlapping goals each each other. other. overlapping overlapping goals goals ort th of of sustainability sustainability ability each other. overlapping overlapping goals bility each other.

Work independently Work in tensionoverlapping against Work towards each each other. other. in overlapping goals goals supportofofsustainability sustainability support rk tension against against Work Work towards towards each other. overlapping goals support of sustainability ndependently ndependently in inininintension Work Work in in tension tension against against Work Work towards towards york ly ininintension Work Work tension against against Work Work towards towards Balancing the Sides of Sustainability Work independently Work tension against Work towards Work independently in Three Work in tension against Work towards Work independently inin Work in tension against Work balancing the three sides oftowards sustainability: support of sustainability each other. goals Balancing Balancing the the Three Three Sides Sides of of Sustainability Sustainability ch other. other. overlapping overlapping goals goals eachoverlapping other. overlapping goals support of sustainability support of sustainability each other. overlapping goals th rtof of sustainability sustainability each each other. other. overlapping overlapping goals goals bility bility each each other. other. overlapping overlapping goals goals

balancing balancing the three three sides ofofsustainability: sustainability: sustainability: balancing thethe three sides ofsides sustainability: balancing the threeofsides of sustainability: balancing the three sides Conflict Condition A: Balancing the Three Sides of Sustainability

$80K-$100K ome

Support Condition A:

balancing the three sides of sustainability: A positive move

Support Support ee sides sides of of sustainability: sustainability: ancing ancing the the three three sides sides of of sustainability: sustainability: gee the the three three sides sides of of sustainability: sustainability: balancing balancing the the three three sides sides of of sustainability: sustainability: balancing sides ofsides sustainability: Condition Condition A: the three Condition Condition A: A: balancing the threeofsides of sustainability: the three sustainability: $80K -$10 0K A:balancing A Apositive positivemove move A positive A positive move move Conflict Conflict Support Support on on one one side side can can one one side side cancan Support Support ct ict Support Support Supportonon Support ee sides of sustainability: ee sides of sustainability: ancing ancing the the three three sides sides of of sustainability: sustainability: the the three three sides sides of of sustainability: sustainability: atat times timesresult result at times atCondition times result result in A: in A: Condition Condition A:in A:in Condition A positive move Balancing Balancing theThree Three Sides Sidesofof Sustainability Conflict Conflict the onSustainability one side can Conflict Conflict Conflict times result in Condition A: Condition A:Condition A:atConflict negative impacts

one side can Support Support on Support at times result Condition A: Condition A:Condition Support A:in positive impacts

A positive move A positive move A positive move A positive move A: Condition A positive move A positive move A: ofCondition another. of another.

A positive move positive on one side can on one side canon one side can on one side can on one side canon oneAside canmove on one side can on one Conflict Support Conflict Support Conflict Support at times result in at times result at at times result in at times result at in can in times result in in times resultside at times result in at times result negative impacts positive impacts A: Condition A: negative Condition negative impacts positive impacts A:in impacts positive impacts Condition A:negative impacts Condition A: Condition A:Condition positive impacts of another.move of of another.

A negative positive A positive move Apositive ofAanother. of another. of positive another. positive move Aimpacts positive move A another. positive move positive of another. of another. negative impacts impacts impacts A Apositive positive move move A positive A move positive move move on one side can on one side can on one side can on one side A A positive positive move move on one side can on one side can ve ivemove move A positive A positive move move can A positive move A positive move of another. another. of another. of another. on on one one side side can can on on one one side side can canin atof times result in at times result in result at times result at in times result in at times result at in times on on one one side side can can side sidecan can on on one one side side can can on one side can on one side can negative impacts positive impacts negative impacts positive impacts negative positive impacts atattimes timesresult result inin impacts at times at times result result in in of another. of result another. at at times times result result in in of another. of another. of another. of another. sresult result in in at at times times result result in in at times in at times result in negative negativeimpacts impacts positive positive impacts impacts

Condition Condition A:A:Condition A:A: Condition A:Condition A:Condition

ition ion A:A:

Support Support Support Support Support Support Condition Condition A:A:Condition A:A: Condition A:Condition A:Condition

ct t ion tionA:A:

950K ve ive move move eve impacts impacts ofofanother. another. side sidecan can her. ther. sresult resultinin 950K eveimpacts impacts her. er.

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 Support Support

1950

K1K

621K

2000 2010 Support

Apositive A positive positive move move A positive A positive move move A positive A positive move move positive impacts impacts positive positive impacts impacts positive impacts positive impacts of another. of another.

Support Conflict onon one side side can canonon onon one one side side can can one side side can can ofone of another. another. of of another. another. of another. ofone another.

Condition B: Condition B: atat times times result result in in There are times when At times one at times times result result in conin at at times times result result in at in a strategy to improve flict causes a chain positive impacts impacts positive positive impacts impacts positive positive impacts impacts onepositive side can simultareaction, casing adSupport Conflict neously improve the ditional conflict. ofB:of another. another. of of another. another. ofConflict of another. another. remaining two.

Conflict Condition Condition B: Conflict

Condition B: Condition B:Condition 621K B: There are times when

strategy to improve There are times when There are timesThere whenare timesawhen one side can simultaa strategy to improve a strategy to improve a strategy to improve neously improve the one side can simultaone side can simultaone side can simulta1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 remaining two.

Support Support Support neously improve neously the neously improve the improve the Support Support Condition B: Condition Condition B: remaining two. remaining remaining two.B: two.

There are timesB: when There Condition Condition B: are times There whenare times when a There strategy totimes improve a strategy to improve a strategy to improve are times when There are when one side can simultaone side can simultaone side can simultaastrategy strategy improve aneously toto improve improve the neously neously improve the improve the Support Support oneside sidecan can simultaone simultaremaining two. remaining two.remaining two.

Condition Condition B:B:the neously improve the neously improve

There Thereare aretimes times when 0rt 10 K1K remaining two. remaining two.when ort a astrategy strategytoto improve improve tionB:one B:oneside ion sidecan can simultasimulta-

are e times times when when neously neously improve improve the the 0 10 gy egy improve remainingtwo. two. remaining ort rt totoimprove ecan can simultasimultation B: ion B: the the eyimprove reimprove times timeswhen when ng ingtwo. two.

At times one Condition B: Condition B:Condition B: con-

flictCITIES_PAGE causes a 4chain energy sustainability _page SUSTAINABLE 14 At times one con-At times one Atintimes one conconreaction, casing adflict causes a chain flict causes a chain flict causes a chain ditional conflict. reaction, casing adreaction, casing adreaction, casing adConflict Conflict Conflict ditional conflict. ditional conflict. ditional conflict.

Conflict Conflict

Condition B: Condition B:Condition B:

energy sustainability SUSTAINABLE At times one con-At times Atintimes one con-414 Condition Condition B:CITIES_PAGE B: _page one conflict causes a chain flict causes a chain flict a one chain At times one conAtcauses times conenergy in sustainability _pagein4sustainability energy in sustainability _page 4 ad_page 4 adreaction,energy casing adreaction, casing reaction, casing flict causes a chain causes a ditional chain ditional conflict.flict conflict. ditional conflict.

Conflict Conflict

reaction, casing reaction, casing ad-adCondition Condition B: B: ditional conflict. ditional conflict.

Atenergy At times times one one conconenergy in sustainability _pagein4sustainability Conflict Conflict in sustainability _page 4 energy _page 4 Conflict Conflict Conflict Conflict flictflict causes causes a chain a chain Condition Condition B:B:Condition Condition B:B: Condition B:Condition B: reaction, reaction, casing casing ad-adenergy energy in sustainability in sustainability _page _page 414 414 SUSTAINABLE SUSTAINABLE CITIES_PAGE CITIES_PAGE AtAt times times one one conconAt At times times one one conconAtAt times times one one conconditional ditional conflict. conflict.

flict flict causes causes aConflict chain a chain flict causes causes a chain a chain flict flict causes causes a Conflict chain aflict chain Conflict Conflict Conflict Conflict reaction, reaction, casing casing adadreaction, reaction, casing casing ad-adreaction, reaction, casing casing adadCondition Condition B: B:Condition B:B: Condition B:Condition B:Condition ditional ditional conflict. conflict. ditional ditional conflict. conflict. ditional ditional conflict. conflict.

WHAT | PAGE energy energy in sustainability intimes sustainability _page _page 414 15 414 SUSTAINABLE SUSTAINABLE CITIES_PAGE CITIES_PAGE AtAt times times one one conconAt At times one one concontimes one conAtAt times one con-

HOW?

HOW ARE PROBLEMS BEING ADDRESSED? Environmental concerns can be simplified as over consumption and pollution, economic development as economic equity and conservation of ecosystem services, and social equity as access to goods and services and environmental justice. This section will build on section one and outline how these issues can be addressed. This section will also discuss the importance of sustainability action plans, the difference between goals and strategies, examples of strategies, and some possible methods for quantifying improvement.

TERMS

In order to understand the design process for sustainability action plans, it is first important to become familiar with four terms: mission, goals, metrics, and strategies. A mission is a long-term vision or end result. There is typically only one mission statement. Conversely an action plan should have many goals under many topics. For example, the topics of energy conservation and safety can each have one or more goals. Each goal should have a metric, meaning that the goal should be quantifiable. In the given example, the metric may be a reduction of non-renewable energy use by 20% measured in kW/hr. Both the value of 20% and the unit of kW/hr are components of the metric. A strategy is a carefully constructed course of action to achieve a goal.

ACTION PLANS

Creating a sustainability action plan is the first step towards creating a more sustainable city. The process for creating a plan has been outlined in many ways, but the core principles can be summarized into three simple steps: analyze, strategize, and implement. This research has been formatted based on these principles: What are the problems?, How can they be addressed?, and Who can implement them? In order to gain a deeper understanding of this design process, two theories will be examined: the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Green Communities program and Green Plus Sustainability Plans for private organizations.

The EPA breaks the design process down into the following five steps.

1. Where are we now?

This step evaluates community assets, strengths and weakness. Every city is acutely distinct and understanding a location’s character, such as its specific resources, is a vital first step. It is also important to examine more general questions such as air quality, waste sites, and median household income. These questions apply to all locations but the answers can begin to paint a more specific image of the city or town in question. Community assessments should involve public and private participation and result in identification of community values, an inventory of both natural and human-made systems, an economic and infrastructural evaluation, and an analysis of existing links between social, economic and environmental issues (Green Communities).

2. Where are we going?

The next step, illustrates where a quality of life of a community’s members is headed if action is not taken. This step is valuable for inspiring prioritization and action in general. This information can take a variety of forms such as statistics, graphs, texts, and maps PAGE 16 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

3. Where do we want to be?

This step challenges a community to draft a mission statement. This statement or statements should outline where a community wants to be within a given timeframe. It should be accompanied by goals focused on the issues outlined in step one (Where are we now?). The EPA states “Community participation is key. Bringing people together, including business, industry, and education, along with children, planners, civic leaders, environmental groups and community associations, allows the vision to capture the values and interests of a broad constituency (Green Communities).”

4. How do we get there?

Step four addresses strategies for achieving the goals in step three. Strategies involve more then recommended actions; they also include responsibility for the work to be done, a timeline, resources, funding, obstacles, and stakeholders.

5.Let’s go.

Finally step five focuses on implementation which raises the question of who is capable of implementation. Responsibility parties may include local government, private companies, technical, non-profit organizations, or community members. Steps four and five create greater accountability and begin to address the question of Who can enact change (Green Communities).

Green Plus Sustainability Plans follow a very similar process but include three additional points that are critical to the success of any action plan. First, communities must research other organizations’ sustainability plans and projects. Although each city is unique, much can be learned from past successes and failures. The final two steps in the Green Plus outline are 1. decide what metrics you will use to measure your goals, and 2. create a reporting plan. Metrics are critical in order to determine weather a strategy is working and, if so, to what extent. Using this information is vital for creating a reporting plan and adapting the action plan accordingly. It is also important to note that a reporting plan can be used to celebrate success, raise awareness, and inspire further action (Sustainability Plans).

METRICS

Quantifying improvement is critical is critical for analysis and reiteration of action plans and their strategies, but it can sometimes be very difficult. While many areas such as consumption can be given a unit, others must be quantified relative to other areas. For example, safety can be quantified through a “safety index”, meaning the percentage of cites that the city is safer than. Safety can also be given more tangible units such as crime rate and assault rate, meaning number of incidents per a given number of people. It is important to note that relative statistics are common because it is difficult to determine statistics that are satisfactory. For example, what is the objectively acceptable amount of pollution or unemployment? For this reason, relative statistics are useful for providing a competitive baseline that continually pushes improvement. Ideally, all statistics would have objective goals, but regardless of objectivity, it is helpful to use other localities to put units into perspective.

Under the environmental category consumption can be broken down into energy and materials.

Energy can be quantified in kW/Hr, BTU, energy use intensity (EUI for individual buildings), or dollars. Materials are measured in pounds, gallons, square feet and cubic feet. Air pollution is quantified by micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m^3). An alternative, Ppb, is the number of units of mass of a contaminant per 1,000 million units of total mass. Ppm (millions) is also widely used. This system can be applied to many particulates, HOW | PAGE 17

Nitrogen Dioxide, Nitrogen Oxide, Sulphur Dioxide, and Ozone, Carbon dioxide. Pollutants in water can be measured in terms of oxygen (BOD, COD, DO), solids contents (TTS, conductivity, settle-able solids, transparency (Secchi disk), and acidity (pH). Nutrients like phosphorus and nitrogen are measured by algae and eutrophication. Finally, CO2 and GHG can also be quantified by global-warming potential. “GWP is an index that attempts to integrate the overall climate impacts of specific actions or emissions.” http://www.ipcc.ch/ ipccreports/sres/aviation/index.php?idp=71

The economic and social categories are more difficult to pin down. Economic equity can be measured by income distribution, or the size of the middle class. As stated before, economic growth is measured

by GDP, but Simon Kuznets, the man often credited with inventing GDP, states that, “the welfare of a nation can scarcely be inferred from a measure of national income.” Thus we must try to quantify economic development. There is no widely recognized, monetary measure of a country’s natural, human and physical assets.

Therefore, measuring economic development becomes difficult. Two possible measurements include Inclusive Wealth Index and Human Development Index (HDI). Inclusive Wealth Index puts a dollar value on three types of assets, manufactured capital, meaning buildings and infrastructure, natural capital, including forests and fossil fuels, and human capital, defined by humans’ skill and health. While it may sound immoral to assign a human life or even natural resources a monetary value it is useful for exemplifying their exploitation.

From 1992-2010, global GDP increased by 50 percent but inclusive wealth rose by 6 percent. The Human Development Index is a composite statistic taking into account human health, knowledge, and standard of living. Health is measured in life expectancy, knowledge by years in school and standard of living by gross national income per capita.

HDI and Inclusive Wealth Index do not reflect inequalities, poverty, safety and other aspects of social equity. The two aspects of social equity are access and environmental justice. Access can be quantified in terms of unemployment rate, rate of homelessness, and food security index. Other access issues such as access to transportation, and education are also important, but employment, housing, and food security act as the baseline. Improved transportation can be quantified though ridership, and education though average years of schooling. Environmental justice can be examined though the diversity of a community but also through the safety in both health and crime in an area. Diversity can be quantified by percentage of a race and gender within a specific area. HRS (Hazard Risk Score) determines the combined risk of nine natural hazards: flood, wildfire, tornado, storm surge, earthquake, straight-line wind, hurricane wind, hail and sinkhole. Lastly, risk to toxic chemicals in land, air, and water can be quantified though the EPA’s Hazard Ranking System, but also in terms of HRS. In conclusion, it is important to note that the accessibility of data must be taken into account when setting quantifiable goals.

STRATEGIES

Several theories and authors on sustainable urbanism present the strategies to achieve several of these goals. As stated before, the three categories of the triple bottom line are very much interconnected.

This section will outline sustainable strategies and analyze how each impacts the triple bottom line. (Take a look at Smart Growth, Transition Towns, New Urbanism, and Seven Rules for Sustainable Urbanism).

NEW URBANISM

New Urbanism intends to prevent urban sprawl, the separation of income and race, and the loss of agriculture and wilderness through the creation of dense communities diverse in use and population. New Urbanism seeks to conserve, restore, and preserve the “built legacy” of cities as well as create pedestrian accessibility. In order to achieve these goals, urban place should be “framed by architecture and landscape design that celebrates local history, climate, ecology, and building practice.” New Urbanists recognize that physical solutions cannot solve all problems cities face, but that the problems cannot be solved without PAGE 18 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

physical improvement. The ultimate goal of New Urbanism is to discover the relationship between the art of building and the making of community.

New Urbanism can be broken down into three scales: regional, neighborhood, and the block. The regional scale can be defined by boundaries derived from water and topography. New Urbanism supports farmland, encourages infill development, and respects history. A spectrum of public and private uses support the regional economy. Affordable housing as well as job opportunity must be well distributed in order to avoid concentrations of poverty. Lastly, a variety of transit alternatives must exist.

The neighborhood scale includes districts and corridors. This scale encourages citizens to take ownership of areas in terms of maintenance and improvement. Neighborhoods should be compact, pedestrian friendly, and mixed use to minimize reliance on the automobile. A range of housing types and price levels should be included in order to ensure a diversity of age, race, and income in a community. Transit corridors can be seen as an opportunity to organize, structure, and revitalize urban centers, but should not divide or displace communities. Neighborhoods should have an appropriate building density, with civic and institutional centers embedded into their fabric. Children should be able to walk to school and parks. Village greens, and ball fields, should be well distributed.

On the scale of blocks, streets, and buildings, New Urbanism encourages dense and diverse communities though the promotion of safety and security. Attractive streets and squares, along with architecture and landscape that evoke local climate, topography, history, and building practice also contribute strongly.

Civic buildings must be given a hierarchy in location to reinforce community identity. All buildings must have strong indoor environmental quality in terms of view to the outdoors and ventilation as well as energy efficiency. Historic buildings, and landscapes must be preserved and restored. At the scale of blocks, streets, and buildings a strong sense of place or community can be created. At all three scales, New Urbanism intends to ensure social strength in a community as well as environmental and economic improvement though cleanliness, efficient transit, well designed building operations, and strong local retail corridors.

These planning strategies address the three categories of sustainability simultaneously in many ways (Charter).

SMART GROWTH

Smart Growth seeks to maintain cities and towns through “building urban, suburban, and rural communities with housing and transit choices near jobs, shops, and schools.� Goals involve, supporting the local economy, promoting beauty, safety, affordability, and access to schools, transportation, and jobs. Smart Growth can support housing, business, the job market, the economy, transportation, the environment, human health, and community revitalization.

The goal of Smart Growth in terms of housing is to create walkable, transit-oriented, and vegetated neighborhoods energized by public space. Strategies include stabilizing home prices to avoid foreclosure, creating more housing options to promote diversity, and reducing overall housing and transportation cost.

The economy benefits from Smart Growth though a strengthening of transit, connecting workers and customers to employers and businesses. The operations and maintenance of transit systems can also create thousands of jobs. These jobs are both green and blue collar jobs providing opportunities to community members without college degrees. Smart Growth also advocates reclamation of existing infrastructure, saving land, habitats, materials, and budget. Affordable and attractive places to live and work attract and retain talented workers.

Smart Growth strategies for transportation include more than simply providing greater transportaHOW | PAGE 19

tion options and improved access for all. Streets are also designed to be safer, pedestrian friendly, and bike friendly. As with buildings, strategies also favor the maintenance of existing infrastructure rather than the construction of new highways. When compared to new highway construction, this strategy decreases the use of materials and land while increasing job opportunities.

The environment can also be improved though Smart Growth. Infill development of buildings and roads protect natural habitats. Improved public transportation reduces car miles and improves air quality. Minimizing greenhouse gas emissions also improves water quality because clouds carrying water contain less pollutants. Minimizing pavement per home built, and new road and building construction reduces runoff (Smart Growth America).

Strategies also address social equity issues. Improved air and water quality provide a healthier community. Safer streets and public space encourage the public to live a more active lifestyle by walking and biking, and also raises real estate prices. Smart Growth also stands for environmental justice, fighting against the placement of harmful factories in low-income areas. Thirdly, strategies encourage revitalization over sprawl. The disinvested inner cities of many great American cities hold great economic potential. Smart Growth encourages the repairing of existing infrastructure, and the reuse of developed land, “raising surrounding property values, creating community amenities, bringing in local tax revenues, attracting residents and businesses, and strengthening regional economies.” In these efforts, community engagement is very valuable in order to determine, “what services they need, what areas need help, and what they (community members) can do to help (Smart Growth America).”

It is quite evident that many of these strategies look to capitalize on overlapping goals between the three categories of sustainability. The most prevalent example is improved public transportation, supporting the economy though providing jobs, but also improving the environment and human health by minimizing carbon emissions. Whether the initial intended goal of the strategy was to improve the economy or the environment, the strategy contains inherent effects that aid all three categories to some extent (Smart Growth America).

Smart Growth and New Urbanism seem very similar but the strategies are fundamentally different.

The agenda of New Urbanism was outlined in the charter of the Congress for New Urbanism (CNU), founded in 1993. The CNU was founded by a coalition of architects, planners, and environmental advocates. Supporters of the movement ague that physical change is a prerequisite for urban economic, social, and ecological change. The ideas behind New Urbanism stem from a variety of theories such as the traditional neighborhood concepts of Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, the pedestrian pockets of Kelbaugh, the transit-oriented designs of Peter Calthorpe and Shelly Poticha, the Garden cities movement, and regionalism of Leis Mumford among others (Smart Growth America).

In contrast Smart Growth originates from the work of environmentalists and policy planners rather then architects and physical planners. The movement began in the mid 90s when the American Planning Association launched the project. By 1997 the Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook was produced, and several policies and acts were passed to encourage compact growth, mixed land use, transit-oriented development and so on. An example in Maryland is the 1997 Smart Growth and Neighborhood Conservation Act, which encouraged Brown-field Redevelopment, and living close to work. While aiming to archive very similar goals New Urbanism focuses on physical strategies and Smart Growth is centered on policy (International).

PAGE 20 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

SIMPLIFY ACTION PLAN DESIGNSUSTAINABILITY PROCESS IN THE BU

Adan Jose Ra

RESEARCH_EXPERIENCE RESEARCH_EXPERIENCE

WHAT

A II N N A A BB LL EE __ CC II TT II EE SS S U S T A

In the fall of of 2013 2013 II proposed proposedaamajor majorin inEnvironmenEnvironmental Design though though the the University Universityof ofMaryland’s Maryland’sIndiIndividual Studies StudiesProgram.

Program.The Theculmination culminationof ofthis thismajor major is a capstone capstone research research project projecton onthe thedesign designprocess process of sustainable sustainable cities. cities. Understanding Understandingthe theintricate intricatererelationship of of the thetriple triplebottom bottomline lineand andhow howcities citiesdedesign strategic strategic plans plans for for improvement improvementisisthe theprimary primary focus of this this research. research.The Theproject projectwill willconclude concludewith with an analysis analysis and and proposal proposal for for Baltimore, Baltimore, Maryland.

Maryland.

Environmental Sustainability RESEARCH_EXPERIENCE S U S Consumption T A I N A B L Pollution E _ C I T I E S

In the fall of 2013 I proposed a major in Environmental Design though the University of Maryland’s Individual Studies Program. The culmination of this major is a capstone research project on the design process of sustainableExternalities cities. Understanding Equitythe intricate relationship of the triple bottom line and how cities design strategic plans for improvement is the primary focus of this research. The project will conclude with an analysis and proposal for Baltimore, Maryland.

Economic Sustainability

W su

Work Workindependently independently in in Work Work Work t Work indepen indepe Work Work independently inininte Socialindependently Sustainability W su support supportof ofsustainability sustainability each each othe oth support of su support of sus support support ofofsustainability sustainability Access Environmental Justice Baltimore Median House Hold Income

Baltimore Median Median House House Hold HoldIncome Income

b b

Ba B

$80K-

$40K-$50K

balancing thethree three balancing the siCsCo balanci balanc balancing the the $80 $80K-$ K-$ 100 100KK balancing

C Co

$40K-$50K HOW $40K-$50K

A

A on on ( Metrics, Timeline) Conflict Conflict at Conflict Conflict Conflict Conflict ne Condition ConditionA: A: Condition Condition ConditionA:at A ConditionA:A: of ne AApositive positivemove moveAApositive AApositive positivemove mov positivemove move of

Goals

on onone oneside sidecan can on on onone oneside sidecan ca onone oneside sidecan can Strategies (Who, Resources) at attimes timesresult resultin inatattimes at timesresult resultin timesresult result intimes inat BALTIMORE HARBOR Baltimore Population 950K negative negativeimpacts impacts negative negativeimpac impa negativeimpacts impacts negative of ofanother. another.

Reporting another. ofanother. another.Planofofanother. of (Reiterate)

510K 1900

1910

1920

1930

1940

1950

196 Su

Co

Baltimore Population Population

Th as on neS Su re

PAGE 13_RESEARCH

950K 950K

WHO...

Co C 621K 621K

510K 1900

1910 1910

PAGE 13_RESEARCH 13_RESEARCH

1920 1920

1930 1930

1940 1940

1950 1950 1960 1960 1970 1970 Support Support

1980 1980 1990 1990 2000 2000 2010 2010 Support Support Support Support

ThT a as ono nen rer

Condition ConditionB: B: Condition Condition Condition B:B Condition B:B: HOW | PAGE 21

There Thereare aretimes timeswhen when There There are aretimes time Thereare aretimes times when There when

WHO?

WHO IS CAPABLE OF IMPLEMENTING STRATEGIES? RESILIENCY

The concept of resilience is another way to mitigate issues cities are facing. Resilience is defined as “robustness in the face of disturbance and opportunities for systems reconfiguration, leaning, self-organization, flexibility and transform-ability.” (Pierce pg571) “Ecological Resilience and Resilient Cities” explains that there are three types of resilience: engineering, multi-equilibria, and socio-ecological. Engineering resilience is by far the most common understanding of the term, meaning the ability or efficiency with which a city can recover from disaster. Multi-equilibria resilience on the other had focuses on the ability to resist before reaching a breaking point. Lastly, the least common, but possibly the most important, socio-ecological resilience aims not to achieve equilibrium but rather adaptability. “Transformability is the capacity to progress to a new arrangement when the current situation is untenable and unsustainable.”

Resiliency in a sustainability plan can be measured in information/knowledge, motivation, and capacity (Pierce pg573). In other words, does a city have the tools to enact change? The information/knowledge aspect of resiliency is critical for innovative responses to threats and system changes. Because cities are centers of innovation and economic growth, they often have this ability. An effort of public outreach and education can also influence social motivation. This aspect of resiliency stems from the fact that “policies are responses to perceptions of existing or potential threats.” Thus the more a community is educated, the more incentive or “motivation” there is towards enacting change (Pierce pg574).

CAPACITY

Capacity begins to ask the question of who can enact change. Public engagement suggests a strong capacity to work together towards common goals. Social capital is defined by the as “networks (individuals or groups who interact) with shared norms, values and understandings that facilitate co-operation within or among groups (OECD).” But capacity is not only defined by social capital. Wang states political support, financial resources, technologies, and managerial execution also contribute. Political support involves support from the mayor’s office, supervisors in the city, legislators, and nonprofits among others. Technical support includes support from city staff, professional institutions, universities and private consultants. Financial resources require a city to have a sustainability initiative budget, applied grants, and funded capital projects among others. Lastly, managerial execution requires a city to incorporate sustainability principles into city departments, the government’s strategic plan and the city’s goal or mission statement among others (Wang pg846). The ability to specify political and technical support and financial resources for each strategy can lead to strong capacity. Strategy execution should range from government agency input, to private organization, to individual involvement. Funding for the strategies should be equally as diverse including existing program funds, city funds, and grant programs among others (BSPpg33-36). Can a city enact change? If not, how does a city place itself in the position to do so? These are some of the least asked question but maybe the most important (Pickett).

PAGE 22 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

WHO

Resilience Capacity

Knowledge Motivation Capacity

Social Capital Political Support Financial Resources Technologies Managerial Execution

WHO | PAGE 23

THEORY

WHAT SHOULD BE DONE AND WHO SHOULD DO IT?

Take a step back and look at the two questions asked thus far. How are problems being addressed and who is addressing them. Both questions lead to significant follow up questions. How are problems being addressed raises the question – what should be done? And who is enacting change, raises the question - who can enact change? These questions do not have a direct answer but rather provide a broad range of arguments. Studying four prominent writers and their views on the topic will put the subjective nature of these questions into perspective. Some authors claim the earth can adjust the logistics of society, and people can continue at their current standard of living. Others argue that adaptation is not enough and largescale change must be taken. Similarly, answers to the question “who can enact change” vary as some authors believe in a top down approach, others in a bottom up or change in the hands of the individual, and still others believe in catastrophe forcing change upon society. Most importantly there is a relationship between how problems should be addressed and who should implement the strategies.

REINVENTING FIRE

Reinventing Fire by Amory B. Lovins takes the stance that the world can adapt to a world without oil while continuing to grow in some areas. Lovins writes that increased efficiency in production and operations along with the advancement of alternative energy technology will facilitate this adaptation by 2050.

In short, “investment across technology and fuel” will enable “fuel without fear”. In fact, Lovins claims this adaptation will provide great business opportunity in areas of transportation, buildings, and materials among others. An institutional and governmental top down approach, enabled by policy, subsidies, and codes will make this a reality.

TRANSITION MOVEMENT

The Transition movement, designed by Rob Hopkins, takes a bottom up approach. Seeking to promote access to information, and community self organization. Though setting up steering groups, raising awareness, and activism any community can positions itself to scale back from a car depended society to self-sustaining communities. The movement can be summed up as grass roots, and citizen-led education and action initiatives building a strong localized community (Hopkins).

THE GREAT DISRUPTION

Paul Gilding takes an optimistic view in his book The Great Disruption. He states that change is directly correlated with the perceived gravity of a problem and thus when catastrophe strikes, people, the market, and the government will take action. Gilding trusts in the resiliency of man to create solutions, equating this adaptation to the global mobilization in reaction to the World Wars. He writes that while waiting for catastrophe to strike before implementing solutions, will prove more costly, the government will still have the capacity to enact large-scale adaptation. Thus it is imperative to construct both engineering and socio-ecological resiliency. Lastly, The Great Disruption concludes by stating that while powerful corporations seemingly hold the capacity to push adaptation prior to collapse, in reality it is the consumers who have the corporations under their control. An individual’s choice to take public transportation, or live in mixed use apartments will influence social construct. The market and even the government directly reflect the demand of the people (Gilding).

PAGE 24 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

THE LONG EMERGENCY

In the Long Emergency, James Howard Kunstler outlines a far from optimistic perspective. He writes that alternative energy relies too heavily on fossil fuels to build up and maintain the necessary infrastructure to prevent peak oil from causing social and economic unrest. The end of cheap energy will also bring an end to globalization and consumerism, as well as industrial farming, which requires huge machinery and large amounts of chemically based fertilizer. Everything will become more localized and the “greatest misallocation of resources� in history, suburbs, will become wastelands. This vast change is inevitable; society must plan for it or be forced into it. At the individual level, people must re-learn the farming and survival methods of pre-industrialization. The centralized government will become nearly obsolete, and local government will be tasked with reallocating land towards farming. Kunstler is not optimistic that either individuals or the government will be able to downsize standard of living gracefully, but in order to prevent economic collapse there is no other choice (Kunstler).

MITIGATION

ADAPTATION THEORY | PAGE 25

PRECEDENT

SUSTAINABLE CITIES IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD COPENHAGEN, DENMARK

Copenhagen has been ranked the number one most sustainable city for the past couple of years. This is in large part due to the city’s strong sustainability plan focusing on three categories: mobility, water, and energy. The postindustrial harbor city serves as a great precedent for Baltimore. The strategies Copenhagen has taken will be examined and the overall plan will be analyzed in terms of the three categories of sustainability and their integrations.

Copenhagen is most well-known for its efforts to create sustainable transport. The city’s strong cycling culture has only been made stronger in recent years by improved infrastructure. Bicycles have been integrated into other forms of public transit, creating convenient routes to destinations and accommodating bikes on trains. Bicycles are given their own lanes on roads, separated by a curb, allowing for increased safety. Bike parking has also been improved both quantitatively and qualitatively. The city has also implemented a “no missing links” strategy to ensure the city is well connected by the most direct bike routes possible. This ensures biking is the most efficient and affordable way to travel and encourages ridership.

Copenhagen’s transit has also been designed to ensure “a convenient and time-saving transport – allowing – passages to move seamlessly between cycle, bus, train and metro services.” Some improvements include the one ticket system, text ticketing, real time information, and Buses Fast Forward. The one ticket system allows the same ticket to be used across all public transit, passengers can also simply text where they are going and receive a text response that acts as their ticket. Online journey planner and real time information on when buses will arrive also simplify the process. The Buses Fast Forward system keeps traffic lights green when a bus is approaching. All these strategies aim to make public transit faster and more convenient and cut down on operating costs.

Improving water quality in the Copenhagen Harbor was an incredible feat that made the water both swimm-able and fish-able but also helped address the rising demand for water. An integration of urban design and wastewater management involving engineers, architects, planners, environmentalists, researchers, municipalities, and even the private sector made this possible by discovering innovative solutions. Strategies include improved wastewater treatment, combined sewer reservoirs, a three-tiered sewage system, and minimized overflow channels. Reservoirs can store wastewater until there is capacity in the sewage system.

The three tiered sewage system, roof water, road water, and black wastewater has proven very useful in flood prevention. Lastly, 55 overflow channels were closed, allowing wastewater discharge only during particularly heavy rainfall.

In order to meet growing demand for water, the city implemented three solutions: management, protection, and behavior change. Management involves minimization of water loss through leak detection technology, better regulation of water pressure, and water cleaning though filtration. Ground water protection involves remediation facilities, and behavioral changes encourage individual responsibility through individual water meters and financial incentives.

Energy initiatives involve public support for wind power, utilizing waste for energy, energy efficiency, and minimizing CO2 emissions. In order to achieve public support for wind turbines, 8,650 shares were sold to members of the local community, and an awareness campaign was launched to overcome the “not in my PAGE 26 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

backyard” attitude regarding their aesthetics. Copenhagen now spends less than 2 percent of its waste to landfills. Almost 60 percent is recycled as a result of public outreach initiatives. Whatever residential waste is created is utilized for district heating. Legislation taxed landfill waste and encouraged incineration for power.

Short-term energy strategies involve converting coal-fired power plants to biomass. In the long term, district heating will gradually be converted into geothermal energy. “District cooling is the centralized production and distribution for chilled water.” A district approach allows for phased introduction of fuel sources and technologies. This approach can also minimize CO2 emissions. The improved efficiency in district cooling allows up to a 70 percent reduction of CO2 emissions and an 80 percent reduction of electricity consumption.

This efficiency can also be attributed to the seawater utilized to help cool the water in these locations. Lastly, new and existing buildings are being constructed and retrofit with improved energy efficiency. Existing buildings greatly benefit from improved insulation, circulators and windows.

The environmental benefits of improved mobility, water, and energy are very apparent. In short, each reduces pollution significantly whether it be in the air or water. Improved energy efficiency and renewable sources of energy minimizing the sourcing of fossil fuels and the destruction of habitats. The same can be said about minimizing the use of cars though improvements in transit.

The question is: are these strategies one sided or do they address all sides of sustainability? Solutions for Sustainable Cities address this question in several pages stating that Copenhagen’s social and economic improvements are often overlooked. Improved transit improves city life though convenience, access to transport, encourages an active lifestyle, creates jobs, saves residents money, and promotes safety.

Economically reducing traffic congestion makes the city a good place to work and do business as the time saved and improved health increases economic productivity of workers. Clean water improves health and swim-able and fish-able harbors create quality public and recreational space, increasing real-estate values in the surrounding neighborhoods. Revitalizing the harbor also brought great economic opportunity for jobs and businesses. Thirdly, green energy provides new jobs, and low running costs following initial investments increases access to energy. Clearly each strategy seeking to improve transit, water quality, and green energy in Copenhagen contains strong synergies between the categories of sustainability.

While the overall answer is yes, Copenhagen’s strategies address all three categories of sustainability, Solutions for Sustainable Cities leaves many questions unanswered. The greatest struggle facing social and economic sustainability is equity. Rising real estate value of land near the harbor and strong public transit many prevent middle and lower class community members from benefiting from this improved quality of life. More specifically, the strategies discussed do not directly address income distribution, economic development, unemployment, homelessness, food security, education, environmental justice, or crime. In order for Copenhagen to truly be the world’s leading sustainable city it must give more attention to social and economic equity (Copenhagen).

POST-INDUSTRIAL PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIAN

“Loss of industrial jobs; subsequent loss of support and multiplier jobs; out-migration and population loss; lack of private investment; tax based decline; neglect and disinvestment in infrastructure and public services; abandoned factories; brownfields; vacant houses; vacant land; declining real estate values; loss of family equity; increased poverty; and finally loss of hope and psychological depression.” Lonely This has been the story of so many of America’s greatest cities in the past fifty to sixty years. The lack of industries to replace the jobs lost to cheap labor and looser environmental regulations overseas coupled with the lure of suburbia, racial conflict, white flight, and middle-class flight created centers of concentrated poverty, vacancy, and crime. At worse, these cities will continue their downward spiral, but the more optimistic view sees an incredible amount of potential in these areas. The low density, car-dependent suburbs, fueled not by a diverse economy but rather growth itself, home building and construction, will eventually decline.

Inner cities have space to grow internally with infrastructure in place. Adaptable buildings, walk-able neighPRECEDENT | PAGE 27

borhoods, and most importantly, a strong heritage all point to a rebirth of America’s postindustrial American cities in upcoming decades. The potential for culture, quality of life, affordability, and economic opportunity in these locations is undeniable.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania provides a great example of this potential today. The city survived the blows of job outsourcing and today is known for having a strong quality of life. In order to learn from its success story, strategies as well as how these strategies were implemented will be examined. Known as the Steel City, Pittsburgh was an industrial powerhouse between the years of 1865 and 1945. But in the late 1970s the steel industry collapsed and 133,000 manufacturing jobs were lost in a span of eight years. Not only did the city survive this loss of jobs but it was named the most livable city in America several times since then. Pittsburgh was able to achieve this honor for several different reasons. First, the city concentrated efforts on per capita income growth rather than population growth. Second, a long-term regional vision was created that engaged the public and looked to capitalize on the existing strong downtown and transform the economy into a high tech research and service economy. The diversification of the economy was a deliberate strategy created by collaboration between government, corporations, universities, and foundations. Fostering public private partnerships was also important for environmental cleanup, transit, and public school improvement.

Lastly, investment in education and quality of life gave Pittsburgh a strong foundation for years to come.

The city recognizes the importance of an educated workforce. Among workers between the ages of 24 and 34, 48.1 percent have achieved at least a bachelor’s degree. This puts Pittsburgh in fifth place behind Austin, Boston, San Francisco, and Washington D.C. The post-industrial cities on the Northeast and Midwest saw declines in enrollment, test scores, and graduation rates in their inner city public schools. The Pittsburgh Promise provides college scholarships for Pittsburgh public school or charter school graduates that are able to maintain a 2.50 GPA and a 90 percent attendance rate. Since scholarship programs began in 2005, enrollment in public schools has increased by 17.6 percent. The increased bike paths, kayakers, art and festivals, coupled with the city’s historic buildings have created a vibrant culture in the city. This has facilitated an influx of young adult interns that have energized the city in recent years.

The city’s success can be attributed largely to institutional, private, governmental, and public action.

Instructional universities in the heart of the city create jobs, support the economy and attract students that provide energy and research. The University of Pittsburgh Medical Center provided the initial $100 million grant for providing scholarships to public school students. Owners of large private companies have invested in the city, keeping their main offices in the city. Some large names include Mellon, McCune, Hillman, and Heinz who invested in the Pittsburgh Steelers’ stadium (Heinz Field). Finally, the local government invested the urban fabric, strengthening the downtown area, as well as recreational facilities such as parks and the river front. Public Private partnerships were formed though a nine-month public engagement process. The collaboration involved 5,000 people and resulted in the report: The Greater Pittsburgh Region; Working Together to Compete Globally. Young adults moving into older neighborhoods generated bottom up energy by renovating houses, starting new businesses, and creating art and culture. Of note, a Rob Hopkins Transition approach was taken, along with theories of Gilding in The Great Disruption. Both a bottom up approach and governmental action were enacted during times of great social, environmental, and economic disruption (Kapp).

PAGE 28 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

COPENHAGEN, DENMARK SWIM-ABLE HARBOR

(Copenhagen Harbour Bath)

INVEST IN BIKE INFRASTRUCTUR

(Copenhagen Bike Safety)

PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIAN WATER FRONT AND SERVICE ECONOMY

(Bridges | Roberto Clemente Bridge)

INVEST IN EDUCATION

(University of Pittsburgh | Cathedral of Learning)

PRECEDENT | PAGE 29

BALTIMORE

BALTIMORE’S SUSTAINABILITY ACTION PLAN Baltimore History:

With a population of 950,000 in the 1950s, the city of Baltimore, Maryland was once the sixth largest in the country. The thriving manufacturing and shipping industry made the city a hub of opportunity in Maryland, drawing rural workers and immigrants from the South and overseas. Baltimore was an affluent city with economic opportunity and a strong sense of place. The steel industry was a primary contributor to the success of the city. Starting in the late nineteenth century and carrying on through World War II, the Steel industry supported a large percentage of the population. However the latter part of the twentieth century brought a decline in manufacturing. Baltimore lost over 100,000 jobs, 75 percent of its industrial employment (Economic History). Soon suburbanization coupled with blockbusting drove the middle class out of the city. By 1997, Baltimore’s suburbs grew from 387,656 residents (in 1950) to 1.8 million and the inner city lost nearly a third of its population.

Beginning in the early 1900’s Southern African Americans, fleeing poverty began to migrate to Baltimore.

Early black neighborhoods were confined to the northern part of the city, but as the economy declined, developers seeking to maximize their profit began to buy homes from white residents at low prices and sell them at as much as 70 percent mark up prices to incoming African American families. This malicious practice utilized existing prejudice against African Americans for personal gain. The realtors would threaten white households with the prospect of plummeting real estate pieces as a result of a predicted influx of African American households in the neighborhood. This allowed the agents to buy properties cheap from white homeowners and sell them at high rates to African Americans, not only for profit but also to scare the remaining white residents into selling even cheaper. Between 1950 and 1970 the African American population doubled, and by 1997 African Americans comprised nearly two-thirds of the city. Between 1990 and 2000 the number of African Americans in the city declined for the first time as Baltimore’s black middle class also fled the city. The disparity from suburb to city is not based on race but economic class. Poverty, unemployment, crime, and housing deterioration affect this population as suburbs continue to flourish (Economic History).

Today, the rate of population decline has slowed, dropping from 657,000 in 1997 to 621,342 as of 2012. The Inner Harbor area has become an incredibly successful postindustrial area, flourishing with a culture of adaptive reuse. However not the entire city has been revitalized. Ironically divided by Martin Luther King Boulevard, the southwest area of the city continues to suffer from poverty. The income inequity in Baltimore is incredible. The top five percent of household income is $164,995 while the bottom 20 percent of households have incomes of $13,522 (Land).

But suburbanization does not only cause social and economic unrest. “Low density developments spreading into previously rural or agricultural land” or sprawl has been a controversial topic since the 1960s (Grabokowski). Homeowners live far from jobs and other amenities, increasing driving, oil use, water pollution, and air pollution. Widespread infrastructure to provide water and electricity to suburbs requires more materials and land. Overconsumption of water for landscaping and excessive land area use is also causes for concern (Grabokowski). In stark contrast, Smart Growth encourages brownfield development; clustered development; zoning for environmentally sensitive areas; carpools, bicycle plans, pedestrian-friendly areas, commuter trains and mass transit; eco-industrial parks; mixed-use development; and inner city/core development. Baltimore contains the physical attributes to achieve each of these goals while taking strides to PAGE 30 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

eradicate suburbanization (Pierce pg. 569).

Current Status in Baltimore:

In order to archive these goals it is vital to understand where the city stands today. This section will outline Baltimore’s current status in terms of the environmental, economic and social concerns discussed earlier. Environmentally, energy consumption, material use, air pollution, and water pollution will be discussed. Economically, vacancy rates, income distribution, inclusive wealth index, and unemployment rates will be quantified. Rates of homelessness, food security index, transportation, education, environmental justice, diversity, and crime index will be discussed in the Social Category.

Under the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy rankings, Baltimore ranked 12th out of the 37 largest cities in America with a score of 46.5 out of 100. Some positives include the following: vehicle fleets are expected to increase in efficiency by 16 percent, public lights were predominately LEDs as of 2014, and all publicly funded buildings are required achieve LEED silver certification (Bose) (The City Energy).

Measuring material consumption in a city is more often a function of individual buildings and is thus difficult to quantify, but in the case of Baltimore there is great potential for adaptive reuse. The reclamation projects of the Hard Rock Café and Oriole’s baseball stadium have already begun to brand the city. In regard to air pollution in Baltimore, State of the Air and the American Lung Association measure air quality under three categories: high ozone days; daily particle pollution, and annual particle pollution. The ideal number of high ozone days is four or less. Between 2009 and 2011 Baltimore averaged 11.7 days. This number has decreased from an average of 35 days between 1997 and 1999. Particle pollution per day ideally should be at three days or less. Between 2009 and 2011 Baltimore averaged 1.7, which is a 10.8 day decrease from 2000.

Annual particle pollution, measured in ug/m3, should be below 12.0. Since 2000 Baltimore’s annual particle pollution has decreased from 15.1 to 11.1 ug/m3 (American Lung Association).

Similarly, water pollution is improving. The Environmental Working Group rated water utilities of cities with populations over 250,000. These rankings were based on factors such as total chemicals detected since 2004, and percentage of chemicals found. Baltimore ranked 69th in the US with 12 chemicals found.

The Baltimore Harbor, made up of the lower part of the Patapsco River and the streams that flow into it, received an overall score of 51-57% for its water quality. This is a significant improvement form the 2012 score of 41% but is still a failing grade. While sewage overflows declined by more than 90 percent, David Flores, the harbor water keeper, said “chronic leaks from aging sewer lines in the city and Baltimore County are the likely culprits in chronically high bacteria levels in the water” (Baltimore Harbor Earns).

According to the United States Census Bureau, the percentage of persons below poverty level is 9.8 percent in Maryland and 23.8 % in Baltimore. Median household income in the state is $73,538 while Baltimore’s is $41,385. More importantly, the disparity between adjacent neighborhoods is often exorbitant, the most prevalent example existing on either side of Martin Luther King Boulevard. On the West side, median household income falls between $40,000 and $50,000 while on the East side the range is between $80,000 and $100,000 (Income Maps) (Income Inequity).

After the 2008 recession, unemployment in Baltimore City rose from 5% to 12% in the span of two years. Since this peak in 2010, unemployment has steadily decreased to 8.2 percent. The unemployment rate in the United States in 2015 is 5.5%, with Lincoln, Nebraska holding the lowest unemployment rate at 2.4%.

Cities comparable to Baltimore like Pittsburgh, Washington DC, and Detroit have rates of 5.7%, 7.7%, and 12.2 % respectively. At 8.2 %, Baltimore currently has an above average unemployment rate.

Conversely, there has been a steady increase in homelessness in the city. In 2003, 2,681 citizens were BALTIMORE

| PAGE 31

homeless; by 2011 this number had risen by nearly 70% to 4,088. This statistic is worse when the fact that the population decreased from 642,000 to 621,000 in the same time frame is considered. With 0.6 percent of the population suffering from homelessness, Baltimore falls into the average range for America. Yet another aspect of social disparity in Baltimore is lack of access to fresh, healthy, and affordable food. Neighborhoods known to lack these amenities are known as food deserts and are typically only served by fast food restaurants and convenience stores that offer minimal healthy and affordable options. In Baltimore, 20 percent of the population lives in a food desert. This statistic is high when compared to America’s overall 7 percent (Homelessness in United Sates).

Public transit in a city contains social, economic, and environmental benefits. 17.64% of commuters use public transit in Baltimore. This ranks 17th out of American cities with a population greater than 100,000.

According to www.walkscore.com, Baltimore is the 8th most transit friendly and 10th most walkable American city although it does not make the ranks of the top bikeable cities (Leading Locations) (List of U.S. Cities).

Walkscore helps people find apartments and homes in good neighborhoods, but the data is also used by dozens of researchers in urban planning, real-estate and other disciplines. The scores take into account average block length, intersection density, cross walks, existing transit, sidewalks, trees, bike lanes, and parking among others. Wlakscore.com provides a city map outlining transit, walking, and bike routes for various cities (Most Walkable Cities).

Education in Baltimore is below state and national average but is improving steadily. 11% of Baltimore citizens do not have a High school degree or higher, 26.1% of the population’s highest level of education is through high school, and 26.1% achieved an Associate or Bachelor’s degree. The more telling statistic than the education attainment of current citizens, who may have been educated elsewhere and later joined Baltimore’s service economy, is the quality of the public school education system in Baltimore City. The 73.5% high school graduation rate in 2013, while 6.8% higher than 2010, is still 14% below the state average.

Dropout levels are also down from 24% in 2010 to 12% in 2013, but similar to graduation rates still falls short of the 9.4% average (Graduation Rates).

The current population of Baltimore is 622,793. 28.3% of households are white alone, 63.3% are African American alone, 4.6% are Hispanic, 2.6% are Asian and 2.0% are two or more races. Racial diversity brings great opportunities to cities in terms of culture and intellectual diversity, but several neighborhoods in Baltimore are very much segregated by race and income, namely the communities to the west of the Inner Harbor. As of 2011 these disinvested communities contain between 90-98% African Americans. Another form of environmental justice related to income and diversity disparities is risk to hazards, both manmade and natural. CoreLogic Hazard Risk Score (HRS) is compiled using data representing nine natural hazards: flood, wildfire, tornado, storm surge, earthquake, straight-line wind, hurricane wind, hail, and sinkhole. HRS is based on a scale of 0-100, where the higher the score, the great the risk a location. Maryland scored a 52.58 making it the 22nd most dangerous state in America (The Lines Between).

Crime Index delineates the percentage of U.S. cities that the given city is safer than. Baltimore has a crime index of 3%, meaning that the city is more dangerous than 97% of American cites. This Index is determined by annual crimes per 1,000 residents and is broken up into two categories, violent crime and property crime. Baltimore suffers 14.28 violent crimes per 1,000 residents while the U.S. as a whole only suffers 3.8 violent crimes per 1,000 residents. These crimes include murders, rapes, robberies, and assaults suffering 0.37, 0.68, 6.03, and 7.19 rates per 1000 respectively. Comparatively the U.S. rates per 1000 for murder, rape, robbery, and assault are 0.04, 0.34, 1.09, and 2.29 respectively. Property crime rates include burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft. Baltimore’s rate per 1,000 is 11.96 for burglary, 31.35 for theft, and 7.21 for motor vehicle theft (Baltimore, Maryland) (Crime Rates). The U.S. rate per 1,000 is 6.10 for burglary 18.99 for theft, and 2.21 for motor vehicle theft.

PAGE 32 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

In the 1990’s vacancy rates in Baltimore rose from 9%, 27,000 residences, to more than 14%, 42,500. The following ten years from 2000 to 2010, the speed at which vacancy rate was increasing slowed significantly.

In this decade vacancies only rose 1.8% to 15.8%. Baltimore is no stranger to blight and urban decay. The city has lost roughly one-third of its total population since 1950, and its 620,000 current residents live among more than 16,000 vacant properties that drag down property values and generate feelings of hopelessness in many struggling neighborhoods (Crime Rates).

Baltimore is a strong city, and it has battled through its trials and tribulations throughout the years.

It is exciting to see that in each of these categories, improvement has been seen, in recent years. This statement carries a disclosure that in some cases, “improvement” refers to a decrease in the rate of decay, such as vacancy rates or population decrease. The city has improved the most in areas of water and air pollution.

Its greatest strengths are its transit and walkability. The greatest weaknesses are seen in areas of social and economic inequity (Crime Rates).

What is being done in Baltimore?

Now that “WHAT are the problems in Baltimore?” has been addressed, the next step is to discover HOW goals can be achieve and WHO can achieve them. In 2009 an action plan was created to answer these questions, but rather than analyzing the individual strategies that are being taken in Baltimore, this study will view the overarching method being used to develop and execute strategies. Who developed the plan?

What are the primary objectives of the plan? How will these objectives be achieved? And who will achieve them? The goal of this survey is to determine if the design process for sustainability in Baltimore has any gaps and if so, what areas need to be addressed as a result of these gaps. http://www.baltimoresustainability.org/sites/baltimoresustainability.org/files/Baltimore%20Sustainability%20Plan%20FINAL.pdf

Primarily the local government, Mayor Sheila Dixon, and Cheryl A. Casciani, Chair Baltimore Commission On Sustainability, drafted the 2009 Sustainably Plan. Several private organizations such as the Parks and People Foundations and other non-governmental organizations also participated (Baltimore Sustainability Plan pg. 37). Public engagement was heavily emphasized during the creation of the plan. Over 1,000 citizens participated in one of four ways. “Working Groups” organized around “resource areas”: Energy/Air, Water, Green Infrastructure, Built Environment, Transportation, and Waste. Community Conversations were more open-ended conversation viewing sustainability in everyday life. Youth Involvement was a one-time event reaching out to the youth of the community to get involved. A Sustainability Forum, brought together over 100 community stakeholders to discuss results of community engagement, seeking feedback, and gather endorsement of the plan (BSP pg. 19).

The Sustainability Plan addresses the triple bottom line through its six goal categories: cleanliness, pollution prevention, resource conservation, greening, transportation, education and awareness, and green economy. The environmental pillar is addressed directly through cleanliness, pollution prevention, resource conservation, and greening. Because the triple bottom line is so closely related, there are some goals within the Sustainability Plan that aid the environmental pillar as a secondary effect, namely improvements to public transit minimizing carbon emissions and improved education and awareness, minimizing individual ecological footprint. The social pillar was addressed primarily by transportation related goals and public education and awareness. Some byproducts of other goals also involve social improvements. For example: greening, pollution prevention, and cleanliness, improving health in the city. The green economy also provides social benefits, providing employment and supporting local businesses. The remaining goals under Green Economy support the economic category of sustainability (BSP pg. 10-11). Byproducts of Greening, Cleanliness, and Transportation also support the local economy by increasing in property value.

BALTIMORE | PAGE 33

Resilience is defined as the “robustness in the face of disturbance and opportunities for systems reconfiguration, leaning, self-organization, flexibility and transform-ability” (Pierce pg. 571). Resiliency in a sustainability plan can be measured in information/knowledge, motivation, and capacity (Pierce pg. 573). The Plan was drafted with a heavy emphasis on public participation and includes a category on Education and Awareness (BSP pg. 11). Additionally, each of the remaining categories includes an aspect of public outreach (BSPpg25).

Because cities are centers of innovation, satisfying the information/ knowledge aspect of resiliency is critical for innovative responses to threats and system changes. This effort of public outreach and education can also influence social motivation and in turn, the interest of the people has the potential for governmental motivation. This aspect of resiliency stems from the fact that “policies are responses to perceptions of existing or potential threats.” Thus the more a community is educated, the more incentive or “motivation” there is towards enacting change (Pierce pg574). Public engagement throughout the drafting of the plan suggests that Baltimore has a strong capacity to work together towards common goals.

As stated before, capacity for change is a function of natural capital, political support, technical support, financial resources, and managerial execution. The Baltimore Sustainability Plan provides information on these aspects of capacity. Each goal category includes a list of strategies and each strategy specifies the financial resources, political and technical support as well as the estimated time-frame (BSP pg. 25). As stated before, the lead partners of the plan range from government agencies to private organizations to individual involvement. Funding for the strategies comes from existing program funds, city funds, and grant programs among others (BSPpg33-36). This diversity in stakeholders is a very strong point in Baltimore’s Plan, calling to mind the city of Pittsburgh, where public-private partnership helped to raise the quality of life in the city.

Another important factor when analyzing the success of Baltimore’s Plan is the inclusion of both adaptation and mitigation strategies. The difference between adaptation and mitigation can be outlined through the example of climate change. Adaptation reacts to climate change while mitigation minimizes emissions. Baltimore’s Sustainability Plan incorporates a balance of both types of strategies. The plan’s pollution prevention category exemplifies this, listing strategies to both mitigate pollution and cope with current pollution levels.

Some mitigation strategies include “Explore options for more efficient fleet conversion.” and “Reduce amount of impervious surfaces.”(BSP pg. 45) Some adaptation strategies include “Aggressively promote the redevelopment of brown field sites” and “Increase actions by individual property owners to treat storm water.”(BSP pg. 49)

PAGE 34 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

support of sustainability eachof othe support sus support of sustainability

b

Baltimore Median House Hold Income

Ba

balancing the three siC balanci the $80K-$ 100K balancing

C

$40K-$50K

A on Conflict Conflict Conflict Condition A: Condition A:Condition A:at ne A positive move A positive move A positive move of

on one side can on one side canon one side can at times result in at times result at in times result i negative impactsnegative impacts negative impac of another. of another. of another.

Baltimore Population

950K

Su Co 621K 510K 1900

1910

PAGE 13_RESEARCH

1920

1930

1940

1950

1960 1970 Support

1980 1990 2000 2010 Support Support

Th as on ne re

Condition B: Condition B:Condition B:

There are times when There are timesThere whenare times a strategy to improve a strategy to im a strategy to improve one side can simultaone side can sim one side can simultaneously improve neously the neously improve the improv remaining two. remaining two.remaining two.

BALTIMORE | PAGE 35

AMENDMENT

BALTIMORE’S SUSTAINABILITY ACTION PLAN ANALYSIS ANALYSIS

In conclusion Baltimore’s Sustainability Plan will be held to the standards discussed throughout this paper. The section of this research asked the question “what is Sustainability”, addressing the primary issues the discipline seeks to address and the intricate relationship of the three categories of sustainability. The second section viewed how the primary issues are being addressed, and the concept of goals, metrics, and strategies were outlined. The third section sought to discover who is capable and responsible for enacting change (BSP).

What are the primary issues sustainability addresses the three categories; environmental, social and economic. Environmental goals seek to prevent the overconsumption of resources and the release of pollutants, and to clean up currently polluted water and air. Baltimore’s seven goal categories include Cleanliness, Pollution Prevention, Resource Conservation, Greening, Transportation, Education (on Environmental Awareness), and Green Economy. All seven sections directly address issues of the environmental category. Even the Green Economy section has a focus on environmental protection through green business with an undertone of economic development.

The economic category seeks to promote qualitative economic development over quantitative economic growth as well as to promote economic equity. The Green Economy Section takes some steps towards economic development but is only focused on enterprise having to do with environmental sustainability.

The economy as a whole in Baltimore must take environmental degradation into account; furthermore, the only goal addressing economic equity is the second to last strategy within the Green Economy goal section: “support local businesses”. As discussed previously, economic equity is one of the problems, if not the largest, that the city faces today (BSP).

Thirdly social goals include assess to goods and services as well as environmental justice. The sections of transportation and green economy provide access to jobs and transit, but access to food security, and education are largely neglected in Baltimore’s Plan. In terms of environmental justice Cleanliness, Pollution Prevention, and Greening improve human health and encourage neighborhood upkeep through the broken window theory. This theory states that the greater sense of disinvestment that physically exists in a community, such as deteriorating parks and infrastructure, the less likely a community is to feel responsible for maintaining the community, and thus deterioration will snowball. Luckily the opposite is also true, therefore Cleanliness and Greening can begin building a better future. Another way to prevent environmental injustice through? concentrations of poverty, crime, and lack of access is to ensure economic equity. As stated before, Baltimore’s Plan lacks strategies to address this pressing matter (BSP).

The areas of economic equity, access to food, housing, education, and environmental justice are all weaknesses of Baltimore’s Plan. The Plan’s strengths lay in developing strategies that aid the environmental category with the byproducts of these strategies aiding the remaining two categories. Going back to the rubik’s cube example, if only one side is solved the adjacent sides will inherently have a row of three solved, but the other two thirds of these sides will remain un-touched. This is where Baltimore stands. Economic and social benefits come only as byproducts to environmental goals. In other words, addressing the intersecPAGE 36 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

tion of environmental and economic issues as well as overlapping goals between environmental and social equity is the strength of the plan, but more must be done to address the interaction between the social and economic issues of sustainability. For example the Environmental goals for cleanliness support the broken window theory and thus support Social Equity, but if more goals are outlined to support Economic Equity though ensuring a diverse economy the poverty would minimize aiding Social Equity (BSP).

“How problems can be addressed” and “Who can address them” proves that this plan is actually very strong in areas that are addressed. Each section is very developed with three to four set goals. Each goal involves six to eight strategies and each strategy outlines a group of organization to put the given strategy into action as well as where funding will come from for the strategy. For example under Cleanliness: Goal three, “Transform vacant lots form liabilities to assets” Strategy C “Create and sustain a land trust to support community-managed open space.” Is to ben enacted by Baltimore Green Space, Baltimore Office of Sustainability, and HCD with funds from Grant Programs. What is lacking in this specific strategy is both a metric to quantify improvement and a plan for evaluation and reiteration. Metric and reiteration are imperative aspects of any plan. Without them it is impossible to determine which strategies to continue and which to adjust. This is a reoccurring pattern throughout the entire plan.

The variety of support from governmental to non-profit to individual aligns with theories from Paul Gilding, Rob Hopkins and others. The plan was able to address adaptation capacity and technical capacity, but not to the necessary extent. The plan focuses heavily on political support and individual’s support but not enough at the scale of private organization or technical support. The potential of this sector is exemplified in Pittsburgh, where strong organizations like Heinz and the University of Pittsburgh played major roles. This is even exemplified in Baltimore in the Southwest Partnership, where the University of Maryland, community greening non-profit Neighborhood Design Center, and world renowned architecture firm Gensler, came together to form a revitalization plan for the disinvested neighborhoods of southwest Baltimore (About). The private sector was a huge contributor in the success of Pittsburgh and should be equally as vital for Baltimore.

Public outreach was very strong throughout the drafting of the plan as well as embedded into strategies within the plan. Thus the knowledge aspect of resilience can be expected to be strong in Baltimore, but one could argue that the approximately 1,000 residents who participated is too small of a percentage of Baltimore’s total population (BSP pg17). While ample opportunity was given to residents to provide input, reaching a greater number of residents in the future should be an objective. With the plan in place, the number of residents, and their willingness to contribute, will only grow.

A closer look at the strategies listed shows that roughly one in eight strategies involved adaptation; the majority address mitigation of environmentally harmful processes. A greater focus on adaptation capacity is needed to react to concerns facing the city today. Baltimore’s Sustainability Plan seems to be planning for the future without addressing the pressing problems of today.

Utilizing research from urban theories, such as Smart Growth and New Urbanism, precedent studies, and Baltimore’s current status a brief amendment will be outlined for the Sustainability Plan. Urban design will also be integrated into the proposal. The primary problems Baltimore is facing, that were largely neglected in the Plan include poverty, unemployment, access to housing, food security, quality of education, environmental justice, crime index, and economic development. Thus an additional goal section should be implemented to the plan, titled Equity. Currently, the plan addresses the intersection of Environmental and Economic, as well as Environmental and Social. This category will address Social and Economic relationships.

AMENDMENT | PAGE 37

AMENDMENT

Goal Category 8: Equity Goal 1: Minimize Unemployment rate by x% and Poverty rate by x% by 2025 – (evaluate and reiterate at 2020)

Strategy 1: Ensure a diversity of opportunity in service economy (Pittsburgh)

Who: government, private organizations, and universities

Strategy 2: Ensure an opportunity for a blue-collar workforce though tourism, food service, arts, and transit.

(Pittsburgh)

Who: Non-profit, government, private organizations

Strategy 3: Capitalize on adaptive reuse culture to create retrofitting jobs (Baltimore)

Who: Non-profit, government, private organizations

Strategy 4: Minimize combined home operation, and transportation cost though efficient building

systems and public transit.

(New Urbanism)

Who: local government, private organizations

Urban Strategy – locate affordable housing close to jobs to minimize combined cost of residents and transport.

Goal 2: Minimize Vacancy Rates and Homelessness by x% by 2025 – (evaluate and reiterate at 2020)

Strategy 1: Provide a greater diversity of housing options

(New Urbanism and Smart Growth)

Who: Non-profit, local government, private organizations

Strategy 2: Retrofit vacant buildings into vibrant mixed income developments.

Who: Non-profit, government, private organizations

Urban Strategy:

Strengthen East West connections across Martin Luther King Boulevard with retail corridors and pub

lic transit.

Goal 3: Ensure Food security in 90% of Neighborhoods by 2025 – (evaluate and reiterate at 2020)

Strategy 1: Minimize concentrations of poverty to ensure economic viability of food stores in all neighborhoods.

Who: Local government Goal 4: Increase graduation rates by x% by 2025 – (evaluation and reiteration at 2020)

Strategy 1: Inner city and charter school college scholarship program.

(Pittsburgh)

Who: Non-profit, government, private organizations grants

Strategy 2: Mixed income developments prevent discrepancies in tax funding.

(Pittsburgh)

Who: local government

Urban Strategy: Strengthen bike and walking routs to public schools.

PAGE 38 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

Goal 5: Raise Crime Index x% by 2025 – (evaluation and reiteration 2020)

Strategy 1: Maintain strong commercial corridors to encourage eyes on the street

(New Urbanism)

Who: individuals, local government, private organizations

Strategy 2: Minimize litter and maximize green space in support of surrounding real estate (Copenhagen)

Who: Individuals, Non-profit, government

Strategy 3: Increase in street lighting where necessary.

(Gehl)

Urban Strategy:

Strengthen East West connections across Martin Luther King Boulevard with retail corridors and pub lic transit. – to encourage middle class residents in south west and minimize concentration of poverty.

Who: local government, private organizations

AMENDMENT

| PAGE 39

CONCLUSION SUSTAINABLE CITIES

Proposing this amendment is not to say that there are not ample initiatives working towards economic and social equity in Baltimore. It is simply suggesting that they give similar organizational structure and importance as environmental goals of the city. Focusing on the social and economic categories in this amendment also does not assume that environmental strategies are satisfactory. Much can be learned from Copenhagen, particularly in the realm of its biking culture and harbor clean up, two areas that Baltimore could use improvement in despite their existing strategies.

The future outlook of this work involves delving deeper into some aspects that were briefly touched upon and addressing several questions that arose as a result of this research. A deeper study of the integration of Urban Design and cities’ sustainability plans would be very beneficial. Specificity of stakeholders in Baltimore as well as funding procedures could also strengthen this body of work. Lastly several questions arose that were outside of the purview of the research. First, how can economic perspectives be changed from quantitative growth to prioritizing qualitative economic development? Secondly, how can statistics be made more accurate and how can success be quantified rather than simply be ranked relative to other cities?

The most vital outlook of this research is to study how the paradox between improved quality of life and gentrification can be combatted. Concentrations of poverty carry associations of environmental degradation and economic and social inequity. This research viewed the intricate relationship between the three categories of sustainability; the importance of quantifiable goals, strategies, and reiteration within a sustainability action plan; and lastly the resiliency and capacity of cities. In outlining the design process for sustainable cities, it became strikingly apparent that adaptation of existing destructive systems is equally if not more important than the mitigation of further harm. “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.�

The outlook of this research is to study how areas where needs of the current generation are not met will in turn harm future generations. This will shift focus towards adaptation, specifically in efforts to eliminate social and economic inequity, and thus achieve balance in the three categories of sustainability.

PAGE 40 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

CONCLUSION

| PAGE 41

WORKS CITED SUSTAINABLE CITIES

“A Brief Economic History of Modern Baltimore.” A Brief Economic History of Modern Baltimore. N.p., n.d.

Web. 13 May 2015.

“Agricultural Marketing Service - Creating Access to Healthy, Affordable Food.” Agricultural Marketing Service

- Creating Access to Healthy, Affordable Food. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“American Lung Association State of the Air 2013 - Baltimore.” American Lung Association State of the Air

2013. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“Baltimore City (Md.) Drug Treatment Court.” PsycEXTRA Dataset (n.d.): n. pag. Web. “Baltimore Harbor Earns failing Water Grades.” Tribunedigital-baltimoresun. N.p., 27 May 2014. Web. 13 May 2015.

“Baltimore, Maryland (MD) Income Map, Earnings Map, and Wages Data.” Baltimore, Maryland (MD) Income

Map, Earnings Map, and Wages Data. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“Baltimore, Maryland.” (MD) Profile: Population, Maps, Real Estate, Averages, Homes, Statistics, Relocation,

Travel, Jobs, Hospitals, Schools, Crime, Moving, Houses, News, Sex Offenders. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“Baltimore’s Three-Part System for Dealing With Vacant Properties – Next City.” Baltimore’s Three-Part System

for Dealing With Vacant Properties – Next City. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

Benton-Short, Lisa, and John R. Short. Cities and Nature. London: Routledge, 2008. Print.

Booth, Colin. Solutions to Climate Change Challenges in the Built Environment. Chichester, West Sussex:

Wiley-Blackwell, 2012. Print.

Bose, Ranjan Kumar, and V. Srinivasachary. “Policies to Reduce Energy Use and Environmental Emissions in

the Transport Sector.” Energy Policy 25.14-15 (1997): 1137-150. Web. “Bridges | Roberto Clemente Bridge and the Pittsburgh Skyline in HDR.” Dave DiCello Photography. N.p., n.d.

Web. 19 May 2015.

Brown, Lester R. Eco-economy: Building an Economy for the Earth. New York: W.W. Norton, 2001. Print.

“Charter of the New Urbanism.” Charter of the New Urbanism. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015. “The City Energy Efficiency Scorecard.” The City Energy Efficiency Scorecard. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“Copenhagen Bike Safety - Spacing Toronto.” Spacing Toronto. N.p., 28 May 2009. Web. 19 May 2015.

Condon, Patrick M. The Seven Rules for Sustainable Cities: Community Design Strategies for the Post Carbon PAGE 42 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

Era. Washington, D.C.: Island, 2010. Print.

“Copenhagen - Solutions for Sustainable Cities.” Arup. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

Counting Matters. S.l.: S.n., 2012. Morgan State University. Web. “Creating An Environmental Sustainability Plan: A How-To Manual For Local Governments.” Creating An Envi

ronmental Sustainability Plan: A How-To Manual For Local Governments. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“Crime Rates for Baltimore, MD.” Baltimore MD Crime Rates and Statistics. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

Dietz, Rob, and Daniel W. O’Neill. Enough Is Enough: Building a Sustainable Economy in a World of

Finite Resources. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

“Economic Development vs Economic Growth.” - Difference and Comparison. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“Easter Island.” History.com. A&E Television Networks, n.d. Web. 15 May 2015.

“Findings by Country.” RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

Gehl, Jan. Cities for People. Washington, DC: Island, 2010. Print.

Gilding, Paul. The Great Disruption: Why the Climate Crisis Will Bring on the End of Shopping and the Birth of

a New World. New York: Bloomsbury, 2011. Print.

“Graduation Rates at City Schools below Average, but Rising.” Baltimoresun.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“Green Communities” EPA. Environmental Protection Agency, n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

Heal, G. M. Is Economic Growth Sustainable? Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.

Print.

“Homelessness in the United States: Trends and Demographics - Journalist’s Resource.” Journalists Resource.

N.p., 04 Dec. 2014. Web. 13 May 2015.

Hopkins, Rob. The Transition Handbook: From Oil Dependency to Local Resilience. Totnes: Green, 2008. Print.

“Income Inequality Hits Certain Cities (like Baltimore) the Hardest.” Citizens Planning and Housing Association Inc RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

International. N EW U RBANISM AND S MART G ROWTH : A F EW W ORDS FROM THE A CADEMY (n.d.): n. pag.

Web. Kapp, Paul Hardin, and Paul J. Armstrong. SynergiCity: Reinventing the Postindustrial City. N.p.: n.p., n.d.

Print.

Kunstler, James Howard. The Long Emergency: Surviving the Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-first

Century. New York: Atlantic Monthly, 2005. Print.

Kunstler, James Howard. Too Much Magic: Wishful Thinking, Technology, and the Fate of the Nation. New

York: Atlantic Monthly, 2012. Print.

WORK CITED

| PAGE 43

“Leading Locations for 2014: U.S. Metros Ranked for Economic and Job Growth - Area Development.” Area

Development. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“The Baltimore Sustainability Plan.” (2009): n. pag. Web. “The Lines Between Us.” Racial Diversity in the Baltimore Region. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“List of U.S. Cities with High Transit Ridership.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

Lovins, Amory B. Reinventing Fire: Bold Business Solutions for the New Energy Era. White River Junction, VT:

Chelsea Green Pub., 2011. Print.

“Most Walkable Cities in the United States, Canada, and Australia on Walk Score.” Walk Score. N.p., n.d. Web.

13 May 2015.

Mumovic, Dejan, and M. Santamouris. A Handbook of Sustainable Building Design and Engineering: An Inte

grated Approach to Energy, Health and Operational Performance. London: Earthscan, 2009. Print.

“National Drinking Water Database.” EWG Tap Water Database 2009. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“Negative Effects of Urban Sprawl.” Home Guides. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“Number of Vacant Homes in Rural Areas of Maryland Grew Faster than City.” Tribunedigital-baltimoresun.

N.p., 06 Oct. 2011. Web. 13 May 2015.

Parlapiano, Alicia, Robert Gebeloff, and Shan Carter. “The Shrinking American Middle Class.” The New York

Times. The New York Times, 24 Jan. 2015. Web. 13 May 2015.

Pitts, Adrian C. Planning and Design Strategies for Sustainability and Profit: Pragmatic Sustainable Design on

Building and Urban Scales. Amsterdam: Elsevier, Architectural, 2004. Print.

Portney, Kent E. Taking Sustainable Cities Seriously: Economic Development, the Environment, and Quality

of Life in American Cities. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2003. Print.

Pierce, C.J., Environmental Politics, Resilience and sustainability in US urban areas,

2011, Department of Political Science, Washington State University-Pullman,

Kansas, USA Reeds, Jon. Smart Growth: From Sprawl to Sustainability. Totnes, Devon: Green, 2011. Print.

“Robot Check.” Robot Check. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“Smart Growth America.” Smart Growth America. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“Southwest Partnership.” Southwest Partnership. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

“States Ranked by Risk of Damage from Natural Hazards: CoreLogic.” Insurance Journal News. N.p., n.d. Web.

13 May 2015.

Steward T.A. Pickett, Brian McGrath, M.L. Cadenasso & Alexander J. Felson (2014) Ecological resilience and

resilient cities, Building Research & Information PAGE 44 |

SUSTAINABLE CITIES

“Sustainability Plans - Green Plus.” Green Plus. N.p., 15 July 2013. Web. 13 May 2015.

Thwaites, Kevin. Urban Sustainability through Environmental Design: Approaches to Time-people-place

Responsive Urban Spaces. London: Routledge, 2007. Print.

“United States Census Bureau.” Baltimore City QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2015.

Walk Score ® Data for Planning & Research (n.d.): n. pag. Web. Wang, XiaoHu, Capacity to Sustain Sustainability: A study of U.S. Cities, 2012. Public

Administration Review.

Wheeler, Stephen, and Timothy Beatley. The Sustainable Urban Development Reader. London: Routledge,

2004. Print.

WORK CITED

| PAGE 45