Institute for Urban Design - Sustainable Cities: Converting Military Bases Into Sustainable Cities

SUSTAINABLE CITIES: Regional, Park and Building Scale And Base Conversion Workshop Fellow Proceedings' Ă? The Institute for Urban Design

The Century Association New York, New York May 25, 2006

Great Park, Orange County El Toro, Ken Smith

SUSTAINABLE CITIES: Regional, Park and Building Scale And Base Conversion Workshop Sponsored by: The Durst Organization, NY EDAW, NY

Fellow Proceedings Ă? The Institute for Urban Design

The Century Association New York, New York May 25, 2006

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction:

Ann Ferebee, Director, Institute for Urban Design

Workshop:

Base Conversion to Sustainable Cities Moderator:

Lance Jay Brown, CUNY

Panelists:

Timothy N. Delorm, EDAW, NY, NY Ken Smith, Ken Smith Landscape Architecture, NY, NY John Clarke, Executive Director, NJ, NY Michael Stepner, Stepner Design Group, San Diego, CA Robert Pirani, Ex. Director, Governors Island Alliance, NY, NY

Respondents: Robert Campbell, The Boston Globe, Boston, MA Robert Ouellette, National Post, Toronto, Canada Laurie Kerr, NYC DOC and Wall Street Journal, NY, NY Commentary: Robert Ouellette, Toronto Post, Toronto, Canada

Fellows Panel:

Sustainable Cities: Regional, Park and Building Scale Moderator:

Lance Jay Brown, CUNY

Panelists:

Michael Kwartler, Environmental Simulation Center, NY, NY Ken Smith, Ken Smith Landscape Architecture, NY, NY Robert Fox, Cook + Fox Architects, NY, NY

Respondent: Robert Campbell, Boston, MA

Event Speakers

Program Registration List

Converting Bases To Civilian Communities Governors Island has a new director: Leslie Koch. Bayonne Redevelopment Authority is announcing new developers with new strategies for finance. These topics were on the table when the Institute hosted a Base Conversion Workshop on May 25 at 2:00 in New York. Land from decommissioned basesĂŠrepresents some of the last land available within cities as states, including New Jersey and California, toughen zoning laws.

Since December 29,1988 when the first Base Realignment and Closure Commission released its report, some 451 installations have been recommended for closure, 97 of them major bases. Less than three months ago, on February 25, another 24 major bases were recommended for closure. Naval bases, often located within existing cities, are providing new, denser,ĂŠcommunities within old cities, especially in California. The biggest hurdle to base conversion remains removal of environmental contaminants and improvement of infrastructure says Tim Delorm, Vice President, EDAW, New York.

San Diego, with two base conversions near downtown and El Toro Marine Air Station with new housing by LennarĂŠlinking two Irvine suburbs, are among the most interesting conversions now.

Ann Ferebee, Director Institute for Urban Design June 9, 2006

WORKSHOP BASE CONVERSION TO SUSTAINABLE CITIES LANCE BROWN

TodayÕs discussion is on the process of converting selected military bases in the US to civilian use. While our first speaker will no doubt give a more pragmatic and precise history and description of this program I want to offer a broad view of the subject and some issues for consideration.

environments. Why not design our military bases as well as was done in classical times, in a sustainable way so conversion might not be such a challenge to future generations.

This is what we are doing with our buildings, doesnÕt our urban scale deserve at least that attention.

(3) There are obviously many facets to todayÕs topic. One of my academic colleagues talked to me about the global economic issues raised by the topic. He referenced the publication whose title sums up his concern: The SocioEconomics of Conversion from War to Peace. And at one point we thought Swords to Ploughshares might be a good title for this panel. The topics contained in the book are compelling. It illuminates issues about industrial conversion, retraining, social program and many others. We might listen for these references today.

(4) And I am hoping that we can, we here interested in urban design, focus on just that, Design, making Place making enduring Place from places now being reassigned. We will here from five colleagues speaking about different aspects of this undertaking, this phenomena. We will then have responses from three individuals that write on design and the environment.

Carcassonne, France (1) First, in a way, we are not involved in anything unique.

Every civilization has had to confront issues of defense and the changing nature of defensive techniques and technologies.

Classically, cities were built for defense and their conversion came naturally as technologies advanced beyond their purpose. Vitruvius in his treatise The Ten books of Architecture discusses issues of defense from the getgo. In Book One, Ch 4 ,The Site of the City, his first line reads Òfor fortified towns the following principles are to be observedÓ And goes on to describe site selection, climate, wind, walls, etc. So, much of what the old world inherited were towns and cities designed according to those ever evolving principles of place making discussed by Vitruvius. They were, in the end, places where community developed and grew and many of the major global cities and their adjacent hinterlands grew from those defensive, and often dramatically aggressive, beginnings.

(2) Today we will discuss how we in the new world deal with our obsolete defensive installations. But, we might also bear in mind as our culture develops what we might be doing with the next generation of encampments, how they may be designed up front for conversion from obsolete uses to more convertible

Aigues-Mortes, France

TIM DELORM

For most of its existence, the U.S. military has persistently protected the status of its bases, although after the Korean War, Congress frequently sought to close bases which, from its perspective, may no longer serve the national defense. The BRAC concept was first considered in the 1960s in an attempt to achieve the government's goal of closing and realigning military installations despite the political challenges which often arise when facilities face reduction or elimination.

Because a military base can bring millions of dollars in federal money and economic vitality to its surrounding area each year, challenges raised by members of Congress from affected districts made such initiatives very difficult.

In view of the political and economic ramifications associated with the closures, Congress decided that it had to be involved in the process and passed legislation in 1965 that required DoD to report any base closure programs to it. However, President Lyndon B. Johnson vetoed the bill. This permitted DoD to continue realigning and closing bases without congressional oversight throughout the rest of the 1960s. But economic and political pressures eventually forced Congress to intervene in the BRAC process and to end DoD's independence. On August 1, 1977, President Jimmy Carter approved Public Law 95-82 that required DoD to notify Congress when a base was a candidate for reduction or closure; to prepare studies on the strategic, environmental, and local economic consequences of such action; and to wait 60 days for a congressional response. Codified as Section 2687, Title 10, United States Code, the legislation along with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) gave Congress an integral role in the process and permitted Congress to thwart any DoD proposals to initiate base realignment and closure studies unilaterally by refusing to approve them.

As economic pressures mounted, the drive to realign and close military installations intensified. In 1983, the President's Private Sector Survey on Cost Control (the Grace Commission) concluded in its report that economies could be made in structure, and simultaneously recommended the creation of a nonpartisan, independent commission to study base realignment and closure. Although nothing came of this recommendation, the defense budget that had been declining since 1985, and was predicted to continue to decrease in coming years, prompted the Secretary of Defense to take decisive action. In 1988, the secretary acknowledged the requirement to close excess bases to save money and chartered the first Commission on Base Realignment and Closure that year to recommend military bases within the U.S. for realignment and closure. From 1988 to 1995, there were four successive bipartisan BRAC commissions that recommended the closure of 125 major military facilities and 225 minor military bases and installations, and the realignment

in operations and functions of 145 others. This resulted in net savings to taxpayers of over $16 billion through 2001, and over $6 billion in additional savings annually.

For the 2005 BRAC round, DoD Secretary Donald Rumsfeld stated that the primary goal was Òmilitary transformation.Ó The BRAC selection process began at the Department of Defense where the secretary had the responsibility to select bases to be closed and those to be realigned. The criteria for the 2005 round included 1) military value, 2) the extent and timing of potential costs and savings of base realignment and closure actions on the entire Federal budget and the DoD, 3) economic impact on existing communities in the vicinity of military installations, 4) the ability of infrastructure of both existing and potential receiving communities to support military operations and personnel and their families, and 5) the environmental impact on receiving locations.

The DoD presented its closure and realignment recommendations to the 2005 BRAC commission appointed by President Bush in May 2005. The commissionÕs charter was to provide an objective, non-partisan, and independent review and analysis of the list of military installation recommendations issued by DoD. The commission conducted an extensive study of the recommendations including numerous public hearings, more than 100 site visits, and exhaustive analysis. The commission submitted its recommendations to the President in September 2005, who in turn sent the recommendations to Congress. The 2005 BRAC recommendations were enacted into law in November 2005 without congressional action.

The commission concluded its study and analysis with 22 major bases being designated for closing and 33 major bases for realignment, including realignment of seven installations initially proposed for closure by the DoD. Over the next 20 years, the total savings to the federal government and U.S. taxpayers resulting from the BRAC. CommissionÕs recommendations are estimated at $35.6 billion or about $4.2 billion annually. By law, the bases designated for closure must close by 2011.

Although historically the bases recommended for closure remain that way, there are exceptions. One of the major ones for 2005 was Navy submarine base in New London, and the Portsmouth (ME) Naval Shipyard. State officials and community leaders mounted sophisticated campaigns to keep the bases operational. Flying in the face of BRAC history and political realities, the bases were removed from the closure list by the commission in August 2005. Although a rarity, in these cases, persistent and political clout paid off.

When a base is selected for closure, the potential economic fallout often strikes fear into the heart of a community in which an installation is being closed. However, frequently these communities have nothing to fear but fear itself. A 1998 study undertaken by the General Accountability Office

(GAO) found that Òthe majority of the communities surrounding closed bases are faring well.

Since 1988, 107,000 jobs have been created in the communities where installations were closed or realigned. The GAO actively tracks 75 of the 97 major base closures and reports annually on the employment picture in those markets. The GAO reported that of the 62 communities that experienced major closures, 70% had 2002 unemployment rates lower than the U.S. average and 48% had annual real per capita income growth rates above the national average. ÒAs of October 31, 2003, almost 72 percent (92,921) of the 129,649 DOD civilian jobs lost on military bases as a result of realignments or closures in the prior BRAC rounds (have) been replaced,Ó the GAO pointed out.

What fearful communities often lose sight of is the fact that base realignment frequently means new opportunities for community revitalization and economic development. Bases are often well-positioned in relation to freeway, railway, and waterway access, and many of them abut woodlands and waterfronts. Additionally, many bases contain well designed and constructed buildings suitable for such civilian uses as hospitals, housing, clinics, recreation facilities and the like, which can often be transformed into community amenities with minimal conversion expense. The airfields and shipyards that are part of many military bases may also have a decommissioned afterlife, such as at the air operations of the former Loring Air Force Base in Limestone, ME; and the Williams Air Force Base in Mesa, AZ; and the shipyard operations of the former Philadelphia Naval Yards.

The Local Redevelopment Agency During the previous BRAC rounds, cities or counties acquired the land gratis or at minimal cost through an economic development conveyance (EDC) or public benefit conveyance (PBC), authorized under BRAC to facilitate job creation and economic recovery. First, a local redevelopment agency (LRA) must be organized and a redevelopment plan created.

There are two types of LRAs Ð the planning LRA and the implementation LRA. Historically, LRAs served as the master developer for the bases, configuring it for civilian use, subdividing it into development parcels, installing and/or upgrading infrastructure, and marketing the project. LRAs are recognized as the primary local planning and implementation entity for base reuse by DoD through the Office of Economic Adjustment. Since 1988, 92 closed military installations have been actively engaged in redevelopment and all have utilized LRAs in some form; there are four types of implementation LRAs: local government, public authority, joint powers authority, and private non-profit corporation.

Before an EDC application can be submitted, the LRA must adopt a conceptual redevelopment plan that has been submitted to the appropriate military department (e.g. Navy Department for the Philadelphia Naval Yard) for consideration

in its review under NEPA. The responsible military department will then establish a reasonable timeframe for submission of an EDC application, which is communicated to the LRA in writing. The LRA always has the option of acquiring property under the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act (FPASA), and if so, it would not be necessary to complete an application for an EDC within the stated timetables.

If there is payment for the property, a note would be structured between the military department (e.g. Department of the Navy) and the LRA. For example, a note might be negotiated for a purchase price of $4 million, with no payment due or interest accruing until the fifth year after the sale, at which time the loan for the purchase price would begin to amortize over a 20-year term at 7 percent interest per annum. The loan could be structured to require payment on a regular schedule for the next 10 years, with a balloon payment at the end of the term for the remaining unpaid balance of the loan. Now the DoD may be changing its approach to generate more revenue from these BRAC transactions. A model for at least some future deals could be the closed El Toro Marine Air Station in Orange County, CA, for which homebuilder Lennar Corp. paid the DoD $650 million for this prime piece of real estate.

The proceeds from the sale will be used for the baseÕs environmental cleanup.

Communities will find that negotiating with developers through the EDC, as well as arranging the cleanup of contaminated land and facilities, and crafting deals with cities, can be tricky and time-consuming. They must collaborate with federal and state governments Ð usually through the LRA - and their constituents/stakeholders to create acceptable landuse and development plans. To further assist communities, Congress in 1994 passed the Base Communities Assistance Act (BCAA). Among other activities, the BCAA supports economic development through such measures as maintaining civilian job-generating uses to the maximum extent possible; expediting environmental cleanup; providing larger economic planning grants; and assisting civilian worker transition to non-military jobs.

In any case, the BRAC process from the actual closure to the actual planning and development is a complex enterprise that must necessarily occur over a long time. Developers looking to swoop in and effect a quick transformation could find themselves stymied, particularly if the surrounding community is edgy and inexperienced with large-scale redevelopment, and wary of its effects. Developers who acquire bases for reuse will likely have to make a number of concessions to local government entities and the community, including the building of new utility systems, roads, parks, schools, and public service facilities. (The Lennar Corp. will pay the City of Irvine $400 million for a 1,000-acre Great Park the city wants to create on the former El Toro base as part of LennarÕs new community development. This is in addition to the $650 million Lennar paid DoD.) Developers must also collaborate

with state, county, and local governments Ð again, usually through the LRA and the state and local constituents/stakeholders to create acceptable land-use and development plans.

Although military installations pose unique challenges from a planning and development point of view, they nevertheless present outstanding opportunities to create a special place that contributes to the economic, business, residential, recreational and lifestyle diversity and vitality of the surrounding communities and region. Based on our firmÕs experience from participating in more than 30 base reuse programs, we believe the 10 key principles for successful development of decommissioned military installations are: 1. Join the Army (Navy or Air Force) -- Early partnering with the military can lead to a smoother transition.

2. Think Big: Create a Vision -- Determining the highest and best new use for a closed base is critical to its ultimate success, and redeveloping a military base may be one of a few lifetime chances for a community to do something really big and significant.

3. Partner for Success: Involve the Entire Community -- A successful reuse effort will be the result of close cooperation between public and private interests and this is a potentially fruitful area for interested community leaders to get involved.

4. Know the Market -- A community (or developerÕs) vision for the property must be supported by market realities.

5. Know the Politics -- Get to know the local officials and stakeholders and what they might have in mind for the property. In addition, work with other elected officials outside of the immediate area.

6. Understand Potential Hurdles and How to Overcome Them -- Local jurisdictions and developers need to understand fully the physical and legal obstacles to reuse; these can be significant, but they also can be overstated. Among the most common is environmental contamination, as well as other considerations such as historic buildings, sensitive speciesÕ habitats, and unexploded ordnance.

embrace the vision created early in the process; staying consistent with that vision ensures community support will remain strong and on course.

10. Be Flexible -- Plans will change as markets and local conditions change, and new markets of opportunity may emerge over time. Implementation tools such as zoning and other land use controls must also be flexible to respond to changes without always requiring burdensome rezoning and variance processes.

Numerous major bases have been or are now being redeveloped, including El Toro Marine Air Station (Orange County, CA); Tustin Helicopter Station (Tustin, CA); Philadelphia Navy Yard; Glenview Naval Air Station (Chicago); Williams Air Force Base (Mesa, AZ); and Myrtle Beach (SC) Air Force Base.

A key to successful redevelopment is selecting the right plan coupled with a strong vision for each base and its location. In some cases, such as Williams AFB and Loring AFB, the more rural locations and the existence of extensive flight operations facilities and runways dictated more commercial/industrial and institutional uses. These two bases have been successfully redeveloped into thriving business and education centers. At the other end of the planning spectrum is the former Glenview NAS located in an urban area 20 miles north of downtown Chicago.

Planned and developed as an urban Ònew town,Ó The Glen today is a 1,121 acre mixed-use district, with homes, offices, and retail space.

Not all closed bases evolve into redevelopment success stories, usually due to location or other issues such as extensive environmental impacts. A case in point is Chanute AFB about 111 south of Chicago and 15 miles from Champaign, IL. Contiguous to the small Village of Rantoul, IL, the base was closed in 1993 and since that time has not blossomed into new uses comparable to other success stories.

One of the primary reasons is the more remote location with marginal economic value, coupled with extensive environmental impacts that are still being remediated.

In the final analysis, a community that is fully informed about current BRAC issues and equipped to handle the reuse task is likely to find reinventing a closed base a rewarding undertaking.

7. Knit the Installation Back Into the Community -- Look for opportunities to connect roads and other infrastructure.

8. Create a New Image as early as possible, take the baseÕs fences down, open the base golf course to the public, create a welcome center, let the local college use a building or two for a satellite campus, and open recreation facilities

KEN SMITH

9. Take It One Step at a Time -- Successful redevelopment requires multiple simultaneous deals and land transfer negotiations. The community and the developers should

Ken SmithÕs discussion on the El Toro project is covered in the panel discussion.

JOHN CLARKE

support the level of infrastructure necessary for any redevelopment.

Peninsula at Bayonne Master Plan The Master Plan for the redevelopment of the Peninsula expands upon the Redevelopment Objectives and serves as an illustrative guide to this Redevelopment Plan. Few locations can provide the PeninsulaÕs sweeping views of a world class city - New York - the reflective waters of Upper New York Bay and one of worldÕs greatest bridges - the Verrazano Narrows - or the canvas to create a new community for its 15,000 residents. Redevelopment of the Peninsula offers Bayonne the chance to build upon its achievements and add new vibrant neighborhoods, entertainment venues, public spaces and employment opportunities to those it already has, making Bayonne a premier location in the metropolitan area.

Infrastructure improvements are expected to be built in phases as redevelopment occurs. The Redevelopment Plan has been designed to match the infrastructure capacities of the street and highway plan, and the provision of public utilities. The Redevelopment Plan anticipates the following level of development: ¥ ¥ ¥ ¥ ¥ ¥

6,700± Housing Units 1.5± million sf. of Office Space 345,000± sf. of Retail Space 750± Hotel Rooms 465,000± sf. Entertainment&Cultural Space 245,000± sf. of Civic Space

The assumptions underlying these numbers are presented in the Development Assumptions section found in the appendix.

They constitute the mid-range of potential development and are permitted to vary as real estate needs change. The development regulations of the Redevelopment Plan are designed to allow for flexibility in accommodating varying levels of demand for different uses within an overall cap of development within each district. The ability to project the need for different types of development is limited and, recognizing this limitation, the Redevelopment Plan has been designed to allow for a wide range of uses throughout the Peninsula.

Harbor overview, Clarke Caton Hintz Redevelopment of the Peninsula is organized around the creation of six districts. The six districts encompass five new neighborhoods and a new maritime facility. The character of each district is differentiated primarily through varying land uses, density and building heights. Uses within these districts will include a variety of residential, commercial, civic, entertainment, maritime, recreational and public transit facilities.

In the process of developing this Plan, a portion of the Peninsula has already been the subject of redevelopment activities. A newly developed cruise ship dock on the northeast edge of the Peninsula is in operation and will be formalized through the development of a cruise ship complex that will include a passenger terminal, parking structures and, potentially, hotels in accordance with the development regulations.

Full build-out of the Peninsula is anticipated to take several decades depending on market demand, the economic cycle and government investment. The intensity of development proposed for the Peninsula is necessary to create the level of residential ambiance and commercial character desirable and

Harbor Station view, Clarke Caton Hintz Although there are five distinct neighborhoods and the Maritime District planned for the Peninsula, the neighborhoods will be woven together through the use of common elements that include public streets, open spaces, the Hudson River Waterfront Walkway (HRWW) and a transit streetcar or similar system. Streets will form the primary transportation links between neighborhoods and they will also serve to link the Peninsula with the existing east side Bayonne neighborhoods, as well as regional highways. At the present time, the Peninsula is disconnected from the remainder of

Bayonne by Rt. 440 and the track system employed for passengers and freight. When the Peninsula was a military base, its isolation was an asset. Now, that the objectives are to create a vibrant mixed-use district for the majority of the redevelopment area, a reconnection to the City street system is essential for a successful project.

Terminal in Jersey City that avoids the mixing of passenger vehicle and truck traffic.

Street Car Plan, Clarke Caton Hintz

The Redevelopment Plan is intended to encourage significant architectural achievement in the design of buildings not only as individual icons, but in their relationship to the overall plan of blocks and streets. Towards that end, locations on blocks that require buildings to be placed at the streetline and be within a range of heights have been developed. These regulations are intended to ensure that the block pattern meets a certain level of structural integrity.

This will be accomplished by constructing a new bridge over Rt. 440 and the railroad tracks, two new entrances from Rt. 440 and two new north/south connections. The existing bridge at 40th Street will remain and a new bridge at 41st Street constructed to aid in the connectivity of the Peninsula back to the City. These two streets are paired together as two one-way streets. The 45th Bridge will remain and provide access for Peninsula residents to the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail stop. A new main entryway to the Peninsula from Rt. 440 is to be constructed between the extensions of 35th and 36th Streets. This new street, called Center Street, will pass through all of the five neighborhoods and end at the harbor.

Center Street will be complemented by Memorial Boulevard that will connect to all three bridges over Rt. 440. Memorial Boulevard will carry the highest level of trips on the Peninsula. A new road, called Harbor Avenue, will provide access to Exit 14A of the NJ Turnpike and Jersey City. A second bridge crossing south over shallow water is also proposed to link to an existing retail development on Constable Hook.

The most significant highway improvement in the Redevelopment Plan is a proposed new tollbooth location for Exit 14A. With or without the mixed use development proposed for the Peninsula, future traffic demands will exceed the capacity of the existing 14A interchange. For the Redevelopment Plan to be fully realized, Exit 14A of the New Jersey Turnpike will need to be reconstructed on the east side of Rt. 440. This location will also create better truck access going to and from the Maritime District and the Global Marine

The Redevelopment Plan, however, does not rely exclusively upon the street network but also incorporates a public transit route, an interconnected open space network that serves pedestrian and recreational needs and the significant amenity of the Waterfront Walkway. The streetcar loop will provide alternative public transit throughout the length of the Peninsula, as well as a pedestrian interconnection to the Hudson Bergen Light Rail stop at 34th Street. The open space system occupies more than 20% of the five neighborhoodsÕ land area � and this does not include the HRWW. The HRWW will wrap around the southern edge of the Peninsula, from Route 440 to the cruise ship terminal, providing a continuous linear park of more than two miles that entices residents, employees and visitors to enjoy access and views of the water and related commercial development. The HRWW will be enlivened at key nodes through the creation of marinas, non-powered boat launches, a fishing pier and public ferries.

The ferries could provide water-borne public transit to MidTown and Lower Manhattan, Jersey City and Staten Island.

Neighborhood Districts During the planning process for the Peninsula, an analysis was performed of the existing conditions and the relationship of the site to various external influences. Through that analysis, a variety of influences on the potential character of future development were documented, including adjacent and nearby uses, existing roadways, rail access and stops, wetlands, views and water accessibility for ships and boats. After analyzing these existing conditions and applying the Redevelopment Objectives, a series of Master Plans were developed among the BRLA, its staff and consultants. From this input, the neighborhood and maritime districts evolved and were developed into the Redevelopment Plan. The neighborhood districts are described below in geographical order from west to east.

Harbor Station (HS) This district is the gateway to the Peninsula. It will set the tone and character for the whole development, and therefore it is of utmost importance that the development in this neighborhood.

Harbor Station provides the site with its link to the regional highway system via Route 440. A pedestrian bridge over

Route 440 is proposed to connect the Peninsulaﾃ不 mass transit system with the Hudson Bergen Light Rail System which would provide pedestrian access between the 34th Street light rail stop and the Harbor Station District at Center Street. The intention is to develop Harbor Station with a mix of uses including offices, low to mid-rise housing, neighborhood and destination retail, and entertainment venues. The most intensive non-residential development is slated for the area directly related to the pedestrian bridge. Civic uses, such as a school, library, active recreation and public safety will be developed. Harbor Station contains the greatest amount of land devoted to public open space by virtue of it being the largest district and its existing environmental characteristics.

Harbor Station will include one of the main focal points of the Peninsula, the Town Square where the southerly bridge to Constable Hook is proposed. The waterfront within Harbor Station will have a small docking and launching facility for kayaks, rowboats, and canoes. Harbor Station will include an area where part of the Peninsulaﾃ不 wetlands restoration program will take place. The wetlands area will be visually accessible by the public from the HRWW and the new bridge.

The Landing (LA) In the years ahead, water transportation for commuter traffic in New York Harbor will grow substantially. Providing water transit docking facilities is an important part of the Peninsula plan. The Landing neighborhood is located mid-way on the peninsula. West of this point, the water depth in the south channel is too shallow for boat traffic, so this area has been designated as the site for a ferry dock. In addition, the waterfront has been identified for a fishing pier, which functions as a visual extension of Pier Place. The ferry dock and fishing pier define the two ends of a proposed marketplace - a focal point for the Landing with small eclectic shops, delis, taverns and restaurants to service the ferry commuter traffic and the neighborhood but of sufficient interest to draw visitors on weekends. The land use in the Landing District will be a mix of low- to mid-rise housing, ground floor retail and civic / cultural facilities. Parking structures will be located in the northern blocks to act as a buffer between the Maritime District and the mixed-use Landing District.

Loft District (LO) The Loft Neighborhood, while residential in nature like Bayonne Bay, will have a significantly different feel. The Loft district will have a more urban context that will be created by the construction of mid- to high-rise residential structures that recall New York Bayﾃ不 industrial past. A series of open spaces and an emphasis on view corridors to the waterfront will create a sense of openness and connection to the marine environment. The Hudson River Waterfront Walkway will be augmented with a marina along Water Street that will serve larger boats than can be accommodated in the other two public docks.

Bayonne Point (P)

Harbor View, Clarke Caton Hintz Bayonne Bay (B) Bayonne Bay, along with the Loft district, is intended only for residential uses, with the potential exception of a hotel use in lieu of a residential block. This residential district is intended for low to mid-rise buildings that is organized around a sweeping waterfront park. Possibly the waterfront park could serve as the foreground for distinctive, large multi-family structures evoking a gilded era manor house. Bayonne Bay is also characterized by its dual experience walkway. The main portion of the HRWW will be located above the bulkhead with views south and east, but a second boardwalk is proposed on piers through the restored wetlands to create a compelling environmental experience for the public. In Bayonne Bay, the boardwalkﾃ不 western terminus ends at another small docking facility for shallow draft watercraft that functions as the visual extension of Hudson Place.

The Bayonne Point district occupies the east end of the Peninsula, with spectacular views of Lower Manhattan, New York Harbor and the Verrazano Narrows Bridge. It contains the highest density and tallest buildings of all of the districts on the Peninsula. The dramatic scenic and marine attributes combined with a dense urban fabric make this location a suitable world-class development site for high rise housing and office use. A significant public open space will punctuate the end of the Hudson River Waterfront Walkway and occupy the northeast corner. Additionally, the Port Jersey Channel on the northern edge serves as an excellent opportunity for the development of a cruise ship terminal, with associated parking and hotel uses. A civic facility may be located to take advantage of this breathtaking location. The streetcar link to the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail Line will provide additional momentum in the realization of this dynamic district.

MICHAEL STEPNER THE REUSE OF MILITARY BASES INFILL REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY TWO SAN DIEGO CASE STUDIES In recent years, many cities have been involved in the redevelopment of brownfields (no longer used industrial areas) that present challenges and opportunities for communities.

We are now looking, also, at grayfields (usually shopping centers, office parks that no longer function as they once did and that should/could be reused to better serve the community.

These are usually privately-owned properties that may or may not go into public hands and, then, go back into private ownership.

I would like to talk about a third category that I will call ÒkhakifieldsÓÐmilitary bases that may be brownfields or grayfields or bothÐthat are owned by the public in stewardship with the military services who have been told they must divest themselves of the property. The property must go through a rigorous reuse planning process that is a joint federal-local process. Who is in charge may be a function of political clout.

The reuse plan may keep all or some of the base in public use and ownership or may e turned over to the private sector for reuse.

San Diego is a Navy town. It contains the nationÕs largest naval base; and, the Navy and related defense. businesses comprise one of our major employers. However, the Navy is no longer in the position that once was when the commandant of the 11th Naval District was called the Navy Mayor and often gave strong suggestions to the civilian mayor of how he might want to handle city business.

Contrary to the impression of many, most military bases are not out in the boondocks. Rather, they are located in urban areas and in many cases in the heart of urban areas. This is especially true of Navy facilities.

San Diego case studies: NTC/Liberty Station was designated for closure in 1993 after 70 years of operation. It is 550 acres in size with over 600 buildings. The original buildings were constructed in the Mission Revival style, based on Thomas JeffersonÕs plan for the University of Virginia. Of the 550 acres, 361 acres were turned into the Liberty Station, a mixed-use developmentÐan urban village. The remainder of the land was divided between the Port for an expansion of the airport terminal, reuse of the fire fighting school for a police and fire training facility, and for military family housing designed as an extension of the Liberty Station development.

The reuse planning process consisted of hundreds of community meetings, design charrettes, and public workshops.

The process and planning were conducted under the auspices of a local reuse planning committee. The plan includes 125 acres of parks, including a 9-hole golf course, shopping, 28acre civic arts district, two hotels, 349 homes in three neighborhoods, and a 22-acre educational campus. The redevelopment of NTC is a success, an extension of the neighborhood that opens up the bay to the community.

Liberty Station, San Diego The second case study is the Broadway Complex on the downtown waterfront. The Broadway Complex is not closing under the BRAC process but under the provisions of a development agreement executed between the Navy and the city in 1992. The development agreement included design guidelines that called for opening up the site by extending streets through the parcel, open space, retail and office, and a facility for the Navy.

For a variety of reasons, the Navy did nothing until last fall when it decided it then had to go forward with the plan or lose the funds from sale of the site and having a private party build a new headquarters.

Downtown San Diego has changed greatly since 1992 and since 9/11, the design requirements for Navy facilities have also changed. Nevertheless, the Navy wants to move ahead in order not to lose control of the site to the BRAC process and the city wants to move ahead with potential development of the site because of tax revenues.

A coalition has formed that asks that the site, following the model of a lot of other areas (Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle) be considered for civic use and that a public dialogue be undertaken. The Navy and the city contend that public process was completed in 1992 and there is no need for further discussion except about the details (read cosmetics). San Diego is heading into a very contentious public process working its way toward litigation.

ROBERT PIRANI GOVERNORS ISLAND: IN NEW YORK HARBOR After 200 plus years as military and Coast guard base, the 172 acre Governors Island is about to be reborn. ÊThe City and State of New York took title to 150 acres in 2003 and the 22 acre Governors Island National Monument was also created. ÊParallel planning process now underway will result in the redevelopment of the historic Island as a great civic space with parks and recreation; hospitality; education; and arts and culture. ÊCritical to the success of this venture is creation of a strong public space framework that will protect the public interest and enable private sector participation over the long term.

Proposals are being reviewed this summer to select a developer team. EDAW is involved in the creation of the Master Plan for Governors Island. Efforts will be made to preserve the islands historic housing. An aerial tramway to Brooklyn has been proposed by Santiago Calatrava (see back cover) and ferry service is under discussion.

Governors Island dock Landing

Governors Island Housing

ROBERT OULLETTE GOVERNORS ISLAND: INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR SUSTAINABLE URBANISM? When Robert Ouellette, a pioneer in city reportage via web, agreed to attend the May 25 program, the Institute also invited him to visit Governors Island and prepare a report for the InstituteÕs website. Herewith is the report.

By Robert Ouellette, National Post Toronto May 31, 2006 When the Dutch came to Governors Island, they saw a land green with promise. To them, AmericaÕs pristine forests breathed opportunity. We wonder though, has Governors Island lost its symbolic promise of a better life based on the natural richness of the land? Has America? The pilgrims moved on to Manhattan but the islandÕs strategic location at the mouth of New YorkÕs harbor made it an ideal military stronghold.

The Coast Guard left Governors Island in 1996. Their move ended a string of military stewardships going back to before the British. In fact, the island helped save George Washington and his revolution. The old military buildings here smell of history. They became a national monument in 2001. In 2003, ownership of the Island transferred to the people of the State of New York. It awaits its next great purpose.

A few hundred yards away, alone in an occasional drifting fog, stands the Statue of Liberty. Governor IslandÕs old flint battlements guard this symbolic gateway to America where the poor of the world came in search of opportunity.

Instead of a gateway to a land green with promise, the island archipelago of New York now risks becoming a gateway to a nation in environmental decline. Even oil barons know we are at a turning point. The American continent that once nurtured dreams of prosperity is in peril. Cities and their users have to change - and they know it.

Can we start again Ð here, where we began? Can we build a sustainable America?

The island could be for urban sustainability what Silicon Valley is for high technology Ð a center where the best and brightest gather to solve complex problems. Imagine the whole of Governors Island as a 21st century laboratory for the development of sustainable cities (and, of course, a sustainable New York). It would house a human enterprise on the scale of the Manhattan Project but dedicated to life not death. There is also the advantage of having the worldÕs greatest urban testbed just across the harbor.

What would it look like? When urban designers get the job of imagining a Governors Island of the future, they must acknowledge that this is not just another green-field site waiting to be planted with so much architectural stuff. These 172 acres need a grand vision.

Santiago Calatrava offers one part of that vision. His scheme for a gondola system connecting the island with Brooklyn and Manhattan is the essence of innovation. In plan, the system looks like a fragile web supporting a pendulum. Maybe, figuratively, it is. CalatravaÕs scheme solves the problem of transporting people to and from Brooklyn to the island quickly. It is an essential first step in the adaptive reuse of this tremendous resource.

A further step might be to create a special kind of park.

Imagine a place similar in scale to ChicagoÕs Millennium Park where artists, designers, and researchers create sustainability themed installations. It would be a beacon for international tourism. Many will wonder what a New York hotel designed in consultation with sustainability guru William McDonough might look like. How will the island get its power? What will it do with its waste? How will users get around? Answering these questions will define the place.

So far, only a few talented and capable urban designers and architects have worked on the Governors Island project. Since this is a new, information-driven millennium, there are other ways to generate ideas for the islandÕs future. Why not open up an urban design and ideas competition to the global wired community? Make it an open-source project for designers (and people) everywhere and see what happens. It worked for Linus Torvald and his Linux software. TorvaldÕs motto is, ÒGiven enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.Ó Governors Island could offer a similar motto: ÒGiven enough design input, sustainability is possible.Ó The island is unique. To trivialize its history and geographical significance by suggesting mundane and predictable urban design solutions would be a disaster. For a host of symbolic and historical reasons the island can represent the best that is America.

For centuries, Governors Island was part of a gateway that swept human resources into America. As a sustainability research center, it could export visions of a better future out to the world and might just help improve the lives of everyone, everywhere.

Robert Ouellette is the former Director of the University of TorontoÕs Information Technology Design Centre, at the Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design. He received the City of Toronto Urban Design Award for the John Street Media Corridor Project 1994. He is an Architectural Critic for CanadaÕs National Post.

FELLOWS PANEL DISSCUSSION SUSTAINABLE CITIES: REGIONAL, PARK AND BUILDING SCALE

Following Michael's talk, we will hear from Ken Smith who, for those of you who were here earlier, will continue his presentation. Ken is the principal of Ken Smith Landscape Architecture in New York, a design critic at Harvard University's Graduate School of Design, from where he received his MLA. Ken is a favorite son of the City College School of Architecture where he taught. We claim him as well.

Lance Jay Brown It's my pleasure to welcome you to the Institute's fall program on sustainable cities. We all know that the President recently acknowledged that there was an energy problem in the United States. That's good news. Al Gore's film, An Inconvenient Truth, is opening in New York. There seems to be some issue about how well it is received here. So while you're in New York, if you're from out of town, go and see it.

Sustainability for me fundamentally is a social issue and an issue of communication. I really was convinced of that by [Oka Kopor], a long-time friend and colleague of AliyeÕs, who wrote a paper entitled "Sustainable Environments, Holistic and Incremental Processes" in 1997. She listed five areas of concern that I think are very useful when thinking about and discussing this subject.

• • • • •

Her first area of concern was the enhancement of diversity.

The second was the intensification of connections with nature.

The third was the supporting of community and social interaction.

The fourth was the maintaining of continuity with history and cultural values.

Fifth was appropriating sustainable technology and the use of renewable energy resources.

I found that to be a really nice umbrella of concerns. So I offer those for your consideration while we hear from today's speakers. Widely varying geographic areas. We'll be in Hawaii -- hopefully we can stay there longest. We'll be on the West Coast, and we'll be back here in New York.

The first presentation will be by Michael Kwartler. Michael is the principal of Michael Kwartler and Associates and the founding director of the Environmental Simulation Center Michael has served as the Deputy Director of the Mayor's Urban Design Council and later joined the City Planning Department as Associate Director of the Division of Land Planning & Environmental Management. He was the director of Columbia University's program in Historic Preservation.

Third, we'll hear from Robert Fox. Bob Fox joined Richard Cook to form Cook + Fox, a firm devoted to creating environmental and responsible high-performance buildings.

Winner of the Urban Visionary Award from the Cooper Union, he's been a guest lecturer at the National Building Museum, Northeast Sustainable Energy Association, and the AIA and United Nations Health and the Environment Conference. Bob has a degree from Cornell and a Masters from Harvard University.

With that, I will give the floor to Michael Kwartler and look forward to hearing some interesting presentations.

Michael Kwartler, ESL, New York Kona, Hawaii: From Green Forest to New Community What I want to talk about is really less about the urban design and more about the process of how the public makes decisions. It's not just a matter of participation. It literally is public decision-making. The project that we've been involved in is plan for the Big Island of Hawaii, the Kona region. The interesting part of all of this is about behavior modification and the politics of it. One is that unless the folks are really behind it and it really is their plan, there won't be any behavior modification. Kona probably more than any other place in the United States has very high values and is a desirable place to be. It's very expensive. There's a disparity in terms of where people live and where they work. There are transportation issues and they're consuming land at a rate that far exceeds the population growth.

The second part of it is that the only way this actually gets implemented, even though it will be adopted by the county, is that the folks will actively hold the county's feet to the fire, and if they don't like what's happening, they throw the bums out. So this is very much a bottom-up plan, and I think if you're going to have any sustainable development, it has to be bottom-up because if it's top-down people tend not to do it.

They have to buy into it, they want to be part of it, and it has to come basically from them.

Let me jump into this. I'm not really going to talk to these slides, but these are the basics. It's actually not a very large population but it's growing dramatically and it's growing by about a third in the next twenty years. It's growing much

faster than most areas in the U.S. Also, the housing is really much more of an issue in part because of second homes and things like that, which also create disparities in the overall population between rich and poor. You can see the vacancy rate, as the census calls it. That means your second homes.

It's really huge compared to other parts of the country.

The other part of this is that they're eating up land, as they would say in New York, until it's going out of style. They've actually realized this, and that's very much what this whole plan is about -- are there any other alternatives? That's where the whole behavior modification part comes in. Because the way in which they're growing is the way other parts of this country grow, which is to eat up land and end up with nothing at the end of the day.

WORKSHOPS The presentation I'll show you is really the one that we've been using in the workshops. This is a fragment of a whole series of workshops, and there will be a final workshop in about three weeks in Hawaii. What I'm showing you is actually what the folks in Hawaii have seen as part of their introductions to the various workshops. Weﾃ夫e gotten enormous turnouts given the size of the population, over 350 people show up for the workshops and they're there for the entire day. That's not an insignificant number given the overall population and the enthusiasm. Notwithstanding the cynicism of twenty years of plans, all of which are on the shelf -- they fill up a whole bookshelf. But there's some sense that something has to be done and that they're more than willing to participate.

It's a whole process of education as well, because most folks don't know what the alternatives are. It isn't that the market necessarily would provide them. The market will respond to it, if in fact the folks say this is really what we want. Then we'll tend to weed out the developers who are less responsive to what the folks are interested in.

Let me very quickly take you through some of this. We divide the workshops into where we grow and how we grow. We do this with Johnny Longo, who was one of the people responsible for some of these processes, who's fabulous to work with in terms of public process. We've been joining a lot of the technology to this in order to make complex problems sensible for folks rather than trying to dumb them down. So there's an education that goes along with it. These are a series of critical questions, and the critical questions really came out of a series of almost 105 small workshops that were done in people's kitchens, with facilitators who we trained. They were the ones who actually bubbled up what they thought were the important issues that really needed to be addressed.

Alternative scenario showing land consumption at dif. density MAPPING THE FUTURE The mapping the future exercise -- this is the ballroom in one of the hotels -- was really a very simple one, which is you have X amount of land, and how much of it are you going to consume? This is not about land use or anything. It's just purely how much are you going to consume and where are you going to do it? That's what came out of this. Out of that came a series of maps. These are little chips. I think a lot of people now do this exercise. I think one of the differences is this is all tied to Geographic Information System, and then it's quantified. So we actually were able to figure out, so that nobody gets lost here, including the other chips where they threw them in the ocean. Those were the folks who said they didn't want to grow at all, notwithstanding the fact that there's actually natural population growth, unless they start to kill their young. You try to explain this to people and it's a tough

one. The idea of using the G.I.S. here is that nobody's vote actually goes unmeasured. This is really important when there's a public process, because there's a tendency in a public process that you come up with the average of the average of the average of the average. So this is a way to make sure that everybody's position is recorded. Then second is how much of a consensus there is for specific locations as well. That's what this is actually reporting.

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE What came out of this is that there were a series of preferred locations, not only for growth for also for a green infrastructure network. The idea is to really mesh the landscape with where the future development would be, and not to think of this as you have the landscape and you have urbanism, particularly in a place like Hawaii where that's, in fact, why people are there. And also because this is the original island of the kingdom. This place is just littered with cultural artifacts. Green infrastructure is basically a combination of culture, because it's so integrated with the landscape itself.

20 YEAR PLAN There are three outcomes that came out of these workshops.

One was development principles, performance indicators, which we're going to respond to what those principles are. So in part, as the plan goes forward and it gets adopted, and this is basically a twenty-year plan, there's a way for folks to see whether, as Ed Koch would have said, how am I doing? So it holds everybody accountable and the principles and the performance indicators will be incorporated and voted upon and adopted as part of the overall plan. Some of these are rather obvious, but the important thing is that these were not things that we did, or said this is the answer for you. This all came through a process that's gone on for the last nine months.

Where the growth should be. People actually were very clear about this, because it's interesting because the region is linear, people travel back and forth pretty much on the same road and know every square inch of this. So where they put those chips was very...as we developed the G.I.S. maps with the county, people always had something to say -- that's wrong, this is wrong, etc. The county now has probably the most accurate and up-to-date G.I.S., in part because we've had almost a thousand people contribute to making it more accurate than it ordinarily would be.

Essentially what they came up with, which in a way if we all sat down as professionals you would have said the same thing, is you really need to grow compactly. What they realized, and I'll show you in a couple of other scenarios, the amount of land that was being consumed meant that in twenty years there would be nothing left. That was not acceptable both to the native Hawaiians, as well as the newcomers.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS We're in the process of putting together the performance indicators. There's about twenty of them. Generally more than twenty doesn't work because nobody could remember them and they get so complicated that they're impossible. So the idea is to winnow them down to the ones that are absolutely critical, and even those get re-evaluated periodically. Let's look at the growth scenario. Taking where people located the chips and where their preferences were in terms of the locations, we said if you continue with a baseline as zone, to absorb the future population there will be no land left in the growth area. The second was this is your current practice. It's pretty much the same thing. Nothing will be left.

The land is actually typically somewhere between a five to ten percent slope, otherwise, known as a volcano. There are three active volcanoes. They call them mountains. It's a little scary.

They're very large volcanoes. They are 13,000 feet tall, the height of Mt. Blanc. This is where there's snow on top. You could ski on some of these if they're not erupting. And you never know where it comes out. The lava fields are quite something.

We also then, based on the way in which they were suggesting where they had layered the chips, in terms of how many, potential growth scenarios in terms of the number of units per acre. It was a way to get them to really begin to understand what these numbers meant, not in the abstract but in the real when you put them down on a piece of land, as well as [word sounds like eight D or something] use to the acre. So we try to help folks understand what this really meant. So land consumption, if we had to accommodate almost 3,000 new housing units and you looked at scenario A, it would take up that much land. Scenario B, scenario C, and a modest 8D use per acre, which actually is below what they build in Queens.

So as a New Yorker, it was beginning to make me twitch that eight was the high-density. But it really is high density for the Kona area.

You can see the dramatic difference just in terms of sheer land consumption. The second has to do with infrastructure cost, affordable housing. The more you sprawl, the more it costs for roads, basically with the gray infrastructure, all of the plumbing and so on. And that in part is driving folks to commute literally across the island, from one side of the island to the other, where the housing is a lot cheaper. Or said in another way, this is what it buys you, on the same piece of land.

Then we did some quick and dirty visualizations and issues about connectivity and walkability. These are different development patterns that we superimposed on a photograph from the G.I.S. that shows the way in which they are currently developing based on the different scenarios that I just

mentioned, the A, B, C and D scenarios. The blue square is basically a half mile, so it makes it essentially quite walkable.

The same again with development patterns. Then we just showed what it would like as a carpet over the landscape.

This is A, B, C and D. All of these were a way to convey the abstraction of numbers in ways that were meant to be quite visceral.

Then there was a lot of voting that went on at these meetings.

Essentially, they're looking at something in between scenario C and D, between five and eight units to the net acre. Using the performance criteria that we're developing right now and a three-dimensional real-time visualization, we're going to be going back in a couple of weeks to show if you really meant this, this is what it actually might look like. One of the big questions when you use these abstract numbers like 8 or 5D use to the acre, the one thing that comes to mind is it's all going to be the same. This is an average. It can actually be one unit to the acre over here and maybe thirty units to the acre over here, and it just depends on how you do it. So this isn't so much about pre-designing it but thinking about how you actually approach this kind of problem. And the only way this really comes across is through an actual real-time walkthrough. Think flight simulation.

are buildings that they're familiar with in Hawaii. They represent a kind of range of styles. The typical Hawaiian building is actually taken from Japan. It looks like [Shojan] architecture. It could come from Katsura on a good day.

Alternative scenario showing land consumption at dif. density What makes this interesting is that there's been incredible buyin from the folks in the Kona region. The politicians have bought into this, and the reason we know we're being successful is that the number of building permits that have been filed in the last couple of months has gone through the roof, because everybody just wants to get in before we change the rules. It's very interesting. There's a sense in Hawaii that once you get zoning, you're entitled to it in perpetuity. We are now in the process of disabusing everybody of this. In part, that's what's fueling this rush to get permits, but permits don't get you vested. This will be adopted. It's pretty clear that the political support is there, and we look forward to actually having been pretty successful, we hope, in helping save an unbelievable, very special place. Thank you.

Lance Jay Brown

Alternative scenario showing land consumption at dif. density NOT ABOUT SALES

It gives me special pleasure to hear Michael talk because he's only been working on it for forty years.

So this is not about sales. It's actually about using this technology in a way to help people understand and frame choices in a very democratic environment where this has actually gone through the newspapers, most people in the county are going to vote on this, and then it finally will go to the City Council.

The next speaker is Ken Smith. We're moving from the coffee fields of Hawaii to the West Coast where we were earlier today. For those who were here, you saw some of the process that Ken Smith covered with his product, and now we're going to see an elaboration of what that process produced.

These are very crude models. They're meant to be very quick and dirty, but you can actually walk through them and get an experience of what this would be like. This is really important when the slopes are like this, about issue of walkability and the pedestrians' experience, and so on. Most of these models

If we have a moment, I'm going to ask two people in the audience if they would also consider playing the role of respondents if Achva Stein and Michael Sorkin are delayed.

Ken Smith Ken Smith Landscape Architecture, New York, NY Great Park, El Toro, Marine Air Terminal, Orange County, CA This is the El Toro Marine Air Base in Orange County. It's now incorporated into the City of Irvine. These are the Santa Ana Mountains, the ocean is down here. Part of the challenge that was put together in the framework plan is a 1300-acre public park called the Great Park. The entire base is 4500 acres. So the park represents between a quarter and a third of the entire former base. Had the base been sold to private developers for development, you probably would not have gotten anywhere near this size of public space out of the deal, nor would you have gotten as large a central public space. It's because of the community process and the involvement of the local politicians that Irvine will get such a large public space.

The deal they put together also provides the $400 million of funding for first phase of park construction.

CENTRAL PARK It's really a question of thinking about what is a great park.

This park is larger than Central Park. It's larger than Golden Gate Park. It's larger than Balboa Park. The mayor of Irvine likes to point out that this park, the Great Park, excluding transportation, is the largest public work in the United States right now. It's a very large project.

Of course, it's inescapable because I live in New York, to think back to Central Park. I've been asking people in Orange County to imagine New York without Central Park. It's really unimaginable. Then because there is disbelief, I ask people in Orange County to think out a hundred and fifty years and imagine Orange County without the Great Park. The Great Park will transform Orange County in the same way that Central Park transformed New York City. There was just a little bit of chutzpa in calling Central Park Central Park, because it wasn't in the center of the town at that time. It was way on the edge, and it was a wasteland. There's a little bit of chutzpa in calling this the Great Park, because that's not proven yet. But it will be. Orange County is growing and changing. It's urbanizing. It's not the Orange County of thirty years ago.

Going back to Central Park for a moment, I'd like to approach sustainability through a little different perspective. We all know those three overlapping circles -- economic, environmental and community. We all know the checklists that we go through, and, of course, this project will do that.

The Great Park project will create community connections. It will have an integrated transportation network. It will have embedded buildings for energy conservation, and it will have all the good things that a progressive park should have.

But my team has been thinking about sustainability in a little different way. It goes back to the thinking of what Central Park was about. Central Park was built in part on notions about community and in concern for public health. If you think back to the time that Central Park was built, New York had pigs running in the street. It was a filthy place. We had people living in slums, in appalling conditions. They worked in factories seven days a week. It was a horrible city. There were tremendous health problems. There were communicable diseases, all sorts of problems which Central Park rose up and started to deal with as an issue of sustainability.

The Great Park is much the same, but the social conditions and health conditions have changed in a hundred and fifty or two hundred years. In fact, we don't work in factories anymore. We don't work seven days a week. We don't work around the clock. We all have nice houses and fancy cars.

But we live a sedentary life. We sit at desks. We have an obesity problem. Diabetes is a problem. We're not in good physical shape. So we still have health problems. When you think about a public park and the role of the public park in creating public health, it will manifest itself in a different way.

For Olmsted, the idea of a great park was to have plenty of open space because, in fact, fresh air and sunlight were believed to be cures to and tuberculosis, and, in fact, they were in part. At the time Central Park was created, because people were working in factories, the idea of going to a park was to go and relax. The idea of Central Park was to create a respite.

It was also a social place where people would meet other people. If you think about the park today, the respite is certainly important, but we need physical activity. Olmsted didn't program much physical activity into Central Park.

There were no playgrounds or ball fields, because that wasn't the solution to public health at that time.

To create a public park today, you need to get people jogging and walking and bicycling and playing tennis and soccer. So a park inherently in the 21st century, even if it's built on the same premises of public health, will be different. A park in the 21st century will not look the same or function the same as a park in the 19th century, even though it's addressing many of the same social, economic and community concerns.

GREAT PARK The future Great Park, the El Toro base, is really beautiful.

It's also hostile and oppressive. The first time I was on the base was last July, in the middle of the day, and it was hot and oppressive standing out in the middle of this runway. But it's also exciting. Orange County is building up, and Orange County is losing this kind of vast open space, in the same way that New York City was building out and losing its open

space. You can stand on this runway and have a two-mile vista of the Santa Ana Mountains and turn the other way and see the Pacific Ocean. It's quite astonishing. If we can preserve this sense of open space, we will preserve something that is part of Orange County's history.

There are three principal parts to our park. They deal with three kinds of sustainability. There's the habitat park. This is dealing with the environmental aspects of the site, the natural systems, the ecology of the site. This is the part that Stephen Handel is working on. There are two former streams that ran through the site. There's a wildlife corridor here, the Bellagio Canyon stream is over here. Those streams and corridors have been badly abused and will need to be restored and the wildlife populations brought back. The second part to the site are the fields and memorial. We're going to preserve portions of that runway. We're going to preserve some of the old 1940's hangars. We're going to replant orchards which speak to the agricultural history of the site. One of the biggest challenges is not to erase the site.

Canyon View

THE CANYON The third part of the site is the canyon. This is the most synthetic part. If you think about Central Park, Olmsted imposed a vision of a new kind of nature on the site. And the canyon is a similar kind of imposition. The habitats play a critical role in connections to the mountains and the coast.

The military memorial, saving of the runways. Sports park activities, what that might look like. Finally, the canyon. That same July trip, I went down to Balboa Park in San Diego and, it was a hot day. I saw the carousel and the train and the tea house. I stumbled upon this little ravine, a natural canyon that was filled with palm trees. I walked in this canyon and the temperature changed. It blew my mind. The idea behind the canyon is a micro-climate at the scale of a 1300-acre park.

The canyon is this kind of micro-climate, and if you think about how parks work in the West, the very notion of a park is going into the canyon. Yosemite is a prototype of that. You go into the canyon where it's cool and comfortable. In San Francisco, you go into these shady recesses.

The canyon is a giant earthwork. This is something that they do very well in Orange County. Orange County is equipped to move earth. They've been for thirty years completely reshaping their landscape. You see road cuts on the scale of fifty feet. You see entire square miles that have been bulldozed and reshaped. It's a scale of technology which is common. So we're going to create a two-and-a-half-mile-long canyon. We're digging down about thirty feet, and then we're building up about thirty feet on both sides. We're going to plant it with trees and palms. We will create a collection of palm trees in the United States as part of this canyon.

Amphitheater

Waterside

Canyon Terrace

All of this is embedded in notions of sustainability. It's embedded in different ways of thinking about sustainability, about public health, about micro-climates and comfort. Thank you.

Lance Jay Brown So far so good. We've brought urbanization to Hawaii, and we're bringing parkland to Orange County. Now we're going to hear from Bob Fox and bring a sustainable building to Manhattan.

Historic Fighter Plane Robert Fox, Cook +Fox Architects, NY, NY THE NEXT GREEN BUILDING Michael's statistics were interesting, and I was thinking about how many people we are going to house per acre in our project. In fact, if I took his 631 acres, which was the densest that you were looking at, that would house 3,100,000 people at the density that we're going to put on the little piece of land down the street at Bryant Park. Indeed, Manhattan is about density.

Bee Creek wetlands

Skater Park

View Entering Park

I'd like to start following on something Lance Jay Brown said.

He said the word "dull". He was talking about the bigger picture of where we find ourselves in talking about the change that is inevitably going to happen to our planet. I agree with him. I think we are in dire straits. This has three different images. The one on the left that we're looking at is the predicted CO2 level, which for 400,000 years has been below 300 parts per million. We are almost at 400 parts per million, where we haven't been for 400,000 years, and we are on our way to 500 parts per million. The scientists who study this will tell you, they're not sure what it means.

The second graph came right out of Fortune magazine. The reason that it's so important is that, indeed, it did come from Fortune. This is a business magazine. You've all looked at the cover of Time when it said "Be worried, be very worried."

And you probably all saw the Vanity Fair and all of the celebrities that have turned their attention to these issues. But Fortune is a business magazine. The issue of Fortune chronicled the natural disasters that we have been facing. If you look at the first half of this century, we didn't have too many natural disasters -- earthquakes, floods, draughts, hurricanes. The effects of the rise of CO2 have not yet kicked in. The second half of this century has led to dramatic natural disasters. The one thing that we can all agree on is that, these kinds of disasters affect the poor rather than the rich. When we have the inevitable rise of the sea, this will displace a hundred million people in India. It will not displace that many people in our country.

GREEN BUILDING COUNCIL GROWS There is some good news, though. If you look at this graph, this is the increase of membership in the U.S. Green Building Council. There are now over six thousand members, and a member is defined as a corporation. It could be a single person but they're a corporation. United Technology has 250,000 people. Ford Motor Company and our firm are members. There are millions of members of the U.S. Green Building Council.

The reason that we are focused in our practice on doing buildings is that they contribute 43 percent of the CO2 that is polluting our environment. We'll give you one small statistic.

Cement is the most polluting manufactured item that we have.

When you make a ton of cement, you make a ton of CO2.

Think about what they're building in Asia. All those buildings are made out of cement.

This is an animation of our building across from Bryant Park.

We are on 43rd Street, right about here. This is Sixth Avenue and 42nd. That little brown piece was the Henry Miller Theatre which used to be on the site. Two million square feet.

This building is sculpted to put the mass of the tower on Sixth Avenue. We've aligned the base of our building with that of 4 Times Square, the CondĹ˝ Nast headquarters. There's a building called the HBO building on this corner, and we've put a notch in our building reflecting a gateway going north and an urban garden room, a public open space, on that corner.

The heart of all of these high-rise buildings is the elevator core and the services that run through the middle of the building.

In this case, they are right on the axis of the block, and we have taken that point to shift the mass of this building to create two distinct forms, that we've folded the planes back at the top of the building to allow for views out of the corner and more light and air to penetrate down to the streets to the north.

There is a corner entry to this building, on the corner of 42nd and Sixth, with a canopy that's about the same height as the trees. The south-facing corner of this building, the south is not on the grid of New York City. It's about 30 degrees off. The south face has a distinctive, transparent glass wall.

It is all steel and glass. We used the lowest iron content glass ever used in New York. This point is 950 feet high, making it the second tallest building in the city. Between these two buildings is wider than most of the wide streets in New York, and we have put a park in between these two buildings, so there is a theme of parks here. Ours will be quite different because it's actually hiding a tremendous amount of mechanical equipment. But it is the primary view for 25 percent of the people on the lower floors of the building.

The building at 4 Times Square, which is here, was actually...

I met Howard Decker, who is here, a number of years ago

and he produced a show at the National Building Museum called Big and Green, and 4 Times Square at that point was deemed to be the largest green office building in the country.

He did a terrific job. This shows the building all alone. This is Bryant Park and the New York Public Library is right behind this. You can, again, see the planted roof behind the building.

SUN IS FREE As architects when we approach a project, we look at what's free. The sun is free. We did not put photovoltaic panels on this building because dark purple panels don't go too well with really glassy transparency. We looked at storm water, rain.

We're looking at biology with this building. How can we use biology to make power by taking the food waste from the cafeterias and putting in an anaerobic digester plant and actually making electricity from that, and using the resultant compost in the public parks. The parks department in New York City is loving this idea.

We looked at the earth, how can we extract energy from the earth, because we have a deep foundation. We also looked at wind. This tall a building should be able to generate some power from wind. We put an anemometer on the top of 4 Times Square for a year, and found that the amount of wind that was there was just not enough with today's turbines to make any reasonable amount of power. We also looked at how we could responsibly make our own power on site. Was there a way that we could do this to some significant amount?

The first thing we looked at was rain water. In New York we get four feet of water a year. Typically when there's a heavy rain, that goes into the water, goes into the storm system, which in turn goes into the sewer system, and that inevitably overflows and goes right into the Hudson. So every time there's a heavy rain you can count on that. We're going to capture a hundred percent of the storm water that falls on this site. We're going to add to it the water from the sinks, condensate from the steam system--when you take energy out of steam, it turns into water--and the condensate from our air conditioning system. We're going to use that to flush toilets and for cooling tower makeup.

We will also be the first building in New York to have waterless urinals. All of the men's rooms will have urinals that do not use any water. It's a very simple system, a normallooking urinal with a cartridge in the bottom that has a chemical inner liquid that is lighter than urine. The urine flows under this seal--it's mainly an odor seal--and goes down the trap. We're going to use half the water of a typical office building. The city has given us a 25 percent reduction in our water rates for this system.

We are putting a cogeneration plant, a combined heat and power plant, in this building. It will be a 5-megawatt turbine.

It will produce 70 percent of the building's annual power consumption. The typical power that comes from Con Ed, our local utility, is about 27 percent efficient. It uses 27 percent of the energy that goes in at the source. Most of it goes up the chimney. Ours will be 77 percent efficient because we're capturing a lot of the heat that normally would go up the chimney. We will run it 24/7. At three o'clock in the morning we will not need all that power, and we will use it to make ice.

We will then melt the ice in the middle of the day to supplement the air conditioning system. We will have a farm of ice tanks about ten feet in diameter, ten feet high, that's probably four times the size of this room, and use the power when we don't need it to make this ice.

Lance Jay Brown Thank you. I consider myself always privileged to see people present their work.

Bob Campbell is a Pulitzer Prize winning author, He manages to capture in a special way the issues of the day. He's an urbanist, so he can relate to the things we've heard. I'll give Bob the floor.

AIR CONDITIONING Our main challenge from Ken Lewis, who's the chairman of the Bank of America, was to create an environment that would attract and retain the best employees. When I usually get to this part, I look at the ceiling. We have some images of ceiling air conditioning systems. Those of you who work in offices typically know that the air conditioning comes out of the ceiling from a diffuser that is beautifully designed to take fairly cold air and mix it with all the rest of the air in the room before it hits you, because if it hits you right from that diffuser, you would be cold. In so mixing, it picks up all of the dust and the pollen and the sneezes and delivers it very democratically in the building. We have put in a filtering system that filters out 95 percent of the particulate matter in the air, filters out all the ozone and all of the volatile organic compounds, VOC's, known carcinogens.

That air is delivered under the floor to the work environment, and it comes up right near the worker's body. It works on something that is also free, the law of thermodynamics: hot air rises. The hot air comes from the person and his computer, and it helps draw the air up around him. It is his own air and he controls it. No wires, no thermostats. Everybody gets a diffuser in the floor, hand-operated, more air, less air. It avoids the number one complaint in every office building -I'm too hot or I'm too cold.

This is an image of what this tower will look like from Bryant Park as the sun goes through its daily cycle. You can see that these facets end up shimmering. Well, they will in real life, not in an animation, so that they will appear different at different times during the day.

Thank you.

Bank Of America Building, Under Construction

Robert Campbell. Architecture Critic The Boston Globe It's one of the privileges of journalism that you're always talking about something you know nothing about. They were wonderful presentations. In each case, I'm going to make a kind of criticism and it will turn out that the position can be defended.

In Michael Kwartler's case, I have read that the Hawaiian Islands are one of the worst places in the world for the loss of habitat, for the encroachment on habitat of both animals and plants. An incredibly rich initial supply or flora and fauna are constantly being eaten away. What does a demonstration project like yours have to do with that much larger issue? Can you use your project in an educational way for that culture?

The question I had for Ken Smith regards the word, "sustainability," which now means everything. Community health, an entirely different issue, was originally brought up by Lance. Does one think of the community as a sustainable social compact? Or is that something that is often ruptured in our civilization? That's another completely different kind of sustainability from that of the individual.

Michael Kwartler It was a good question that you asked, Bob, because what's driving the idea of limiting land consumption is the destruction of the habitats. The Big Island is really at a crossroads, unlike some of the others. Oahu is devastated. In the way that Manhattan is an artificial environment, Oahu is an artificial environment. The significant component of what we're doing is driven by developing a green infrastructure.

That involves working lands, first-, second- and I guess, thirdrated habitats. Any agricultural land which is currently being used or not being used becomes undevelopable. The idea of limiting where people can build is essentially to portions of the landscape that are not vital to the ecosystem of the Big Island.

Some of the animal habitats, unfortunately, have been dramatically reduced. But what we're looking at is whether we can create the connectivity between where those animal habitats are...and that's the idea of a network of green infrastructure. It's more than just trails. It really has to do with how the animal habitats actually can be connected and then naturally continue to grow. It raises questions about access to private property, which is a very big one, and issues of liability, which brings in all of the lawyers who are a big problem in all of this. When you begin to think of natural systems and private property, it's really a problem.

Then we have the sustainability of the ecosystem, which we heard about from two or three of the speakers. Sustainability of an individual ecosystem which is no more than a cell in the body of the planet. Then we have the sustainability of the planet, which was not brought up very much except when it was pointed out that water levels are rising, and we're going to lose South Florida and a hundred million people will be displaced in India. I'm no scientist, but so far as I can tell by surveying the literature, that's now inevitable. Itﾃ不 not reversible.

There is a system on the Big Island which apparently there is on all of the islands, called the [Hawaiian word]. Hawaiian is mostly all vowels and a few consonants, so forgive me if I don't pronounce it properly. Each clan had a strip that went from the mountain all the way down to the ocean. So it was a self-sustaining environment. You could fish, you could farm.

Each of the elevations, kind of like out West, you go up a couple hundred feet and everything changes dramatically.

So that's a fourth kind of sustainability. I would argue that we should refer every kind of sustainability to that largest planetary kind of sustainability, and measure our sustainability by what it contributes to the planet, this is the greatest moral issue of our time.

Each one of these strips was a complete entity and self-sustaining. One of the things that we'll be doing is trying to restore these to the degree that we can, and they actually will be running through these urban areas, so that there will be a direct access to them, and they'll be fully integrated with the urban development. How successful this is remains to be seen, but that's basically the idea behind it.

I also wanted to make a comment on Bob Fox, whose presentation was fascinating and beyond anything that I know of for a building of that kind. But you were the one who said that, every time you manufacture a ton of cement, you manufacture a ton of CO2, which I had no idea was true. It seems incredible. As we all know, they are building concrete buildings in China at an incredible rate. What is the relationship between this prima donna work of architecture in Manhattan and what's happening in China? Is there any back and forth? Is there any educational process going on? Any way to relate what you're doing to what they're doing?

ECOLOGICAL ZOOS Robert Campbell We're really at a stage of demonstration projects like the canyon in Irvine. These are almost ecological zoos, they're so small, and so is the Fox tower here in New York. It's like an ecological zoo. Will those become models for much larger activity elsewhere?

Michael Kwartler That's why I focused my presentation on politics, because I know the issue. Sustainability is anything. But for me it was

can you actually sustain this? That means that you really need the political wherewithal and the buy-in by the population to make sure that, in fact, this does happen. Otherwise, we could do all these plans and it's really wonderful. At the scale of the Kona region, unless there's really buy-in, they're the only ones who are...and they'll change the market. We're seeing developers really responding to this. There are other issues having to do with transportation, affordable housing. It's a very complicated problem. But there are groups of developers who are responsive to it, and, hopefully, the other developers will just go someplace else. Ultimately, maybe we'll put them all out of business. But in the short run, they're the ones who, if this is what people are looking for, they will come and they will build it, and hopefully will change things.

Robert Fox It's really great to hear the idea of the strips down the mountain. That's exciting. It's a nice balance against the wonderful book, Snow Crash, about the future of a digital atmosphere in which we would all live and none of these things would matter anymore. This idea of sustainability . . . so far the term has already caused many little explosions to go off. The one that I was thinking of as Bob Campbell framed that question is that little piece of property that I think most of us now know on Houston Street and LaGuardia where there's a fenced-in piece of Manhattan landscape that has been tailored to be what Manhattan was when it was first occupied by the Colonials in 1600.

I was actually standing across the street with a student trying to explain to him what that was, and the students couldn't quite get it. They said, yes, but where are the flowers? Who takes care of them? I said no, it's a preserved piece of landscape.

And it's different. This idea of the preserved landscape as opposed to the managed landscape. We're on an evolutionary path with that, as well. I don't know what the preserved versus the managed landscape may be. I think that's why it was so interesting to listen to Ken's discussion.

Ken Smith Bob Campbell has asked the appropriate question. Everybody wants sustainability. If you ask them what it is, well, things get fuzzy. Everybody's for it but nobody really knows what it is. Certainly on a project like the Great Park, even though it's a big project, it's not going to solve global warming problems and hydrocarbon problems. It's not even going to solve the transportation problem in Southern California. But by focusing it on the individual, we've been thinking of it as three concentric circles. At the center is this notion of personal health, that if you can actually engage people with something they really understand, that's a start.

LOCAL ECOSYSTEMS Then the next step out, at a regional level, are the issues of the local ecosystems, the wildlife corridors, the drainage ways, and the ground water. If you can start to make a connection between people and their understanding their personal health with the health of the region, then that's a start. Or if we have a polluted ground water plume, which we have on our site, the region isn't healthy. And people in Southern California may start to understand that the transportation system isn't healthy.

They don't know how to solve it.

Then the next level is really the global level, the problem with the ozone, the carbons and global warming. We don't know how to solve that. But if you can start at the individual level and help people understand that it's really a question of global health, and that personal health is related to global health, we start to set in place a mechanism where we can start to think about these problems in a way we might solve them. Because the Great Park alone won't solve them, but it could be an agent.

Lance Jay Brown It comes back to the problem that Bob Campbell raised about your work. It's significant that he was as impressed as he was.

I especially liked the calculation of the habitat density against Michael's presentation. It sheds a new light on density, which I'm always talking about. I'll be using that.

Robert Fox I want to talk about cement, because you brought it up. We're actually using blast furnace slag, a waste product of the steel industry, for 45 percent of the cement on this project. That will save 56,000 tons of CO2. It's amazing. It sets up a little better than regular cement and it's 10 percent stronger. Throw a little garbage in your concrete mix and you're better off.

One project I think can make a little bit of a difference. What Howard Decker did with 4 Times Square, it did reverberate around the globe. This project is indeed getting a fair amount of attention, but in terms of where the effort is needed in the Far East, the Natural Resource Defense Council has been incredibly active there for five, six, or eight years. There was a big conference with the U.S. Green Building Council there about a month ago. They are very committed to be in China.

They get it probably a lot better than we do, and they are committed to being members of the World Green Building Council. There are seventeen or eighteen countries that are part of that. But their problem is enormous. In China every year sixteen million people move from the fields into the cities -- two New Yorks every year. There's a city in the middle of China that has 32 million people. They are urbanizing at the rate of acres an hour. And every one of those people wants exactly what everybody in this room has. All of it.

EVENT SPEAKERS Lance Brown Lance Jay Brown served two terms as elected Chair, School of Architecture, Urban Design and Landscape Architecture at the City College of New York / CUNY where he is now Coordinator for Design. Principal of Lance Jay Brown, Architecture + Urban Design, Brown served as Assistant Director, Design Arts Program, and National Endowment for the Arts and served as Director, Design Excellence Project.Ê He served as Professional Advisor to the WTC Site 9/11 International Memorial Design Competition; co-Directed the 2003 NEA funded Upper Manhattan Heritage Project; served as special advisor to the Mostar 2004 Urban Reconstruction Workshop, Bosnia Hercegovina and recently returned from an Urban Design Workshop in Tbilisi, Georgia. Awards include the 2004 New York State AIA PresidentÕs Award for Excellence in Non-traditional Architecture, the 2003 ACSA Distinguished Professorship for Life; 2003 Fellowship, American Institute of Architects and was elected two terms as Board Member for Educational Affairs, AIA New York Chapter. In 2005 he was Chair of the AIA national RUDC Advisory Group. He is Program Advisor to the Institute for Urban Design and Co-Chair of the AIA/NYNV Disaster Preparedness Task Force.

Tim Delorm Tim Delorm is the Managing Principal of EDAWÕs New York office. He is a registered landscape architect and urban designer whose practice focuses on the development of sustainable urban frameworks for public and private sector clients nationally and internationally. His approach to urban design and redevelopment emerges from a pragmatic analysis of existing conditions, his belief that effective public participation is essential, and a commitment to creating powerful public realm plans as the primary determinant of urban character. EDAWÕs New York office is emerging as a practice leader in the area of green infrastructure and the concept of applied ecological research in designed landscapes.

Mr. Delorm is currently leading the Governors Island Master Plan Advisory Team working with the Governors Island Preservation and Education Corporation and recently completed the Yankee Stadium Community Parks Master Plan for NYCEDC/NYCDPR. His BRAC related work includes the preparation of the Fort Totten Reuse Master Plan in Queens and the Philadelphia Navy Yard Master Plan. He is a former Councilman and Planning Board Member for the Borough of Glen Ridge, New Jersey, is a member of NJULIÕs Executive Committee currently serving as Vice-Chair of their Smart Growth Recognition Program initiative, and is a Fellow of the Institute of Urban Design in New York.

Ken Smith Ken Smith is the principal of Ken Smith Landscape Architecture in New York and a design critic at Harvard University's Graduate School of Design, from which he received an MLA. His projects are in the realm of urban public space, often exploiting existing, reworked, or complex urban sites. Current endeavors include a light rail project in San Francisco and streetscape projects in Harlem. Smith won the Trust for Public Land's 2002 Santa Fe Rail yard Park competition and received an Honorable Mention in the Van Alen Institute's 2001 Queens Plaza competition. He has been involved with a group of artists, architects, and landscape architects working to commemorate the events of Sept. 11, 2001, in New York.

John Clarke John Clarke has over 30 years experience with the planning, design and construction of large-scale public and private projects in New Jersey. From 1971 to 1977 Mr. Clarke was Director of the Department of Planning and Development for the City of Trenton, and in that capacity had responsibility for all of the CityÕs redevelopment efforts. As a private consultant, Mr. Clarke has designed and implemented redevelopment plans for many New Jersey communities including Newark, Bayonne, Paterson and Jersey City. He holds a Bachelor of Architecture degree from The Cooper Union and an MS degree in Urban Planning from Columbia University.

Michael J. Stepner Michael Stepner, during his tenure with the City of San Diego, from 1971 to 1997, was responsible for the cityÕs general plan and growth management efforts. His diverse experience includes advising other cities about cities, city planning, and urban design. He was director of Land Use and Housing for the San Diego Regional Economic Development Corporation from August 2001 to August 2003 and serves as professor of Architecture and Urban Planning at the NewSchool of Architecture & Design and as adjunct faculty at Woodbury University and University of California, San Diego. In 2004, he received the Distinguished Leadership to Professional Planners Award from the American Planning Association, San Diego Chapter. In 1997, the San Diego Chapter of the American Institute of Architects awarded Mr.ÊStepner the Community Design Award and officially changed the name of the award to the Michael J. Stepner Community Design Award.

Robert Pirani Robert Pirani is Regional Plan Association's Director of Environmental Programs and Executive Director of the Governors Island Alliance. His responsibilities include developing and directing programs in parks and open space

advocacy, land use planning, water quality protection, and the reuse of abandoned industrial sites. He has been invited to testify before the United States Congress, the states of New York and New Jersey, the City of New York. Mr. Pirani received the 2003 Advocate Award from Environmental Advocates of New York and the 2003 PresidentÕs Advisory Council on Historic Preservation/National Trust for Historic Preservation Joint Award for Federal Partnerships in Historic Preservation. He is an adjunct faculty member of the Pratt Institute Graduate Center for Planning and Environment and serves on the Board of the fourÐstate Highlands Coalition, Brooklyn Greenway Initiative, and the Governors Island Alliance. His publications include: New York- New Jersey Highlands Regional Study Update (USDA Forest Service, 2002), Transforming the Places of Production (Edizioni Olivares, 2002); ÒRelaunching Governors IslandÓ (New York Times Op-Ed, 2002). Mr. Pirani holds a Master's Degree in Regional Planning from Cornell University and a Bachelor's Degree in Environmental Studies from Hampshire College.

Aliye Celik Aliye Celik has joined the Institute staff as a Managing Director as of January. For five years previous to that she was Chief, Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) at the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Celik holds degrees in architecture from Istanbul Technical University and from Princeton.

Michael Kwartler Michael Kwartler is principal of Michael Kwartler and Associates and founding director of the Environmental Simulation Center, a non-profit research laboratory created to develop innovative applications of digital technology. His thirty years of practice and teaching have focused on the theory and practice of legislating aesthetics/good city form.ÊExamples of his work include Housing Quality Zoning Regulations (1976) and the Midtown Zoning Regulations (1982), which recognize the power of zoning to determine urban form; Westside Futures (1985), a community based preservation and development plan; "Legislating Aesthetics: The Role of Zoning in Designing Cities": in Zoning and the American Dream (Haar and Kayden, 1990); and most recently Regulatory Strategies for Central Tokyo, a project done in conjunction with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the Institute for Behavioral Studies, Tokyo (1992).

Kwartler has done numerous urban design plans including: the New York Circle Line Piers; Geneva New York Downtown Waterfront; Franklin Development in Queens; an integrated housing development and community garden/open-space plan for the Lower East Side. Michael Kwartler received his architectural and planning education at Cooper Union and Columbia University respectively.ÊEntering the New York City government in 1969, he served as Deputy Director of the Mayor's Urban Design Council and later joined the City Planning Department as Associate Director of the Division of Land Planning.ÊHe has taught at the University of Oregon,

Renneselaer, M.I.T., Columbia and the New School's Milano School of Management and Urban Policy.Ê Robert Fox In 2003, Robert Fox joined with Richard Cook to form Cook+Fox Architects, a firm devoted to creating environmentally responsible high-performance buildings.

Winner of the Urban Visionary Award from The Cooper Union and he has been guest lecturer at the National Building Museum, the Northeast Sustainable Energy Association, the American Institute of Architects, and the United Nations Health and the Environment Conference. He has taught at Cornell University and the Graduate School of Design at Harvard University. A founding partner of Fox & Fowle Architects, Bob guided that firm to a prominent position of national leadership in the design of sustainable high-rise buildings and urban design. Under his direction, Fox & Fowle completed more than 30 major projects in New York City.

Among them was the influential 4 Times Square - Conde Nast Headquarters, which set new standards for energy efficient high-rise buildings, received the National Honor Award from the American Institute of Architects. Beginning in 1999, Bob directed a team that created Green Residential and Commercial Guidelines for the Battery Park City Authority.

Bob continues to be the lead Sustainable Design Consultant for the New York City Transit Authority. Robert Fox received a Bachelor of Architecture degree from Cornell University and a Master of Architecture from Harvard University.

Robert Campbell Robert Campbell in 1996 received the Pulitzer Prize for his work as architecture critic for the Boston Globe. He is a contributing editor of the magazine Architectural Record, for which he writes a bimonthly column. Of his book Cityscapes of Boston: An American City Through Time, a collaboration with photographer Peter Vanderwarker, the St. Louis PostDispatch wrote: ÒCampbell is esteemed by many to be the leading architectural critic in America.Ó Mr. Campbell has been in private practice as an architect since 1975, chiefly as a consultant for the improvement or expansion of cultural institutions, including the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum and (since 1983) the Boston Symphony Orchestra. He is an advisor to the Mayors Institute for City Design, which he helped to found. Mr. Campbell is a Fellow of the American Institute of Architects. He has received the AIAÕs Medal for Criticism; the Commonwealth Award of the Boston Society of Architects; a Design Fellowship from the National Endowment for the Arts; and grants from the Graham Foundation and the J. M. Kaplan Fund. He is a graduate of Harvard, where he was elected to Phi Beta Kappa; the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism; and the Harvard Graduate School of Design, where he received the Appleton Traveling Fellowship and Francis Kelley Prize.

Robert Ouellete Robert Ouellette is the Producer and Editor of www.readingtoronto.com & www.readingmontreal.com online communities dedicated to the design, culture, and politics that shape those cities. His column on those same topics, ÒToronto Unbuilt,Ó runs in the National Post. His exploration into the impact of new communications technologies on the design and use of modern cities earned a City of Toronto Urban Design Award for the ÒJohn Street Media Corridor ProjectÓ. A CD-ROM derived from the project has toured internationally as part of the ÒContact ZonesÓ exhibition sponsored by Cornell University. It is in the collection of major museums. He is the former Director of the Information Technology Design Centre at the University of Toronto Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design. His interest in how design affects the economic life of cities led him to acquire an MBA from the Ivey School of Business.

Prior to earning a Lieutenant-GovernorÕs Award of Excellence and the AIA Henry Adams Medal in architecture, he was a Senior Analyst at the Boeing / de Havilland Aircraft Company. There he used early versions of the CAD/CAM systems that have since revolutionized architecture.

Laurie Kerr Laurie Kerr is the Chief of Sustainable Research for New York CityÕs Department of Design and Construction (DDC).Ê DDC has been a major force in the cityÕs progress toward sustainability, having introduced sustainable practices to roughly 30 municipal building projects and advising on projects such as Governors Island and Willets Point.ÊÊLaurie was an agency representative on the multi-agency Mayoral Task Force on Sustainability, and was the author a preliminary framework for a citywide sustainability plan. Her writing on architectural issues has appeared in The Wall Street Journal, Slate, and Architectural Record.Ê Prior to receiving her M. Arch. from Harvard, Laurie earned degrees in engineering and physics from Yale and Cornell, respectively.

Michael Sorkin The Michael Sorkin Studio has a New York based architectural practice devoted to both practical and theoretical projects at all scales with a special interest in the city and in green architecture. Recent projects include planning and design for a highly sustainable 5000-unit community in Penang, Malaysia, master planning for Hamburg, Leipzig, and Schwerin, Germany, planning for a Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem. The Sorkin Studio is active in research in issues of urban morphology, sustainability, and equity and has been the recipient of awards from Progressive Architecture, ID, and the New York AIA. Michael Sorkin is the Director of the Graduate Urban Design Program at the City College of New York. From 1993 to 2000 he was Professor of Urbanism and Director of the Institute of Urbanism at the Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna. His books include Variations on A Theme Park, Exquisite Corpse, Local Code, Giving Ground (edited with Joan Copjec).

REGISTRATION FOR WORKSHOP AND FELLOWS PANEL JOSEPH ALIOTTA Swanke Hayden Connell Arch.

New York, NY

ROBERT DIMILIA Liberty Harbour Associates Staten Island, NY

CATHY LANG HO The Architects' Newspaper New York, NY

ANURUPA BADRINATH Pratt Institute Brooklyn, NY

MAYOR JOSEPH DORIA Bayonne, NJ

ANNA HOLTZMAN Update New York, NY

JOYCE BATTERTON Institute for Urban Design New York, NY

KENNETH DRUCKER HOK New York, NY

BHAVANA INGALE Pratt Institute Brooklyn, NY

FREDRIC BELL AIA New York Chapter New York, NY

KAREN FAIRBANKS Marble Fairbanks New York, NY

SUDHIR JAMBHEKAR FX & Fowle Architects New York, NY

LANCE JAY BROWN School of Architecture, CUNY New York, NY

ANN FEREBEE Institute for Urban Design New York, NY

KATHLEEN JOHN-ALDER Yale School of Architecture New Haven, CT

META BRUNZEMA Meta Brunzema Architects P.C. New York, NY

JAYSON FINK Bayonne Journal Bayonne, NJ

BETTINA KAES Institute for Urban Design New York, NY

ROBERT CAMPBELL The Boston Globe Boston, MA

KENNETH FISHER, ESQ. Wolf Block New York, NY

LAURIE KERR The Wall Street Journal New York, NY

ALIYE CELIK Institute for Urban Design New York, NY

MICHAEL FISHMAN Halcrow New York, NY

NANCY KIST Bayonne LRA Bayonne, NJ

LISA CHAMBERLAIN New York Times New York, NY

GLORIA FOX New York, NY

MICHAEL KWARTLER ESL New York, NY

BETTY CHEN GIPEC New York, NY

ROBERT FOX Cook + Fox Architects New York, NY

JASON LANG CUNY Landscape Architecture New York, NY

JOHN CLARKE Clarke, Caton, Hintz Newark, NJ

JEAN MARIE GATH Pfeiffer Partners, Inc. Los Angeles and New York, NY

LEONIE MANHARDT Architecture Ackteulle Munich, Germany

CHARLES CROSS CUNY New York, NY

AXUMITE GEBRE-EGZIABER UN Habitat New York, NY

VICTORIA MARSHALL Till Landscape + Urban Design Hoboken, NJ

HOWARD DECKER Ehrenkrantz Eckstut & Kuhn New York, NY

STEPHANIE GELB Battery Park City Authority New York, NY

PETER MC COURT Battery Park City Authority New York, NY

TIMOTHY DELORM EDAW, Inc. New York, NY

RON HARWICK James, Harwick & Partners, Inc. Dallas, TX

WILLIAM MENKING The Architect's Newspaper New York, NY

JAYNE MERKEL Architecture Review London, England

SUSAN SHOEMAKER Ehrenkrantz Eckstut & Kuhn Arch.

New York, NY

PABLO VENGOECHEA Zone Architecture Staten Island, NY

DAVID B. MIDDLETON Handel Architects LLP New York, NY

KEN SMITH Ken Smith Landscape Architects New York, NY

JOHN WILLIAMS HDR, Inc. New York, NY

ROBERT OUELLETTE National Post Toronto, Canada

NORMA SMITH Institute for Urban Design New York, NY

BEVERLY WILLIS Womens Architecture Foundation Branford, CT

MEG PARSANT HPA, Inc. New York, NY

MICHAEL SORKIN Michael Sorkin Studio New York, NY

SOFIA ZUBERBUHLER A. Billie Cohen, Ltd. Landscape Design New York, NY

ROB PIRANI Governors Island Alliance / RPA New York, NY

JEFFREY SOULE American Planning Association Washington, DC

ALMA PLUMMER Philadelphia Industrial Dev. Corp.

Philadelphia, PA

NED SOWDER CUNY New York, NY

ELLEN POSNER Newman Institute New York, N

ACHVA STEIN CUNY Landscape Architecture New York, NY

RONNETTE RILEY Ronnette Riley Architects New York, NY

MICHAEL STEPNER Stepner Design Group San Diego, CA

JANET RISERVATO Institute for Urban Design New York, NY

MARK STRAUSS FX & Fowle New York, NY

ROSEMARY RUGGIERO Institute for Urban Design New York, NY

EVAN SUPCOFF HNTB Architecture New York, NY

MARTINA RUHFASS Pratt Institute Brooklyn, NY

ALLEN SWERDLOW Design Seven Associates New York, NY

WILLIAM SCHACHT Team 7 New York, NY

DIANE TANCHAK New York, NY

MICHAEL SCHWARTING NY Institute of Technology Central Islip, NY

LEITH TER MEULEN LandAir Project Resources, Inc. New York, NY

PATRICK SEEB St. Paul Riverfront Corporation St. Paul, Minnesota

JANE THOMPSON Thompson Design Group Cambridge, MA

CHARLES ZUCKER Washington, DC

Special thanks to: Ê Lance Jay Brown Program Chair Ê Bettina Kaes Program coordinator and Proceedings Managing Editor

Governors Island, Calatrava proposed gondola