Green Planning

Green Planning:

Development, Planning, and the Environment

Evan Regan-Levine Environmental Politics October 8, 2009

Regan‐Levine
 Americans, even those with a strong “green” consciousness, often fail to appreciate the true influence of the built environment. The decisions of planners and real estate developers have helped to shape our interaction with the world around us. Their creations govern the ways we carry out our lives and likewise the ways in which we consume and pollute. The true impact of planning on the environment is often lost to sight, purely because it’s often so close to us that we are unable to recognize it. Despite that, the effects of the built environment are far-reaching and ought not to be ignored. The model of mass suburban development, begun in earnest in the years since the Second World War came with a tremendous environmental price tag. As people abandoned cities and traditional inner-ring suburbs, they reinforced the new development paradigm, which came to be known simply as “sprawl.” The environmental impacts of this trend speak for themselves. The National Resources Defense Council found that “between 1960 and 1990 the amount of developed land in metro areas more than doubled, while the population grew by less than half.”1 This troubling trend reflects the way suburbs were and are developed: single family homes situated on relatively large individual lots – a strategy which consumes vast quantities of land. Estimates place the annual land losses to sprawl at approximately two million acres per year.2 The isolated, segmented design of suburbs also necessitates increased use of automobiles3, particularly as development moves further and further away from the city center to which many of the suburban inhabitants commute for their jobs and subsequently out of the reach of mass-transit systems. The impact of this constant expansion is clear: a reported increase of 68 percent in the number of “miles driven” between 1980 and 1997.4 Even within the suburbs, car ownership is an inescapable necessity. The problems are not strictly residential. The commercial analogue to the vast, lowdensity subdivisions is the suburban superstore. The NRDC highlights many of the environmental disadvantages of the “big box” stores including destruction of “Greenfield” spaces such as “farmlands, forests, and meadows,” promotion of automobile use (“as many as 10,000 car trips per day”) and the destructive runoff these stores and their immense 























































 1
Jutka
Terris,
Nancy
Vorsanger
F.
Kaid
Benfield,
Solving
Sprawl:
Models
of
Smart
Growth
in


Communities
Across
America
(New
York,
NY:
National
Reources
Defense
Council,
2001),
3.
 2
Stephen
M.
Wheeler,
Planning
for
Sustainability
(New
York,
NY:
Routledge,
2004),
4.
 3
Wheeler,
Planning
for
Sustainability,
4.
 4
Terris,
Vorsanger,
Benfield,
Solving
Sprawl,
49.





2


Regan‐Levine
 parking lots generate.5 Water quality is also adversely affected by suburban sprawl which brings with it an increased amount of pavement, chemical yard treatments, and cars all of which contribute to erosion and pollution.6 Our mass-development fetish is not only environmentally destructive, but also unnecessary. EPA data shows that “the amount of land consumed by urbanization in 34 large US metropolitan areas grew 2.65 times faster than the rate of population growth during four decades in the late twentieth century.”7 Quite simply, Americans are addicted to suburbia – a construct which consumes excessive amounts of land for both commercial and residential properties, leads to increased pollution, and slowly but surely homogenizes the unique character of many American cities and towns. Development of suburbs is also tied up in the wasteful trend of city depopulation – leaving vast numbers of houses and businesses empty. The suburbs have even had a powerful impact on American culture, having come to represent “the good life” for an entire generation who could ignore the environmental impacts of their stucco promised land. Clearly, the next generation of public officials, urban planners, real estate professionals, and environmentalists needs to take a more intelligent and conscientious approach to development in order to revise the wasteful practices past 50 years. If anything, suburban sprawl stands as an indicator of what an impact planning can have on the environment. Urban Growth Boundaries: The simplest means of preventing sprawl is the creation of a barrier to development. According to one policy prescription, Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB) should be established at the edge of metropolitan regions to protect significant natural resources and provide separation between existing towns and cities. Lands within the UBG should be transit accessible, contiguous to existing development, and planned for long-term urbanization.8 























































 5
Terris,
Vorsanger,
Benfield,
Solving
Sprawl,
59.
 6
Ronald
Kellett
Cynthia
Girlig,
Skinny
Streets
&
Green
Neighborhoods
(Washington,
DC:
Island
Press,


2005).
 7
Wheeler,
Planning
for
Sustainability,
7.
 8
Peter
Calthorpe,
The
Next
American
Metropolis
(New
York,
NY:
Princeton
Architectural
Press,
1993),
 73.





3


Regan‐Levine
 Taking steps to limit the continued imposition of sprawl is an essential means of limiting the haphazard development of outlying areas. Seattle has established a series of urban growth boundaries, which were fairly successful in controlling the unabated spread of sprawl. Once growth is limited, however, what do environmentally sound development options look like? High Density Development: With the rise of the “New Urbanism” movement, as well as increased environmental awareness among the public, innovative urban planning and real estate development strategies are evolving which may affect the environment in unprecedentedly positive ways. These approaches emphasize high-density development that is “walkable,” “human scale,” connected to public transportation, and home to a mix of stores, offices, and residences in close proximity. Peter Calthorpe, an urban designer and one of the leading advocates of New Urbanism, succinctly sums up the raison d’être of the movement: “The alternative to sprawl is simple and timely: neighborhoods of housing, parks, and schools placed within walking distance of shops, civic services, jobs, and transit – a modern version of the traditional town.”9 Instead of the distance of the suburbs, with one area for shopping, one for houses, and one for offices, these mixed-use developments bring all three together in one place. The environmental advantages of such a concept are impressive, stemming from an increased reliance on walking and mass-transit rather than automobiles. A high-density concentration also drastically cuts down the footprint of development, both reducing the acreage of land used and creating a space where homes are only steps from work, stores, entertainment, and public transit stations. This change does not mean eliminating the automobile, instead it simply creates disincentives its use for routine trips and makes alternative forms of transport a convenient possibility.10 A simple comparison between a high-density and suburban (low-density) development is striking. To pick up a grocery item in the suburbs, a customer has to drive from a residential subdivision to a shopping area, using gasoline and generating emissions. Both the subdivision and the commercial area occupy large tracts of land that were formerly undeveloped. 

























































9
Calthorpe,
The
Next
American
Metropolis,
16.
 10
Wheeler,
Planning
for
Sustainability,
72.





4


Regan‐Levine
 By contrast the same shopper, had he lived in a high-density development, could have walked or biked to a store located in close proximity to his home. Both the residential and commercial areas in the mixed-use development are located on the same piece of land, which was likely the site of existing development – not a newly cleared area. In the suburbs, therefore, the environmental impact of picking up a quart of milk is immense, but in the high-density model, the impacts are negligible. The pollution and congestion of the commute to work in the city center is also lessened by contemporary high-density development, which borrows from the nineteenth century model that tends to “cluster development around transit corridors, transit stations, or neighborhoods.”11 Providing the option to take the subway, train, or bus to work reduces the number of people who use automobiles to commute. Adaptive Reuse: Another environmentally positive development strategy is “adaptive reuse” – the practice of recycling buildings and vacant land in previously developed areas for new uses instead of clearing unused land for new construction.12 Popularized in part by the historic preservation movement, adaptive reuse has the potential to revitalize struggling neighborhoods and spur economic development while simultaneously limiting sprawl. Because of city depopulation and the flight to the suburbs, many fundamentally sound buildings stand empty. By restoring these structures, developers can create “anchors” for further redevelopment which in turn lead to marketable city properties that are alternatives to sprawling new development. Adaptive reuse goes beyond limiting sprawl – it makes simple environmental sense. Why create something new when reuse is an option? Historic structures often offer additional environmental advantages such as being located near transit corridors. Some developers are even opting to “green” historic buildings as part of the restoration process, making them both more environmentally friendly and more marketable.13 Brownfield Sites: 

























































11
Wheeler,
Planning
for
Sustainability,
72.
 12
Terris,
Vorsanger,
Benfield,
Solving
Sprawl,
10.
 13
www.phlf.org







5


Regan‐Levine
 One of the most exciting environmental development policies centers on the reclamation and reuse of brownfields, defined as “contaminated land formerly used by industrial, commercial, or military-related enterprises.”14 Similar to adaptive reuse, brownfield redevelopment focuses on reusing land rather than actual buildings and represents a clear means of not only preventing waste and future pollution, but also cleaning up and restoring areas formerly lost to the destructive effects of environmental degradation. One of the most promising avenues of brownfield redevelopment is the formation of public-private partnerships in which cities work with developers and businesses to clean up and reuse a site that was formerly contaminated.15 Farmland Protection: Governments and private groups may also take an active approach to protecting remaining undeveloped areas. Programs such as Montgomery County, Maryland’s “Agricultural Reserve” help to protect farmland from development by adopting zoning practices that reduce land value and prevent subdivision.16 The farmers are compensated for the resulting drop in property values by the grant of “transferable development rights” which they can sell to a developer wishing to build houses in an area set aside for such construction by the county.17 Farmers also have the option to place conservation easements on their property, which can generate substantial sums when sold, and which may also have significant tax benefits, particularly if the holder agrees to donate the easement.18 These strategies can effectively slow the spread of sprawl by withholding the land needed for additional suburban development. Making it Work: If suburban development has been a profitable and proven development trend in the past, what incentives are there for developers to stop, short of direct government regulation? The clearest incentive for developers is a shift in the market. While property values in the suburbs have plummeted in recent months, one of the cores of new urbanism in the 























































 14
Wheeler,
Planning
for
Sustainability,
9.
 15
Wheeler,
Planning
for
Sustainability,
168.
 16
Terris,
Vorsanger,
Benfield,
Solving
Sprawl,
167‐8.
 17
Terris,
Vorsanger,
Benfield,
Solving
Sprawl,
168.
 18
Terris,
Vorsanger,
Benfield,
Solving
Sprawl,
168‐9.
 


6


Regan‐Levine
 Washington, DC area (the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor) has shown great resilience and demand continues to increase. On October 6, 2009 the New York Times reported that, Served by five Metro subway stops within four miles, the corridor continues to attract new tenants, buyers and developers in the face of the deepest recession since the Great Depression.19 The developments in this area are dense, mixed-use, connected to public transit, and extremely walkable. They reflect the preferences of a new generation of consumers and the resilient prices indicate a strong market for this type of property. Another reason for developers to consider building in a more sustainable fashion is the existence of various tax incentive options such as TIF or Tax Increment Financing. This tool operates by using all tax payments above the pre-development assessed value of the property to cover public infrastructure improvements that are needed to make the development possible.20 Innovative strategies like this help governments encourage private firms to make development decisions that are environmentally and economically beneficial. Such incentive-based governmental interventions are proving their worth in other areas of environmental regulation as well. The empirical evidence embodied in the suburbs shows that planning decisions can have disproportional impacts on the environment. The sorts of planning strategies discussed above have tremendous potential to help Americans reduce pollution and consumption while simultaneously revitalizing urban centers, delivering a high quality of life for residents, and generating a return on investment for developers and investors.

























































 19
Eugene
L.
Meyer,
"An
Oasis
of
Stability
Amid
a
Downturn,"
The
New
York
Times,
October
7,
2009:
 B6.
 20
Office
of
Tax
Incentives,
Tax
Increment
Financing,
http://www.development.ohio.gov/edd/tif/
 (accessed
10
8,
2009).
 


7