Climate Change Adaptation - A Green Infrastructure Planning Framew
Climate Change Adaptation - A Green Infrastructure Planning Framew
ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst
9-2013
Part of the Landscape Architecture Commons, and the Urban, Community and Regional Planning
Commons
Recommended Citation
Abunnasr, Yaser F., "Climate Change Adaptation: A Green Infrastructure Planning Framework for Resilient
Urban Regions" (2013). Open Access Dissertations. 775.
https://doi.org/10.7275/yg71-qy42 https://scholarworks.umass.edu/open_access_dissertations/775
This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It
has been accepted for inclusion in Open Access Dissertations by an authorized administrator of
ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected].
CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION:
A GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING FRAMEWORK FOR RESILIENT
URBAN REGIONS
A Dissertation Presented
by
YASER ABUNNASR
DOCTOR OF PHILISOPHY
September 2013
Regional Planning
Department of Landscape Architecture and Regional Planning
© Copyright by Yaser Abunnasr 2013
A Dissertation Presented
By
YASER ABUNNASR
To
Professor Elizabeth Brabec, and Professor Qian Yu for their support in a long and
arduous journey.
matters and confidence in my capabilities to make the leap from design to research. You
Elizabeth, I appreciate the time you took to follow-up on my progress during your
remote sensing. These topics are dear to my heart as they come closest to fulfill a
Thank you to Ray La Raja and Scott Auerbach for their informal teaching through
great discussions.
Thank you to Maria for your love and patience in sharing these absolutely
challenging years.
v
ABSTRACT
SEPTEMBER 2013
framework for climate change adaptation in urban regions. The research is organized in
three distinct, but related parts. The first develops an adaptation implementation model
based on triggering conditions rather than time. The approach responds to policy makers’
reluctance to engage in adaptation planning due to uncertain future conditions. The model
is based on planning and adaptation literature and applied to two case studies.
second part develops the green infrastructure transect as an organizational framework for
context aspects of green infrastructure for vertical and horizontal integration of policy.
The framework integrates literature from urban and landscape planning and tested on
vi
jurisdiction coordination at regional and parcel scales supports mainstreaming. A
secondary conclusion suggests that green infrastructure is space intensive and becomes
the basis of the empirical study in part three. A spatial assessment method is introduced
uses and across an urban-rural gradient. Spatial data in GIS for Boston is utilized to
develop a percent pervious metric allowing the characterization of the study area into six
zones of varying perviousness. Opportunities across land uses were assessed then
surfaces to vegetal surfaces are highest in the urban center and its surrounding.
Intensification of vegetation on pervious surfaces along all land uses is high across the
gradient. Conservation of existing forested land is significant for future climate proofing.
The concluding section argues for a green infrastructure planning framework for
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pages
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................ v
ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... vi
CHAPTERS
1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1
viii
3.2.3 Uncertainty in Impacts at the Urban Micro-Climate Scale ................... 47
3.2.4 The Challenge of Uncertainty to Municipal Planning .......................... 48
3.5.1 Managing Rising Sea Level Impacts: The City of Clarence, Tasmania,
Australia................................................................................................ 60
3.5.2 Managing flood impacts from Extreme Precipitation Events: The City
of Copenhagen, Denmark ..................................................................... 65
3.5.3 Case Study Discussion ......................................................................... 69
ix
5.5.1 Study Area .......................................................................................... 118
5.5.2 Percent Pervious ................................................................................. 120
5.5.3 Pervious Data Set................................................................................ 121
5.5.4 Characterizing the Study Area ............................................................ 124
5.5.5 Assess Pervious Surface Opportunities .............................................. 125
5.6.1 Gradient Zones of Percent Pervious Across Study Area .................... 135
5.6.2 Pervious and Impervious Surfaces within All Land-use classes and
Across Gradient Zones ....................................................................... 138
5.6.3 Pervious Surface Opportunities Across Land-uses ............................ 141
5.6.4 Maximum Opportunities of Pervious Surfaces
for the Urban Heat Island ................................................................... 143
x
6.1 Prologue ........................................................................................................ 159
6.2 Green Infrastructure and Adaptive Capacity................................................. 160
6.3 Green Infrastructure Framework for adaptation at the metropolitan scale ... 169
6.4 Future Research Work................................................................................... 174
APPENDICES
xi
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
3.1 Components of the implementation model used to assess case study examples. ..... 59
3.2 Example of integrating adaptation measures across geographic scales and reduction
of risk for flooding from extreme rain events and rising sea level ........................... 67
5.1 Derived data sets used in the study from raw spatial
data downloaded from Mass GIS. ........................................................................... 124
5.3 Classification scheme of coefficient of use (CU) and coefficient of tree planting
(CT) for each land use class. ................................................................................... 130
5.7 Green infrastructure prioritization scheme across gradient zones. ......................... 156
5.8 List of towns included in the study area with basic population, area, and land cover
data. ......................................................................................................................... 193
5.9 Table of land-use classes used in the study (MassGIS). ......................................... 197
5.10 Original data set used to develop study data layers (adapted from MassGIS web site,
http://www.mass.gov/anf/research-and-tech/it-serv-and-support/application-
serv/office-of-geographic-information-massgis/datalayers/layerlist.html) ............ 199
5.11 Detailed information on calculation of coefficient of use by land use class .......... 201
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
2.2 Four types of regional urban form: Chicago, sprawl/constellation city (top, left);
Buenos Aires, Stellar/Linear (top, right); Washington DC, Green City (bottom, left);
and Calgary, Nucleus (bottom, right). ...................................................................... 42
3.1 Timing of regional and global climate change impacts under high-emissions
scenarios. ................................................................................................................... 46
3.2 The Adaptation Planning process as recommended by the U.S. National Research
Council. ..................................................................................................................... 49
3.3 Local adaptation planning process advised in the State of California Adaptation
Planning Guide.......................................................................................................... 50
3.5 An example of phased engineering adaptation for the Thames Barrier, responding to
potential climate change trigger points ..................................................................... 58
3.6 Phasing Model for Lauderdale Area, City of Clarence, Australia. ........................... 61
3.7 Phasing Model applied to the Copenhagen Climate Adaptation Plan ..................... 68
4.4 Metropolitan region of Boston: green infrastructure across town boundaries .......... 83
4.5 Green infrastructure transect application to Boston region, step one: vulnerability
assessment ................................................................................................................. 84
4.6 Green infrastructure transect application to Boston region, step two: existing green
infrastructure patterns ............................................................................................... 85
xiii
4.7 Green infrastructure transect application to Boston region, step three: identification
of GI policies............................................................................................................. 87
5.1 Primary variable for the provision of ecosystem services is the area of
hydrologically active surfaces or vegetated surfaces. ............................................... 91
5.2 Impact of land use classes on space availability and morphology of pervious
surfaces. .................................................................................................................... 93
5.3 Typical Surface and air temperature differences during the day and at night .......... 97
5.5 Diagram showing how increasing physical and biological properties of vegetated
green infrastructure decreases the urban island heat............................................... 109
5.9 Reduction of variables of interest to two primary surrogate indicators, pervious and
impervious surfaces. ............................................................................................... 120
5.10 Six Gradient Zones by percent pervious and pervious-to-impervious ratio ........... 136
5.13 Distribution of percent pervious across land uses within the MB. ......................... 140
5.14 Percent pervious surfaces across land-use types within each gradient zone and
ranking of the highest three values ......................................................................... 143
5.15 Percent pervious values for four hectare patches across land uses and their ranking
cross the six zones. .................................................................................................. 145
5.17 Qualifying potential building roofs for green roof implementation ....................... 148
5.18 Copmartive duagram and table of PP potential within road easements categorized by
road class ................................................................................................................. 149
xiv
5.19 Class five roads (local arterial) that could potentially
be transformed to green streets ............................................................................... 150
5.21 Spatial distribution of each green infrastructure measure type across the gradient
zones compared to the urban heat island distribution for MB. ............................... 153
5.22 Opportunities for green infrastructure measures across gradient zones. ................ 154
5.23 Opportunities for green infrastructure measures across gradient zones including
forest and agricultural land use classes. .................................................................. 155
xv
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
planning. It is spatial because it is a network of patches and corridors of land that are
planned and managed for biodiversity conservation, “nature” protection, water resources,
land protection, recreation, cultural uses, urban development control, and more recently,
for climate change mitigation and adaptation. A green infrastructure network or system
may include networks of greenways, open spaces, greenbelts, urban greening, cultural
landscapes, urban open spaces, ecological networks, agricultural land, and natural
systems (and all un-built land that could support vegetation) that form the necessary
support system for living. Green infrastructure can be conceived and understood by
stakeholders, planners and policy makers (Benedict and McMahon, 2002; Ahern, 2007;
landscape or urban system (Benedict and McMahon, 2002, 2006). Green infrastructure
combines principles from landscape ecology and landscape planning (Forman, 2008)
combined with principles of growth management and sustainable development. The aim
development in response to humanity’s needs and to maintain “nature” for the ecosystem
services it provides for the benefit of humanity and other species. Ecosystem services are
1
derived from geological, biological and ecological processes and generalized under four
categories: provisioning services (food, water, timber, and fiber), regulating services
(regulation of climate, floods, disease, wastes, and water), and cultural (recreational,
aesthetic, and spiritual benefits), and supporting services (soil formation, photosynthesis,
and nutrient cycling) (MEA, 2005).Within metropolitan contexts, regulating, cultural, and
communities and environmental conditions. Yet, the explicit connection between green
infrastructure and climate change adaptation planning (as an ecosystem benefit) remains
less prominent.
The main premise to adapt to climate change is that the climate is already
2007). These emissions result in increased temperatures across the globe with varying
impacts on humans and other species. Direct impacts of climate change are
environmental and physical with clear and strong repercussions on social and economic
increased intense heat human mortalities and species migration), flooding due to extreme
well as related mortalities), rising sea level (inundation of large tracts of developed
coastal urban land resulting in lost property) and extreme variability of local and micro
climates (McEvoy et al. 2006). Accordingly, the magnitude of exposure and risk to these
2
contexts, adaptation planning aims to adjust human and natural systems to the impacts of
increased temperatures (IPCC, 2007).These adjustments are and will be vast and costly
Urban and metropolitan populations will incur the financial, moral and temporal costs of
these changes because, currently, more than fifty percent of the world population is
More recently and in tandem with mitigation, adaptation planning is gaining more
attention with a strong focus on urban contexts. It is a developing field for planning.
Frameworks have and are being established to advance adaptation plans. The process
begins with climate science to identify current and future climate impacts to be able to
assess vulnerabilities and risks. Current adaptive capacities are then assessed followed by
adaptation. These impediments render many policy makers reluctant to pursue adaptation
Emerging adaptation plans are beginning to set forth a series of multi-tiered and
these measures are conventional in approach and high cost engineering projects. Green
infrastructure has much to contribute to adapt to climate change impacts and adaptation
planning in a cost effective way, without explicitly advancing the climate change
adaptation agenda, and through gradual policies that are more acceptable to communities.
3
Yet, the extent and explicit contribution of green infrastructure has not been researched
enough.
theory and application of green infrastructure planning and practice can be an integral
benefits from natural sciences and environmental engineering; and advanced by practical
applications from the fields of ecology, forestry and landscape architecture/planning. This
approaches to adaptation planning1 . The convergence of all these fields prompt common
1
Two approaches for determining adaptation needs dominate the literature: The first is a
linear cause–effect chain in which climate scenarios are the basis for estimating future
climate impacts, which then define adaptation needs (Fussel, 2007). Adaptation to climate
change is seen as largely separate from other social processes and activities, and
adaptation needs are largely determined by scientific analysis, such as the IPCC report
(1994-2007). The second approach is more complex and is characteristic of recent
adaptation assessments. This approach arrives at a more comprehensive description of
climate-related risks now and in the future by considering future climate change together
with current climate variability and non-climate factors. The risk assessment is further
informed by experience from management of past climatic hazards. Recommendations
for adaption are determined by their potential to reduce current and future climate risks
but also by their synergy with other policy objectives, for example sustainable
development goals. The second approach considers the wider policy context of adaptation
that usually lead to suggestions for mainstreaming climate adaptation into existing
management activity and development plans (e.g. Huq et al. 2003).
4
multiple objectives for green infrastructure and adaptation by making urban and
objectives. The fact that green infrastructure is all around us and can be seen and touched,
and when used for adaptation, becomes a tangible adaptation measure that is meaningful
to communities. Open space planning, urban greening, urban forest management and
other vegetation policies are already underway in many US cities. The task upon us, as
planners concerned with climate change, is to support and increase these initiatives and
adaptation and makes original contribution on how to integrate and make effective the
use of green infrastructure for adaptation planning and measures. The dissertation argues
that green infrastructure is an essential tool for addressing climate change adaptation, but
the green infrastructure transect (GIT); 2) implemented incrementally and in phases with
Two key concepts provide the basis for the synergy between green infrastructure
past and current climate variability and non-climate factors. Recommendations for
adaption are determined by their potential to reduce current and future climate risks but
5
also by their synergy with other policy objectives, for example sustainable development
and adaptation at the operational level. Direct climate change impacts can be ameliorated
to some extent by the provision of green infrastructure and the ecosystem services it
regional one where local adaptation planning and implementation is integrated into a
regional vision.
The dissertation employs a mixed method approach that utilizes literature reviews,
case study analysis, policy analysis, and geographic information system (GIS) mapping
management. Policy analysis is used to understand the state of practice and to identify
synergies with developed theories. Case studies are used for application and to test the
approaches and frameworks. Lessons are then integrated into a proposed theoretical
framework to mainstream adaptation based on green infrastructure. Case studies are used
to test the adaptation implementation approach. Taking the urban island heat as a
surrogate to climate change, spatial mapping and analysis of land cover and land uses is
6
carried to test the theoretical green infrastructure framework in the Boston Metropolitan
area.
The individual chapters are unified by four general propositions. These propositions
were developed to guide the research and act as a basis for the relationships between the
chapters. Figure 1.1 provides a hierarchal schema of the interrelations between the main
Figure 1.1 was developed to ensure that each proposition is addressed and contributes to
advancing the main argument of this dissertation. Different aspects of each proposition
are addressed in more than one chapter and from different perspectives. The concluding
chapter summarizes the propositions and evaluates the extent each was addressed.
multiple scales. Three arguments support this proposition: 1) the multi-scalar and multi-
boundaries.
When impacts from a changing climate occur, they will occur regardless of
conducted at the local scale. Adapting at the town or city scale is important because it
7
across boundaries will be necessary to curb impacts that transcend these boundaries, such
as large flooding events or extreme heat waves. Green infrastructure provides an analogy
and practical road map to conceptualize and organize adaptation efforts into a regional
initiative. A regional vision for adaptation provides the basis for coordination of local
plans and resources. In such an approach, local initiatives will contribute to the regional
adaptation effort and a regional vision would guide local policy makers towards priorities
within their jurisdiction. This becomes especially crucial when using green infrastructure
as an adaption strategy. Small and large scale green infrastructure elements transcend
administrative boundaries by the mere fact that they depend on biological and ecological
processes for the delivery of benefits. These processes are interconnected through air,
soil, water and species migration. Therefore, a regional vision that directs adaptation
adaptation.
integration for adaptation planning using green infrastructure. Chapter five applies this
framework to define the physical element and spatial distribution across a metropolitan
area.
provide ecosystem services. This depends on the presence of soil, vegetation, and water
as a harbor for these processes to occur. In urban contexts, pervious surface is the
primary indicator of the extent and potential of the delivery of ecosystem services. This
8
proposition is supported with the following arguments: 1) pervious surface exists and
should be accounted for across all land-use types, 2) the provision of ecosystem services
is irrelevant of land ownership type and use, and 3) there are opportunities to intensify
infrastructure and the delivery of ecosystem surfaces within urban and surrounding
contexts. Chapter four suggests a framework for accounting pervious surfaces across
varying metropolitan contexts. Chapter five estimates the current pervious surface area
of uncertain future climatic projections and impacts. Uncertainty is not new to planning.
context of climate change, actions described in adaptation plans are best determined
recognizing uncertainty. The precursor here is that we cannot wait until impacts begin to
9
experimentation are crucial theories to advance in adaptation planning while recognizing
uncertainty.
Chapter two, surveys adaptive management and resiliency theory and its
four applies the incremental approach by proposing to estimate current existing area of
disturbance. In the context of adaptation planning, exposure and risk determine the extent
of vulnerability to climate change impacts that may change or affect the system (i.e.in
this dissertation the metropolitan system). In the context of this dissertation, risk,
exposure and vulnerability are related to the location of physical assets and communities.
Green infrastructure reduces risk by decreasing the intensity of impacts from a changing
climate (i.e. reduce overall temperatures within a metropolitan area). Green infrastructure
decreasing intensity of impacts and protection from hazards, it follows that vulnerability
of physical measures and social, cultural and economic policies will result in a total
10
Chapter two explores the relationship between risk, exposure, and vulnerability and the
Lastly, while this is not a core proposition of the dissertation, the idea that green
across all chapters. The fact that vegetated surfaces deliver ecosystem services that
The no-regrets nature and the cost: benefit of green infrastructure strategies in the short
and long terms makes evident that green infrastructure is an opportunity that may prove
to be very effective in curbing the pace of climate change, at least within metropolitan
The dissertation is comprised four main chapters and a conclusion. The first chapter
is a general literature review and the remaining three are written in the form of
publishable articles. One was already published as a refereed conference proceeding, one
submitted for review and the third completed for this dissertation. All three articles were
of the articles as well as an assessment of the extent the propositions have been
addressed. The references from each article were merged into a master reference section.
11
1.3.1. Chapter Two: Green Infrastructure and Adaptive capacity:
Complementarity and Synergy
planning. The aim is to identify the overlaps and contradictions between both fields. The
survey of the literature discusses theory, practice and applied case studies in both fields.
infrastructure could contribute to adaptation planning. The main findings indicate that the
within the environmental dimension. The primary variable for the efficacy of using green
infrastructure is: 1) space and 2) extent of pervious surfaces across the metropolitan area.
planning that will create urban systems suited to current as well as future climates, but
uptake of adaptation has been slow. This is particularly unfortunate in that patterns of
urban built form interact with climate change in ways that can reduce, or intensify, the
impacts of overall global change. For policy-makers, uncertainty regarding the timing
cities that can bring these factors together. The method we propose focuses on
marker, instead arguing for an initial comprehensive plan to prevent maladaptive policy
12
interventions. Policies begin with no-regrets decisions that reduce the long-term need for
more intensive adaptive actions and generate immediate policy benefits, while gradually
Global and local indicators assume a larger role in the process, to evaluate when tipping
points are in sight. We use case studies from two exemplary municipal plans to
demonstrate this method's usefulness. While framed for urban planning, the approach is
applicable to natural resource areas and other planning that must manage uncertainty.
The model is applied to two case studies in Australia and Copenhagen with new insights
When considering the range of spatial planning actions that cities can take to
adapt to climate change, many of them fall under the conceptual umbrella of green
infrastructure (GI). GI has been defined as the spatial planning of landscape systems at
multiple scales and within varying contexts to provide open space, safeguard natural
systems, protect agricultural lands, and ensure ecological integrity for cultural, social, and
ecosystem benefits (Benedict and McMahon, 2002, 2006; Ahern, 2008). While the
traditional definition of GI refers to areas of land that are least intervened by human
action, in this expanded definition, we are deliberately including areas that are engineered
Although climate adaptation is a fairly new policy goal for GI (Gill et al., 2007; CCAP,
2011), three key characteristics qualify GI as a suitable tool for adaptation planning
including multi-functionality (to match ecosystem benefits with adaptation needs), multi-
13
scalar nature of the spatial elements, and a ‘no-regrets approach’. However, GI needs to
be matched to the character of the urban environment and coordinated across jurisdictions
and planning scales to become an effective adaptation policy. In this chapter, we present
a policy framework, the green infrastructure transect, that can help planners and
describe how these policies can create a regional adaptation planning framework.
1.3.4. Chapter Five: Estimating the potential vegetated pervious surface are for
urban heat island adaptation strategies in the Boston Metropolitan Area
reduce temperatures within urban contexts. The mitigation of the Urban Heat Island
effect provides a test case for the effectiveness of GI as a future adaptation strategy.
Climate change is a global phenomenon that exacerbates local urban heat island (UHI).
from hydrological active surfaces to impervious surfaces. For green infrastructure to have
maximum surface areas should be dedicated to vegetated surfaces. Yet the availability of
space is not evident especially when considered in the context of urban expansion.
This chapter tests for the availability of surface area within land uses and across
Several strategies are developed to intensify vegetated land cover (pervious surfaces) and
14
patterns of development. A percent pervious (PP) metric is developed to characterize the
region. Gradient zones of PP are defined and used to compare space opportunities across
land use classes. Maximum opportunities are then tested to address the urban heat island
on the availability of space across gradient zones. The results indicate that residential
land uses carry the highest potential to intensify vegetated land surfaces while
commercial land uses provide the highest potential for green roof implementation and
impact of the UHI. The results for the gradient of policies indicate that transformation of
impervious surfaces is possible within the urban core with more dependence on land
Planning
This chapter reviews the research in the dissertation as well as the limitations.
Green infrastructure policy implications are discussed for the purpose of increasing the
potential adaptive capacity across urban regions. Original contributions are then
15
CHAPTER 2
2.1 Introduction
The purpose of this section is to identify the gaps in the knowledge that this study
will address, provide a literature background for the study and identify the variables of
concern. What we know is that CC is happening and the need to address the impacts on
human and natural systems is becoming more urgent with increasing scientific evidence
(IPCC, 2007). While planning for CC has been predominantly focused on mitigation
Urban regions are vulnerable and are already affected by CC due to historic
emissions (Wilby, 2006). Increased exposure and risk, and the deficiency of existing
urban systems to cope with known and uncertain magnitude of impacts, render urban
(intensification of the urban island heat effect), and rising sea level (Wilby, 2006, 2007).
As such, cities are just starting to address these impacts through initiatives that change
reduce miles travelled (providing walking, cycling, and public transportation), provide
cooling stations, mix uses in developments, and increase tree canopy (Lindley et al.,
2006). In addition to these measures (which coincide with sustainable planning and Smart
16
is identified as an effective measure to prepare cities and their surrounding regions to CC
impacts.
GI planning has been recognized at the regional scale to control sprawl (Benedict
and McMahon, 2002, 2006), provide cultural and environmental benefits (Fabos and
Ryan, 2006) and at the local scale for environmental control (EPA, 2011). The focus of
GI on adaptation is new. To date, the literature has primarily focused on connecting the
roofs), streets (trees and swales), and parks to regional forests and reserves (Benedict and
McMahon 2003; Ahern, 2008; EPA, 2011). While these are very significant qualitative
ingredients that have become the basis of many perspectives on the subject, few studies
begin to provide practical guidance on how to adjust the urban (and regional) form to
incorporate GI.
Many research connect aspects of the urban microclimate with GI (Ashley et al.,
2007; Gober et al., 20010), but only few connect adaptation, GI and spatial distribution
into one study with practical useful results to planners2. Gill et al. (2007) use the city of
Manchester to characterize land cover within the urban city boundaries. They determine
land-cover percentages within land-use categories as their primary input for climatic
modeling. By using climatic and planning scenarios, they determine the existing adaptive
capacity and the future potential based on IPCC climatic scenarios and planning scenarios
2
See GRaBS Project at the University of Manchester, UK. http://www.grabs-eu.org/
17
such as increasing green roofs, green walls, and tree planting. The results on adaptive
capacity are percentage values for the whole urban area without any specificity to
location, the impact of built urban form on this capacity, the threshold capacity of GI and
The research by Gill et al. (2007) provides an inspiration for this study and
highlights some of the gaps that are required. The comparative study by Forman (2008)
on urban regions highlights the significance of GI at the regional scale and the delivery of
work of Hamin and Gurran (2008) on connecting urban form and climate change and the
work by Brabec (2002, 2005) impervious surfaces within watersheds, the research will
Provide practical data and information useful and applicable to spatial planning for
The interpretive framework the study utilizes is the theory of resilience. The
concept of resiliency originates from the field of ecology. Resiliency is defined as the
Walker et al., 2004; Walker & Salt, 2006). This means an internal capacity to
accommodate change and rebound to a state that is similar to the original state, but not
necessarily identical. In many cases, where the magnitude of the disturbance is high,
social-ecological systems may reach thresholds that alter their structure thus transforming
18
This research considers urban regions as social-ecological systems. This means
that human and natural systems within urban contexts are interconnected and
interdependent and mutually affecting one another. Extending this analogy from the
sciences to planning, there is a need to integrate and plan for both systems to consider
mutual causes and effects. Therefore, the research brings together the work on urban
regional patterns by Richard Foreman (2008) from landscape ecology and Brabec and
Lewis (2002, 2005) from resource efficiency along with recent literature on planning for
climate change (Howard, 2009; Hamin et al., in review). In this manner, natural systems
(GI in the context of this research) and urban form are mutually considered as both
Walker and Salt (2006) propose three steps to manage for and enhance resilience
certain condition. Slow drivers are coarse-scale variables often coupled with fine-scale
fast variables. In the context of urban regions the coarse and fine scales drivers is the
transformation of land from pervious and impervious surfaces, which is urbanization. The
large scale driver is in this case is climate change which augments the conditions of the
urban micro-climate.
Second, is to know the thresholds of drivers. When discussing GI, the limits of
delivery of ecosystem services could characterize the threshold of adaptive capacity. The
adaptive capacity is determined by the extent of area of pervious surfaces. The amount of
pervious surface within an urban region determines how much water may percolate or be
stored or the extent of canopy cover for temperature amelioration. Within urban regions,
the amount of pervious surface is finite and constantly eroding, thus limiting the adaptive
19
caapacity. Theerefore, thresshold is this context is diirectly relateed to the propportion of
pervious to im
mpervious su
urfaces withiin a given unnit of study oor area.
fu
unctions are determined by the exten
nt of ecosysttems provideed such floodd water storaage,
teemperature reduction,
r an
nd CO2 sink. By understtanding the ccapacity of G
GI for adaptaation,
an
nd planning at multiple scales
s to creeate a regionaal network oof GI, the urbban system iis
en
nhanced (in one way) to increase thee resilient caapacity of coommunities ((Figure 2.1)..
Step1: Identify
I Slow
w and fast drivvers of changge
Climate
e Change and Urbanization
n
Step 2: Undeerstand thressholds of drivvers
impervious ssurfaces, extrreme Temperratures
Step 3: Enh
hance aspectss of the systeem
Green Infraastructure (sp
patial patternss)
REESILIENCY
Figure 2.1: Th
hree steps to
o achieve ressiliency by m
managers andd planners (S
Salt and Wallker,
2006).
In the context of this h, GI is used as the tool too enhance thhe urban system
t research
in
n face of the slow driver of change, climate
c channge. In additiion, the capaacity of the
sp
patial elemen
nts of GI aree limited by the fine scalle driver of uurbanizationn that creates
20
2.3 Adaptation to Climate Change
change and being impacted by climate change (Stone, 2005; McEvoy et al., 2006; Wilby,
2007; Watkins et al., 2007; McPherson et al., 2008). Urban regions contribute to climate
change in two ways. First, through the resulting greenhouse gas emissions which add to
the global stock of suspended particles in the atmosphere (IPCC, 2007); and second,
altered land use and cover, as compared to predevelopment conditions (Gober et al.,
2010). Both factors force changes in local and regional climates (Stone, 2009) which
Urban regions are impacted and are vulnerable to climate change impacts.
Citizens and ecological systems within are subject to the same vulnerabilities.
Vulnerability maybe defined as the combination of increased exposure and risk and the
deficiency of existing measures to cope with known and uncertain impacts. Impacts from
climate change as characterized by the IPCC (2007) report are increased or decreased
temperatures, and rising sea levels (IPCC, 2007) (See Table 2.1 for a full list of impacts
and indicators). The impact on urban areas simultaneously affects social and ecological
systems. For example, Guhthakurta and Gober (2007) show that an increase of daily low
temperature 1F (under UHI conditions) in the city of Phoenix increases water use by 290
3 Richard Forman’s (2008) definition of urban regions is used to mean a major city, the
surrounding metropolitan area, suburbs, and any satellite cities in the vicinity, any
heterogeneous area composed of buildings and open space, as well as natural amenities.
21
In addition to increased water use due to rising temperatures, the watersheds that
store and provide water to urban areas are and will be simultaneously impacted. For
example, it is projected that the watersheds that are responsible to store and provide water
in New York City will be affected by lower precipitation and drought conditions to
sustain the resource and provide sufficient quantities of water (Rosenzweig et al., 2007).
The same can be said to other ecosystem benefits that are provided by ecological systems
within urban areas such as food, energy, clean air, and nutrient cycling (Forman, 2008).
The IPCC report (2007) clearly indicates the vulnerability of these systems and their
potential high impact to social systems within urban regions. Therefore, impacts and
causes are closely related at multiple scales effecting social and ecological systems.
To address the impacts of climate change through adaptation, structural and non-
structural measures are proposed (Heinz, 2006; Wheeler et al., 2009). Structural measures
are engineered systems that respond and protect from vulnerability due to exposure to
hazardous locations such as flooding, erosion and sea rise levels in coastal urban regions.
For example, Barnett and Beckman (2007) discuss structural solutions, such as dams and
levees, to protect against sea level rise in Boston, New York, Miami and San Francisco
Bay. Others, have proposed raising buildings above flood plains (Walker and Salt, 2006),
redundancy of road networks (Kirshen et al., 2008), or levies to abate rising sea levels. In
many urban areas, structural measures may be the only viable solution to adapt, other
than abandonment. Such options are expensive, but maybe justified on the basis of
existing property values or other reasons. Structural solutions need to be evaluated based
22
Non-structural measures are existing natural systems, constructed natural systems,
region. While structural and non-structural measures may be needed to respond to climate
change impacts, specific contexts will determine what is needed, which combination and
what magnitude of each. Within this study, we focus on green infrastructure as a non-
impacts and enhance the urban system, namely GI. The two primary impacts of CC that I
seek to address and relevant to urban contexts are increased precipitation regimes (that
23
Increase of Melting ice and increasing water temperatures cause Rahmstorf
storm surges sea level rise. More frequent storm events add to this (2007) and
and result in more frequent and more extreme storm Woth (2006)
surges. Storm surges can cause coastal erosion,
damage to buildings and structures especially in ports.
In cases of dam failure such damage will be severe and
flooding will endanger human lives.
Increase of More frequent heavy rainfall and changes in freeze- Glade et al.
mass thaw cycles will destabilize hillsides as well as (2005),
movements embankments and cause landslides and rock fall. Lang and
Stronger variation in snowfall can change the Glade (2008),
concurrency of avalanches. Mass movement events and McInnes
cause damage to buildings and structures and endanger et al.
human lives (2007)
Increase of More frequent heat waves and changes in precipitation Badeck et al.
forest fires cause drought and increase the danger of forest fires. (2004),
Forest fires cause harm to the forestry industry. They Westerling
can also damage buildings and structures as well as and Bryant
wildlife habitats. (2008) and
Girardin et
al. (2009)
More frequent Several extreme weather events can cause harm to Zebisch et al.
destruction of road and rail networks. Even if public infrastructure is (2005)
infrastructure not always directly damaged, traffic and transportation and Walsh et
is delayed or disrupted al. (2007)
Caused by slow changes
Increased loss Changes in seasonality and intensity of precipitation Mathews et
of soil by will result in more loss of soil by water erosion. al. (2006)
water erosion Erosion reduces soil fertility but also affects water
quality and causes increasing problems due to
deposition.
Changes in temperature as well as precipitation and Leuschner
Loss of their seasonal variation are a kiumajor thread to and Schipka
species and biodiversity. They will cause a rapid change in habitat (2004, Root
biodiversity conditions which may lead to an increased loss of et al.
species and biodiversity, especially in regions with a (2003), and
high proportion of fragmented or isolated habitats. Walter et
al. (2002)
Increased Changes in seasonality and intensity of precipitation as Hergesell and
fluctuation of well as changes in freeze-thaw cycles will cause more Berthold
the pronounced fluctuations of ground water levels. This (2008),Kämpf
groundwater could be exacerbated by erosion processes that reduce et al. (2008)
level soil water storage capacity. The resulting drop in and Merkel et
ground water levels in summer will increase drought al. (2008)
situations, while rising ground water tables in winter
endanger the structural integrity of buildings.
24
Fluctuation in Changes in the seasonal variation of precipitation will Zebisch et al.
the result in more pronounced fluctuations of river (2005)
availability of discharge. Shortage of water in drought situations can and Lehner et
water for constrain production. Energy production can be al. (2005)
industrial use especially affected
Desertification
Table 2.1: Climate change impacts and their indicators
conservation and protection of land with ecological and cultural benefits. Benedict and
McMahon (2002) define green infrastructure as the “natural life support system-an
natural areas; greenways, parks, and other conservation lands; working farms, ranches
and forests; and wilderness and other open spaces that support native species, maintain
natural ecological processes, sustain air and water resources and contribute to the health
and quality of life for America’s communities and people (p.12)”. As a process, it is
and other species benefits such as enriched habitat and biodiversity; carbon and nitrogen
cycles; carbon cycle; maintenance of natural landscape processes; cleaner air and water;
to control and direct patterns of development (Benedict and McMahon, 2002). When
built parts of the urban region should qualify in the definition of GI. Therefore the
25
definition of GI is expanded to include all possible potential to create and engineer GI
elements.
expanded definition the following elements and typologies: hybrid systems such as green
roofs (Gill et al, 2007; Oberndorfer, et al., 2007) or vegetated facades of buildings;
interstitial spaces between buildings and streets (Corner, 2006); residual spaces from
transportation and utility infrastructure (Garde, 1999); derelict land from industrial and
military sites (Corner, 2004; Berger, 2006; Donadieu, 2006); urban agriculture; landfills
(Belanger, 2009); and private open spaces on residential property, schools, cemeteries,
shopping malls, and parking spaces (Gill et al., 2007). The inclusion of these spaces to
form an urban green infrastructure network is intended to show the current capacity of
any urban region and its potential to increase the density of green infrastructure within
urban regions. This allows the provision of mitigation and adaptation measures at
multiple scales.
extensive network. For example, conservation of land through policy at the regional scale
for cultural, economic and ecological purposes (Benedict and McMahon, 2006); spatial
reserves (Solecki and Rosenzweig, 2004). Similarly, at the parcel scale, efforts such as
the Berlin biotope green area factor encourages owners to increase planted area and treat
run-off on site through financial incentives (BAF). The BAF incorporates hybrid systems
such green roofs and vertical vegetal surfaces. While the idea of incorporating green
infrastructure within urban regions may seem attractive, it is a space intensive measure.
26
Within space limitation in urban contexts, there is a need to intensify effort to find ways
and think of creative ways to ‘find’ space (Gill et al, 2007; Currie and Bass, 2008). This
study will address this aspect of the problem during the research process and will explore
the size and function of such a network along the urban-rural gradient.
There are four key ideas contained in the above definition that define green
implementation tools. The ideas are briefly explained to set the context for the discussion
on scale and using green urbanism and landscape planning literature to point out to
varying meanings of these ideas. By discussing the five ideas, an overarching framework
ecological and social systems. One could argue that networks of open spaces have
evolved as systems to preserve and use open space in lieu of urban development. GI is
Benedcit & McMahon, 2002, 2006; McDonald et al.) with varying focus on ecological
and social concerns that depend on spatial contexts and planning objectives. Networks of
open space simultaneously developed over time as urban park networks (The Emerald
Necklace in Boston and Chicago open space system by Fredrick Olmsted; Fabos and
Ryan, 2002) and regional systems (Elliot, McKaye and Lewis, 1996; Fabos, 1995).
Precedents to GI within the US and Europe have varyingly emphasized ecological and
first connected and multi-functional system of open spaces that combines recreational,
27
preservation of natural landscape and management of the hydrological systems criteria
(Ndubisi 2002, Fabos 1985, Fabos 1996, 2004, Ahern 2004). Contemporary examples
follow suite with varying emphasis on function and benefits. With primary ecological
and their interconnections that make a fragmented natural system coherent in order to
support more biological diversity than in its non-connected form (Opdam et al., 2002;
Jongman 2004; Jongman et al., 2004; Jones-Walters, 2007). Greenways are also an
social benefits (Fabos and Ryan, 2006; Hellmund and Smith, 2006; Imam, 2006;
Ribbeirto & Barao, 2006) with lesser extent on ecological processes (Ahern, 1995, 2004).
Examples of greenways range from regional examples such as the New England
Greenway System (Fabos et. al, ) to multi-scalar systems that connect urban core areas to
regional amenities such as the Confluence Greenway System in St. Louis to local rails for
trails such as the Norwottuck trail in Amherst, MA. Another example of networks is
Greenbelts which originate in the UK and used at the regional level to control urban
growth and provide recreational amenities for urban populations. It could be argued that
it is the antecedent to the contemporary urban growth boundary used by Smart Growth.
urban cores prompts it to be so. The common aspect between all these precedents to GI is
connectivity.
McMahon, 2006; Fabos & Ryan, 2002; Nadubisi, 2004; Mell, 2009; Kambites & Owen,
2006). Physical and functional connectivity is key for networks with an ecological
28
objective to ensure species diversity and flow of natural processes (biotic and abiotic
resources, Forman, 1995; Opdam, and Vos, 2002; Nadubisi, 2004; Jongman et al., 2004).
Connectivity within networks with a social and recreational focus ensures access to open
spaces resources within urban cores and regional contexts. Linear elements of green
transportation systems (biking and walking) define the linkages between parks and places
of living (Fabos & Ahern, 1996; Chiesura, 2004; Conine, at al., 2004; Ribbeirto & Barao,
2006). Connectivity is also critical to ensure resource continuity and protection such as
the plan for a GI network Barcelona, Spain (Forman, 2008). Connectivity functions at
multiple scales for multiple reasons to ensure ecological health, accessibility, and
resource protection. Connectivity depends on the individual spatial elements that form
the network.
for adaptation purposes, it is not evidently applicable or necessary. In this research, the
question of connectivity for adaptation purposes is left open and not addressed directly.
The spatial elements that define a GI network vary with objective and context.
hubs, and movement corridors (Forman, 1995; Nadibisi, 2002; Zonneveld, 2002; Ahern,
2007). The elements that compose an ecological network are core areas, buffer zones,
For example, that could include forests, lakes, river systems, wilderness reserves
and grass fields. The basic variable that defines the elements of an ecological network are
29
species consideration and ecological flows. Elements that compose a GI network for
human use and in proximity to urban areas, is a finer system of open spaces that includes
a larger typology.
within urban cores and on the urban periphery (Schilling & Logan, 2008). A GI within
cities may include neighborhood, city and regional parks; playgrounds and play fields;
community gardens, recreational trails and urban greenways, underused private and
public land, urban tree canopy including streets trees, public plazas, waterfronts, green
roofs, abandoned land that can be converted to new green spaces, and commercial
fringe, GI is comprised of larger green spaces that take advantage of lesser urbanization.
These may include waterways, wetlands, woodlands, wildlife habitats, greenways, large
parks, conservation land, working farms, ranches, forests, and riparian flood plains
(Fabos and Ahern, 1996; Randolph, 2004; Hough, 1995, 2004). In addition, deregulated
military sites, abandoned industrial sites, large logistical sites, spaces around and within
the urban fringe (Waldheim, 2006; Berger, 2006;Reed, 2006; Bellanger, 2006, 2007).
While GI within urban core and region areas are predominantly target human use and
benefits, ecological health of these elements is key to maintain and ensure the social and
cultural accrued benefits, thus the critical interdependency between ecological and social
30
systems. In this sense, a regional GI that connects the urban gradient has the potential to
related to urban land use (Table 2.2) and to landscape ecological principles (Table 2.3).
The intent is to ensure that the multi-scalar network incorporates as many types possible
and organized based on ecological principles set forth by green infrastructure planning.
The variability of size, and location within and outside urban cores and formal and
informal un-built spaces provide the stock of land that potentially can be incorporated
31
Regional Urban Regional Urban Corridors Regional Urban Matrix
Patches
Parks Utility Lines Sub-urban residential
Neighborhoods
Golf Courses Drainage ways Industrial districts
Wetlands Cultural greenways Waste Disposal Areas
Natural reserves Ecological greenways Commercial Areas
Forests River ways Mixed Use Districts
Urban Forest patches Transportation Corridors Urban cores
and environmental4 benefits. These benefits accrue to people and other species with
varying magnitudes. Ecological benefits for species may include habitat conservation and
processes, and ensuring the continuity of water systems processes (Benedict &
McMahon, 2002, 2006; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Report, 2006). The benefits
to ecological systems mean a healthy functioning system, which in turn, ensures the
provision of ecosystem services that people and the environment benefit from.
water pollutant reductions (Booth et al., 2002, 2004), enhanced groundwater recharge
(Brabec at al., 2002; Clausen, 2007), protection of soil, increased carbon sequestration
(McPaherson et al., 2008), adapting and mitigating to climate change (Gill et al., 2007;
4
I use the terms ecology and environment to differentiate what is termed biotic and
abiotic, respectively, within natural resource fields. Ecological pertains to living species
and environmental pertains to non-living such as soil, water, and air.
32
Currie & Bass, 2008; Mell, 2009; Hamin & Gurran, 2008), address flooding (Caroll,
2007) and improved air quality (EPA). The environmental and ecological benefits in turn
translate into social and cultural benefits directly connecting people with open space.
economic benefits. Kambites and Owen (2006) and Schilling, J. & Logan (2008) provide
opportunities through access to parks, improved exercise and walking, increased water
quality and quantity through best management practices, better connection to nature
through engagement and access, improved sense of place through greening and social
interaction, increased real estate values of property around open space, historical
rootedness through heritage conservation, local food production, and ameliorating urban
island heat impacts (Stone, 2010). While these benefits are not comprehensive, they
ecological health, environmental and social benefits are derived. Through ecological and
environmental services, social benefits are accrued by societies; and through best
ecological and environmental services are maintained. The best example of this feedback
ecological and environmental services are reduced due to changing climatic regimes. As
such, the benefits that people accrue, such as water use and food production, are affected
33
2.4.4 Implementation
design. The objectives of planning a GI is to lay out (Benedict and McMahon, 2002,
2006; Kambites and Owen, 2006; Ahern, 2007) the system strategically as a whole
governmental organizations, and the private sector are key to ensure the spatial whole.
There are two dominant approaches that follow the European spatial concept
model (Ahern, 1999; 2007) and the US comprehensive planning5 model. The European
approach defines a broad scale spatial concept, such as the ‘Green Heart’ in Holland, to
capture the image- ability of people and ensure marketability of the proposal (Shrijnen,
2000; Tjallinji, 2002). Resources are assessed; goals defined at the nationals scale, then
put out for stakeholder and community comments, then altered as necessary to reach a
consensus. Alternatively, the US approach is based on deriving goals and visions through
a public participation process that takes into account stakeholder needs and requirements.
suitability. Alternative plans are derived and discussed to arrive to consensus. The main
national (top down), and as such, statuary bodies define a broad vision where local plans
(which may be participatory in nature) are plugged into the overall vision. In the US,
planning is locally based (bottom up) with some level of state intervention. Land use
5
Comprehensive planning steps include: Identify issues, state goals, collect data, prepare
plan, create implementation plans, evaluate alternatives, adopt plan, and implementation
and monitoring.
34
decisions are directed at the town and city scale. At the state and national scales, rare
coordination exists that defines the overall outcome and impact. In both approaches,
assessment methods are similar based on geographic information systems and suitability
analysis methods (McDonald et al.; Conservancy Fund) based on values derived from the
context and holding national planning aside (for now), a spatial concept at the local scale
consuming. A spatial concept that communities can react to and suggest comments may
provide a better use of time and resources. Accordingly, conservation tools for GI
growth tools, conservation land, land trusts, and partnerships with private entities may be
developed.
What is apparent is the significance of scale and context in the reviewed models.
To account for varying objectives of land conservation, benefits, and spatial contexts to
address land transformation and climate change impacts and causes, approaches at
multiple scales that account for multiple variables are needed. To develop the rural
gradient framework of GI, scale and context variability is central to account to the
varying gradients of benefits, spatial configurations of patterns of use and GI, as well as
to ensure the network aspect of GI at multiple scales and across gradient sectors. The
discussion that follows attempts to discuss all the above aspects of GI in the context of
35
scale and context variability to redefine GI as a system of networks that functions across
address climate change impacts. The environmental impacts of climate change such as
increases temperatures, run-off storage and infiltration due to extreme precipitation can
an ecosystem based system, green infrastructure in the form of trees, for example, may
reduce temperatures within urban contexts. Retarding basins and infiltration swales allow
the delay of run-off and infiltration of excess rain water. This synergy renders green
Green infrastructure measures already exist in many cities in the form of urban
canopy, street trees, gardens, and parks. While these may not be conceptualized as green
infrastructure providing benefits, the advantage is that cities are already doing what at
least could be a first step. In other words, these ecosystem based measures may be
will also provide social, environmental, and cultural benefits. Therefore, the
complementarity between green infrastructure and adaptation needs provide the impetus
for cities and policy makers to enhance and intensify greening projects across urban
areas.
36
Climate Change Impacts Ecosystem Benefits of Green
Infrastructure
Increased run-off and flooding due to Reduce and run-off through retarding,
extreme precipitation events or rising storage and infiltration. Examples include
sea levels swales and tree canopy.
Local and global temperature increase Reducing surface and air local temperatures
by shading and evapotranspiration.
Anthropogenic emissions Improve air quality by reducing particles in
the air and act as CO2 sink thus mitigating
climate change and reducing local urban
heat island
Rising sea level leading to flooding, Coastal/ river, natural and engineered
erosion, and inundation. systems allow the absorption of any direct
impact and protection to dwelling areas.
Table 2.4: Complementarity of GI benefits and adaptation needs
The literature from climate change planning, land-use and urban planning suggest
two ways to mitigate climate change within urban regions. First, through denser and more
compact urban form and development (Lerch, 2007); and second, changing land uses
towards uses that ameliorate local and regional temperatures, such open spaces with
pervious surfaces (Stone, 2009). For this study, urban form is considered as a variable
effecting the distribution of open space and thus will be included and controlled for
Changing land-use and cover types aims to abate local and regional urban climate.
This is achieved by advocating planning and design that increases the quantity and
quality of vegetated surfaces6 (Gurran and Hamin, 2008; Gill et al., 2007; Gober et al.,
6Vegetal surfaces (green infrastructure) are both a mitigation and adaptation measure,
therefore a multi-functional and multi scalar system.
37
2010). The approach protects pockets of urban ecosystems and aims to promote vegetated
surfaces in creative ways within existing urban residential and commercial parcels,
infrastructural residual spaces, and tree canopy within transportation corridors. Vegetated
surfaces provide the potential to regain some of the lost predevelopment land cover to
mitigate and adapt to local climate changes (Stone, 2009). McPherson et al. (2008) show
that local climates maybe ameliorated by increasing tree canopy cover. In their One
Million Trees Assessment Study of Los Angeles, they have identified and quantified
reduction, and air quality improvement as direct benefits of urban tree cover. Therefore,
by promoting land use and cover changes at multiple scales, GI may be identified as a
To reduce GHG emissions, denser and more compact development may potentially
conserve energy use and reduce miles travelled (Ewing et al., 2008). Alternative public
commuter services and a strategic mix of uses may be needed to change people’s
preferences to drive less and use public transport (Lerch, 2007; Wheeler, 2009).
Therefore, the literature is advocating the use of denser and more compact development.
buildings and structures (Lerch, 2007). Multi-storey buildings and buildings that share
walls use less energy for heating and cooling, thus producing less emission and energy
waste (Lewis, 2006; Wilby, 2007). Compact and denser development may provide better
mitigation results and coincides with Smart Growth and Sustainable urban planning.
When considering adaptation (especially for flooding and temperature reduction), the
38
The current discussion on the suitability of compact and dense urban form comes
from the literature on sustainable urban planning (Berke, 2007; Wheeler, 2008). Jabreen
(2006) suggests that nontraditional development, compact city, urban containment, and
eco-city are urban forms that contribute to sustainability. He finds that compact city ranks
highest when compared to the other forms based on density, diversity, mixed land use,
Jabreen (2008) focuses on the built form itself, Berke (2007) surveys historical green
planning urban forms at the regional scale. He identifies centrist, poly-centrist, and de-
centrist models and compares them against five dimensions of green communities:
human health, natural systems, spiritual renewal, livability, and fair share. He finds that
the historical poly-centrist vision holds traction in contemporary planning thought. While
these two examples show that compact city form, at the urban or regional scale, maybe
the most suitable model for sustainable urban planning, they also suggest a conundrum of
space and density (Hamin and Gurran, 2008), when considered in conjunction with green
infrastructure.
Neuman (2005) refutes the argument of compact form based on evidence from the
literature. While he does not deny the benefits of compact and dense urban forms, and
rather than limiting the discussion on form, he argues that the process of living is more
indicative of the state of sustainability of urban areas than their form. He identifies five
diversity, and balance. He offers four common points: health, contextually, relationships,
and systems thinking. What Neuman (2005) and others (e.g Forman, 2008) suggest are
salient characteristics that would identify a certain urban form as sustainable or not.
39
Similarly, Alberti (1999) identifies centralization, density, grain, and connectivity as
spatial parameters of urban regions. The author assesses these urban patterns against
environmental performance such as sources, sinks, support systems, and human well-
being.
Within the context of the discussion of suitable urban form for climate change
planning, Hamin and Gurran (2008) offer an alternative urban form based on potential
performance. While the performance has not been empirically proven, they suggest that
“[T]the likely best urban form … must bring green space within settlements focused
along green transportation routes and flood plains (ribbons and corridors) rather than
large expanses (Hamin & Gurran 2008, p.242)”. This urban form may offer a possible
The discussion on different urban forms and their suitability for climate change
effective as an adaptation measure, surface land area and/or surface built areas (engineered
green infrastructure) should be allocated. This is not readily available in urban contexts
specially when land value is high and competition for real estate is continuously on the
rise.
Different urban forms provide varying possibilities to increase and expand green
infrastructure surfaces. Brabec and Lewis (2002), identify four urban regional forms that
provide an example for this discussion. They base their discussion on previous literature
(Lynch, 1954; Bacon, 1976) that resonate with more current research on the
environmental impact of different urban regional forms (Berke, 2008; Forman, 2008;
40
Jabreen, 2008; Wheeler, 2009). The nuclear form, such as Calgary in Canada (Figure 2.2,
bottom right) is characterized with a dense built center and a distinct definition with the
provides a clear example of a green city where pockets of densely built areas surround a
land in between. Clear definitions between built and un-built remain clear. A sprawled city
such as Chicago (Figure 2.2, top left) extends over land in a homogeneous manner with
patches of built and un-built areas somewhat equally distributed across the landscape. The
stellar city as in Buenos Aires (Figure 2.2, top right) extends along transportation
maximize the protection and expansion of existing and potential green infrastructure
spaces. The four urban types provide a glimpse of the varying possibilities for green
infrastructure policies across urban regions. For example, the focus within a nucleated
urban form may be on green roofs and street trees and small scale best management
practices (in addition to existing parks and open space) that do not require extensive space
because it is simply not available. On the other hand, a sprawled city may provide a larger
sprawl). Policies may vary from privately owned residential parcels, similar to the BOF to
increasing patches of urban forest, protection of river actuaries and transformation utility
lines. Tis demonstrates that re-equipping existing cities with green infrastructure measures
for adaptation will vary across urban regions and very much dependent on the availability
41
Figure 2.2: Four
F types off regional urbban form: CChicago, spraawl/constellaation city (toop,
leeft); Buenos Aires, Stellaar/Linear (to
op, right); W
Washington DDC, Green Ciity (bottom, left);
annd Calgary, Nucleus (bo ottom, right).. (Urban remoote Sensing:
htttp://sedac.cieesin.org/urban
n_rs/ )
42
CHAPTER 3
3.1 Introduction
feasible adaptation planning process is difficult given the uncertainties inherent in the
timing and magnitude of the change. The result is that it is easier for policymakers to
ignore climate change in their policymaking than risk being wrong, creating a significant
barrier to the implementation of climate adaptive actions (Dessai and Hulme 2007; Carter
2011). While reducing the underlying uncertainty will only occur through improvements
to climate science and modeling, reducing the impact of uncertainty can occur through
improved policy and planning processes. While significant research attention has been
paid to using scenario planning and vulnerability assessments to improve policy and
opportunities to reduce the impact of uncertainty. For planning purposes, what matters is
the pace of change over the planning period, rather than some eventual end-point. But
43
responses to the pace of climate change and the effectiveness of interventions already
undertaken, in a way that engages both scientific and local knowledge. We use case
studies of two cities that are already approaching adaptation planning in this way to
Overall this approach has several advantages. Perhaps most important, planned
phasing matches investment to the stage of climate change that the community is
experiencing. At the same time, it allows for incremental actions to build toward
process. This adaptive approach allows for testing of the efficacy of adaptive responses
already undertaken. In-situ monitoring of early and no-regrets policies will help
climate change, and thus inform what more needs to be done. Challenges remain—large
responses. But for the more gradual impacts of climate change, such as increased
excessive heat days, more erratic and larger storm events, and extended drought and
desertification, the model may be very helpful in providing a road map to move forward
The level of climate change that is already underway is startling (Kintisch 2009;
Rahmstorf et al. 2007), and fairly consistently ‘ahead of schedule’ (McKibben 2008). In
terms of mitigation, the hard fact is that global greenhouse emissions, far from declining,
are still increasing. In 2010, the annual rate of emissions growth was 2.35%, higher than
any of the previous five years (NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory 2011).
44
Emission levels are generally following the ‘high emissions scenario’ projected as a
worst case by the IPCC in 2007 (European Environment Agency 2011), and there is no
apparent movement towards global governance systems that would lead to significant
reductions (Stafford Smith et al. 2011). Recent findings that incorporate the growth of
emissions since 2007 suggest that the globe is currently headed toward 4°C (7.2 °F) of
global average climate change, even if emissions reductions begin soon, and impacts will
policy, uncertainty over the level of change is a key reason for difficulties in getting
policymakers to take action on climate change (Bedsworth and Hanak 2010; Moser and
function of magnitude, direction, and timing of change (Joshi et al. 2011). But given an
average 20-year urban planning horizon, the pace and timing of change may be an even
larger issue than where global climate eventually lands (Figure 3.1). As Figure
3.1demonstrates, a thirty-year plan (which is, admittedly, longer than most current policy
horizons) could use a 1.2°, a 2.2°, or a 4.0° projection depending on the choice of global
or regional forecast, and the longer the time horizon, the greater the uncertainty. And
these are not worst-case projections--none assume any ‘abrupt’ climate shifts (Alley et al.
2003).
45
Figure 3.1: Timing of regional and global climate change impacts under high-emissions
scenarios.
The plots show smoothed and simplified approximations of the projections in three
reports. The IPCC line is for A1FI scenario, which provides a best estimate of 4°C
temperature change at 2090-2099 relative to 1980-1999 (IPCC 2007, p. 45). Betts,
Collins et al. (Betts et al. 2011) use the IPCC A1FI scenario to estimate that a 4°C change
by 2060-2070 is within the IPCC’s ‘likely’ range. In contrast, at the regional level for the
Boston area, Frumhoff et al. (Frumhoff et al. 2007; Frumhoff et al. 2008) suggest that a
4°C change could be quite imminent.
Within the one to two decade time-frame that most plans work, the locally-
experienced impacts of climate change are likely to be relatively small compared to the
impacts of natural climate variability (IPCC 2012). Particularly at the local level it may
addressing a threat such as climate change that is less directly experienced, and more
climate change may in many cases be a more policy-beneficial approach than focusing on
46
one or the other. In view of this, we sought to identify an approach that did not explicitly
require the separation of natural and anthropogenic-caused climate problems, and instead
barriers while still allowing for short and long term climate-change informed planning.
At the urban level, the impact of climate events can be magnified (or reduced) by
the form and/or design of on-going urbanization processes (Hardoy and Pandiella 2009;
Schipper and Burton 2009; IPCC 2012), which create micro-climates that influence
human climate-experience and ecological functions. One key variable is the amount of
impervious surface. Higher imperviousness tends to lead to more flooding, more intense
urban heat island effects, and increased desertification (Arnold and Gibbons 1996;
Brabec 2009; Rosenberg et al. 2010; Stedinger and Griffis 2011). These affect an
environmental cycle that results in higher levels of particulates in the air; increased levels
of pollutants, particularly ozone; decreases in floral and faunal diversity and numbers;
and increasing destabilization of soils and floodplain systems (Stone, 2012). These in
turn result in a higher incidence of human health problems (Few 2007; Shea et al. 2008),
property damage and loss, and ecological degradation and species extinction (Nitschke
and Innes 2008). The poor tend to be disproportionately effected by these changes as
economic forces push them into areas that are highly impervious and flood prone with
high heat indexes and unstable soils (United Nations Human Settlements Programme
(UN-Habitat) 2011).
Thus, if cities are built without attention to the climate impacts of development
and the poor continue to be pushed into high risk areas, vulnerability to climate
47
variability increases regardless of climate change, and is magnified with it (United
adequate green infrastructure to reduce urban heat island effects, with on-site stormwater
variability. These types of policies, which provide sustainable environmental and social
benefits, are widely held to be the place to start for reasons both obvious and subtle. The
obvious benefit is that they create better places to live without even having to argue the
climate question (Heltberg, Siegel, and Jorgensen 2009). The less obvious reason is that
their micro-climate impacts may slow the need to undertake expensive larger-scale
interventions (Stone 2012). Conceptually, good design can mean that a global climate
temperature increase of 2°C may be locally experienced as the equivalent of 1°C, for
example.
Taken together, these factors make clear that uncertainty in the timing and local
impacts of climate change are a real and significant challenge to the municipal climate
adaptation process. The most common municipal and research response is to focus on
climate scenarios, often using two – a high and low change – assuming a relatively
straight line pace of change toward the projected degree (e.g., 2°C or 4°C) at the end of
the planning window. This is clearly better than assuming climate stability, but does not
fundamentally address the problem of timing, and the implications above, that climate
48
3.3 Municipa
al Adaptatio
on Planning
g Processes
prrojections in
nfluence infrrastructure caalculations aand the like ddirectly, withhout any speecific
models
m for ho
ow planning should be done.
d The cuurrent best-ppractices appproach to
ad
daptation plaanning follow
ws closely from
fr traditionnal comprehhensive plannning, but adds
more
m focus on
n risk assesssment, as sho
own in Figurre 3.2 below
w.
Figure 3.2: Th
he Adaptatio
on Planning process as rrecommendeed by the U.S S. National
Research
R Couuncil.
Note
N the iteraative processs steps (lightt grey arrowss) and focus on co-beneffits in step 44.
Adapted
A and redrawn fromm the US Naational Reseearch Counciil, (2010).
To appropriately phase
p adaptaation policie s in ways thhat address cuurrent climaate
brring together the advantaages of thesee three plannning approacches: the bigg-picture view
w of
in
ncrementalissm, and the continual
c tessting and utillity of adaptiive managem
ment. One
49
gu
uidance from
m the State of
o Californiaa to its cities and towns oon adaptationn, as shown in
well
w understo
ood because these modells follow clo sely from thhe highly-devveloped pracctices
not essential as
a in a climaate-variable environment
e t. As a resullt, our modeel particularlyy
ad
ddresses thiss post-plan, implementat
i tion phase, w
where there iis significannt opportunityy to
im
mprove practices.
50
3.3.1 Maladaptation in the Planning Process
Along with more opportunity for public engagement, one of the advantages of a
comprehensive process is that it allows for testing for maladaptation – defined by Barnett
and O’Neill (2010, p. 211) as “action taken ostensibly to avoid or reduce vulnerability to
climate change that impacts adversely on, or increases the vulnerability of other systems,
sectors or social groups.” They identify five distinct types of maladaptation: actions that
have high opportunity costs, reduce incentives to adapt, and set paths that limit the
The first type of maladaptation listed above, where adaptive actions actually
increase the use of fossil fuels, is a particular issue in developed countries and needs to be
reduces the individual health impacts of heat waves, but at a long-term and shared cost of
higher emissions. A particular challenge in phasing adaptation is the last issue in this set:
remedies appropriate to 2°C degrees may interfere with 4°C degree adaptations—for
example, investing in sea walls to address sea level rise appropriate to a 2°C global
temperature rise may make it more difficult to persuade homeowners of the need for
planned retreat of their built structures on the lot or indeed off the coast altogether as
change moves toward the sea level rise associated with a 4°C rise in temperature. In all
maladaptation, but the time and resources necessary to create a plan mean that it will
likely be rarely updated. This is a particular problem for climate change and its
uncertainties.
51
3.3.2 Mainstreaming and Incremental Change
steps be taken toward very specific policy goals, with little effort toward a fully
incrementalism by focusing on the need for consistent testing, monitoring, and revision of
policy as new information becomes available (Jacobson et al. 2009; Nelson, Adger, and
Brown 2007).
demonstrates that rather than the unexpected, change is to be anticipated and tends to
occur when thresholds are passed. As a result, planning needs to prepare social and
ecological systems so that when stresses occur, systems can reorganize in a beneficial
way to achieve a new and desirable system state (Folke 2006; Walker and Salt 2006).
This focus on small steps and the underlying processes brings significant advantages to
the planning process, but may come at the cost of long-term vision and policy coherence.
The model (we propose is presented and its elements are discussed in the sections
52
Figure 3.4: Windows
W of Opportunity
O Climate Addaptation Moodel is basedd on phasing of
policy to match new cond ditions.
A critical path h is determinned by the co ommunity (bblack dottedd line) wheree ATPs are
id
dentified along this path.. The ATPs trigger
t moviing from onee phase of poolicies to thee
otther, from no o-regrets to transformatiional policiees. Windowss of opportunnity for plannning
att the initial stage
s and priior to phase transitions
t aallows for plaan revisions based on
feeedback loop ps where mo onitoring is carried
c out w
within short pperiods of tim
me set by thhe
coommunity. The T model ap pplication reesults in antiicipating inccremental additions to poolicy
alllowing matcching of inteerventions to o experienceed (or anticippated) climatte conditionss.
Comm
monly, comp
prehensive pllans are deepply tied to tiime, with speecific roll-ouut
hange’s cond
ch ditions of tim
ming uncertaainty as desccribed abovee, it is much less effectivve.
Because
B of th
his, a revised
d planning ap
pproach willl focus on testing the acttual environm
ment
an
nd matching
g that to inveestments, rath
her than plannning roll-ouut of policy based on speecific
years into thee future. To achieve thiss, plans shouuld identify inncremental ppolicies thatt can
ro
oll-out as needed, and th
hat may cumu
ulatively creeate a transfoormed state ((Pittock, Jonnes,
an
nd Mitchell 2001; Wilso
on 2009). Fo
ollowing Parkk et al. (20122), transform
mation is deffined
53
as policies “that fundamentally (but not necessarily irreversibly) results in change in the
location (state) to another” while incremental actions seek to maintain the essence and
integrity of an incumbent system (Park et al. 2012, , p. 119) (O’Brien 2012). In seeking
to appropriately phase adaptation policies in ways that address current climate variability
as well as on-going climate change, our model proposes a process that brings together the
comprehensive planning, the specific goals and policy steps of incrementalism, and the
The initial steps the community is likely to take are the no-regrets policies that
many authorities have identified as the appropriate place to start. The IPCC defines these
as “policies that would generate net social and/or economic benefits irrespective of
whether or not anthropogenic climate change occurs” (Glossary E-O 2007; see also
Callaway and Hellmuth 2007; Heltberg et al., 2009; Lempert and Collins 2007). One of
the key benefits to no-regrets policies in urban environments is that they may, as noted
above, reduce or delay the need to move to the next phase of the plan, with more
intensive response. At some point, however, movement to a more intense policy phase is
likely to be needed. In our model and increasingly in other studies, phasing is based on
thresholds (Walker and Salt 2006), or what (Kwadijk et al. 2010) call Adaptation Tipping
Points (ATPs) -- moments in time where the magnitude of climate change is such that the
current management strategies are no longer meeting local objectives, and new strategies
need to be put into place. ATPs are recognized through the use of indicators, defined as
54
statistical evaluative rubrics that reflect the status of a more complex system (Kates,
Travis, and Wilbanks 2012), or at the local level as proxies for the status of the system.
The ATPs are representations of local conditions and values and climate as
‘noise’ from ‘signal’, scalar considerations (local versus regional), and the complex
politics of decision making, using a suite of indicators in concert with local values will be
more effective than any attempt to identify one threshold measure that indicates the need
to move to the next phase. The indicators may be categorized into three types: climate
related, social, and local urban environmental indicators. A portfolio of indicators can
include those that are scientifically robust, and those that are more locally meaningful
even if less scientifically robust (Boulanger 2008; Feiden and Hamin 2011).
to be easily available. In the U.S., for example, NOAA has developed Global Climate
Change Indicators7 while the U.S. Global Change Research Program prepares a national
climate assessment and is developing a rigorous set of indicators including societal data.8
The Annual Greenhouse Gas Index prepared by NOAA provides a simple number of
cumulative global emissions (US EPA 2010). Europe has developed indicators for
7
See http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/indicators/
8
See http://globalchange.gov/what-we-do/assessment
55
widespread use, especially the 2008 indicators report for climate impacts (European
2008), the 2012 environmental indicators report for greenhouse emissions and
environmental conditions (European Environment Agency 2012), and the on-going data
sets available on the EEA website. Data for developing countries is available through the
World Bank Climate Change Knowledge Portal,9 although with less detail than the US or
European initiatives.
Global level indicators, however, cannot take account of the local effects of
context that occur outside the plan, such as new up-shore developments. As a result,
locally derived and relevant indicators are an important part of the process. Local
indicators provide the opportunity to engage community members, perhaps the climate
planning steering committee or other local board, as well as local staff in both defining
what is meaningful in the particular context of that plan, and in regularly measuring and
reviewing outcomes. While the more scientific indicators provide validity, locally
the need for the policy change (Gasteyer and Flora 2000), and respond to the IPCC’s
2012 call for more direct inclusion of local knowledge in planning. Examples of local
extreme heat days in the region; number of bank-full and/or flood stage days; the increase
in level of mean high tide; levels of base flow in area rivers as an indicator of drought;
miles of beach impacted by storms; the number of individuals hospitalized for heat stress
9
For Brazil, for instance, see http://data.worldbank.org/country/brazil#cp_cc
56
or asthma; or similar indicators. The number of times a sea wall is overtopped per year,
for instance, may be a locally-meaningful indicator that encourages action—but for that
to happen, the record of occurrences must be made and annually reviewed. By focusing
on local impacts (e.g. heat waves experienced) rather than only the causes (globally
higher GHG) these kind of indicators help to overcome the uncertainty of microclimate
opportunity for regular discussion, on what would constitute an ATP for the local
community. Local values will determine whether they can tolerate three days when roads
are flooded per year? Five? One event per year with more than 10 residents hospitalized
due to heat stroke? These are not likely to be easy decisions, and require the community
to engage very directly with deciding on acceptable levels of loss and risk management.
This also allows better integration of local knowledge systems into formal institutions.
London’s plan for the Thames barrier provides a recent example of combining
phasing, indicators and ATPs. By maintaining a 1000-year flood standard, using the dual
indicators of freeboard and storm surge, and incorporating various levels of projected sea
level rise, the city of London identified the tipping points for increasing the height of the
Thames Barrier (see Figure 3.5). While this is an analogous application of the theoretical
basis of our model, the model goes beyond this application to include multiple adaptation
57
Figure 3.5: An
A example of o phased eng gineering addaptation forr the Thamess Barrier,
reesponding to
o potential cllimate chang
ge trigger pooints (Reederr et al. 2009,, 62)
The ap
pplication off the proposeed model is illustrated an
and groundedd through tw
wo
caase study ex
xamples. Thee examples were
w selectedd from a largger pool of cclimate
ch
hange impaccts and wentt beyond asseessment to im
mplementatiion, regardleess of geograaphic
10
0
Georgetown n Climate Cen nter clearing house
h
(h
http://www.geeorgetownclim mate.org/adap ptation/clearinnghouse); ICL
LEI adaptatioon
reesources(http:://www.icleiuusa.org/climatte_and_energgy/Climate_A Adaptation_Guuidance/free-
cllimate-adaptaation-resourcees?searchtermm=climate+addaptation+planns); NOAA aadaptation andd
acction plans daata base
(h
http://collaborrate.csc.noaa..gov/climateaadaptation/Lissts/Resources/AdaptationAAction%20Plaans.as
pxx); and the Un nited Nationss Environmennt Programmee(UNEP), clim mate change aadaptation
reesources sectiion
(h
http://unfccc.iint/adaptation
n/workstreamss/nairobi_worrk_programm me/items/65477.php)
58
the implementation model as possible including a form of phasing or gradual
indicators; monitoring periods; and the provision of time periods and transitions for plan
update based on hard evidence that we term ‘windows of opportunity’ for planning
implementation. In both case studies, analysis was carried out to extract the components
approach was utilized when the details existed in the plan allowing minimal processing of
information. A prescriptive approach was used when details were lacking and required
additional processing and analysis. In each case study relevant components were
59
identified, simplified and then mapped against the community critical path. Adaptation
measures were reorganized to fit the continuum of measures with specific attention given
to ensure that later measures were built onto previous ones and supported future
conditions, while maintaining the objectives of the plan. Where measures were missing,
The selected plans are unusual and particularly useful when presented according to the
by considering triggers for movement to the next stage of their adaptation plan. Thus
they provide examples of policy phasing that may reduce (while not necessarily
3.5.1 Managing Rising Sea Level Impacts: The City of Clarence, Tasmania,
Australia
The Clarence City adaptation plan for coastal areas (Clarence City Council 2009)
provides a road map for adaptation for risk prone areas within the city boundaries. The
plan develops solutions that support the continued use of coastal areas while recognizing
the need for long term protection, accommodation and retreat as sea levels rise (SLR).
“While use may be practical and desirable for many years, there will come a trigger when
a response will be required to manage increasing risk (Clarence City Council 2009, iv)”.
In Clarence’s case, the triggering event, or ATP in our terminology, is specific levels of
performance based responses that maintain acceptable levels of risk (Clarence City
Council 2009, v)”. The plan demonstrates that managing risk today through adaptation
60
measures
m can
n reduce impacts from seea level rise ““from a factor of 10 up tto a factor off
in
n the decision making prrocess in spitte of the chaallenges this poses to deccision makerrs.
In
nteractive strrategies that are participatory and coombine bottoom-up and toop-down
ap
pproaches en
nhance a “co
ommunity’s ability to coope and maxiimize comm
munity suppoort
fo
or policy meeasures, espeecially in thee case of drasstic measurees (Clarence City Counciil
2009, v).” Th
he combination of these principles
p reender the adaaptation plann flexible and
op
pen for imprrovement an
nd revisions as
a the effectiiveness of innterventions becomes cleear
an
nd impacts of
o climate ch
hange increaase.
Figure 3.6: Ph hasing Modeel for Lauderrdale Area, C City of Clareence, Austraalia.
The
T plan detaails include several
s comp ponents of thhe Windowss of Opportunnity model. For
th
his article, we
w focus on one
o high risk k zone and appply the moddel (Figure 33.6)—
Lauderdale
L an
nd Roche Beeach--out off the eighteenn identified rrisk zones. L
Lauderdale iss a
4,300m long low-lying saandy isthmuss with duness and housinng developmeent. The plann
id
dentifies threee major hazzards for thiss area: storm
m surge and eerosion, inunndation, and
riising water tables leadingg to failing septic
s tanks. Complicatinng the situattion is currennt
61
coastal beach movement processes (not related to climate change), 11 which will occur at
a faster pace under a changing climate condition.
The plan uses six primary and thirteen secondary variables to identify the extent
of exposure resulting in a risk priority ranking: areas currently at risk (next 25 years),
areas at medium risk (25-75 years), and areas with longer term risk (beyond 75 years).
Sea level rise (SLR)12 scenarios are developed for the whole city based on IPCC (2007,
17) emission projections with mid and high values for three milestone years: present
(zero SLR), 2050 (mid at 0.2m and high at 0.3m SLR), and 2100 (mid at 0.5m and 0.9m
SLR). Triggering conditions or ATPs are estimated for each zone based on the indicators
of the current 100 year Average Return Interval (100yr ARI) for erosion/recession of the
coastline, wave run-up, and inundation. ATPs will be triggered when the 100 yr ARI
would likely lead to significant damage to property or where more extreme events would
critical path and ATPs were deemed realistic and probable by experts working on the
The first window of opportunity is used to refine the plan by conducting detailed
studies of all risk zones, secure immediate and long term funding, undertake cost-benefit
assessments of measures, and update climate information and indicators. Phases after
11
The plan identified any combination of the following coastal processes not related to climate
change: adjust to past sea level rise (post ice age) or recent sea level rise, long shore drift, storm
cut and rebuild, beach rotation, and changes in sea grass colonies that may trap or release sand (
Clarence city Council 2009, 52).
12
SLR based on Australian Height Datum (AHD) in Tasmania is based on mean sea level for
1972 at the tide gauges at Hobart and Burnie which was assigned the value of zero on the AHD.
62
implementation are the next windows of opportunity, in which the outcomes of policy
interventions on microclimates can be evaluated and the plan can be revised. Future plan
measures, lessons learned and evaluation of the ATPs. A five year period is suggested in
the plan as a review period or the monitoring feedback loop in the model. The plan
explicitly recognizes the need for evidence based monitoring by observation and ground
climate. The provision of initial, transition, and monitoring time periods allow for the
accommodate the changing coastline, and ultimately recommends retreat if ATPs indicate
the necessity. The full set of measures included in the plan is clear enough to be
reorganized into the continuum of measures in our model with no additional processing
required. These are included in the model application (Figure 4), providing a continuous
approach where implemented measures support future policies. An example for existing
properties protection is increasing the height and vegetation of existing sand dunes as no-
regrets measures that could transition into the construction of a sea wall, phased in based
on ATPs. At present, using the indicator of wave run-up, the current level for a 100yrARI
is 2.8m and dune average height (where present) is 3.5m. Minor sand nourishment to fill
gaps and vegetation for stabilization will provide immediate protection. When the ATP
for wave run-up of between 2.8m to 3.2m is reached, additional height will be added
(approximately 1-2m) to ensure protection. When the ATP of 3.7m is reached, topping
existing dune height, then additional height of another one to two meters may be
63
required. If monitoring of the indicator shows that the future trajectory seems to be
exceeding set thresholds, then an ATP has been reached, and transitioning to sea walls is
triggered.
The plan provides a cost metric that is also used as an ATP, based on the cost of
adaptation measures per protected dwelling. As long as the cost of measure per dwelling
remains lower than the value of the property, the next phase of adaptation is deemed
feasible. While the plan explicitly states this principle and there is no provision of an
average property value to assess and include in the model diagram. The following
example may demonstrate the utility of the cost metric. The cost of sand nourishment at
present conditions for a 100yrARI is $136,000 per property for nineteen protected
properties. With an SLR of 0.3 and protecting 108 properties with sand nourishment, the
cost is $71,000 per property; for a 0.9 SLR and 195 protected properties, the cost
increases to $119,000 per property. When compared to the cost of a sea wall for the same
number of protected dwellings, at present SLR 100year ARI, the cost per dwelling is
This cost metric is also used to reduce the extent of exposure to risk. Prior to the
25 year cut-off period, it is assumed that owners have located within these this risk area
prone without knowledge of the associated future risks. After 25 years, and with
awareness and communication campaigns set by the plan, residents will be assumed to
have made a conscious choice to locate in a risk-prone area. At that time more costs will
64
Using the proposed model, we organize the gradient of responses identified for
regrets responses are critical for implementation as soon as possible, and as the plan notes
will provide protection and maintain the coastline as an amenity. As monitoring of the
such as sea walls and planned retreat kick in, assuring adequate responses. Mapping out
the likely policies and the conditions indicating their need means that maladaptation is
3.5.2 Managing flood impacts from Extreme Precipitation Events: The City of
Copenhagen, Denmark
2011 to address an array of climate change impacts with a particular focus on extreme
precipitation events and rising sea level. Such extreme conditions are already occurring in
Copenhagen. The cloudburst event of July 2011 poured down 150mm of rain within two
hours, a city record since measurements began in the mid-1800s. The result was an
estimated insurance damage of 650-700 million Euros ($US 820-880 million) (EEA
2012). This focusing event helped the City of Copenhagen to expedite research and
development of the comprehensive adaptation plan in a way that allows gradual and
The plan presents many exemplary practices, but for our purposes its main
interest is its principle that adaptation should be flexible and staged. The plan is
65
climatically responsive planning. The prioritization, implementation and extent of
(Table 3.0.2): level 1, to reduce the likelihood of occurrence of an extreme event; level 2,
to reduce the scale of impact; and level 3, to reduce the extent of vulnerability. The
(level 1) is not feasible within a zone, then reducing the scale of impact (level 2) to
measures, the choice of action will also depend on the geographic scale where the action
is being implemented. Table 1 shows the relationship of the three levels of measures and
the five geographic scales of planning relevant to Copenhagen: the region, the
municipality, the district, the street, and the building. This approach ensures coordination
and integration across planning scales and measure intensities, thereby better avoiding
66
Level1: Level 2: Level 3:
Reduce Likelihood Reduce Scale Reduce Vulnerability
Delay quantities of rain in Emergency preparedness Protection of vulnerable
catchment: Establishment of and infrastructure protection infrastructure Metro, S-
detention basins within Protection of vulnerable trains, tunnels, cultural
catchment areas. infrastructure Metro, S- assets.
Pumping excess run-off to trains, tunnels, cultural
sea assets.
Region
Raised building
elevation/threshold***
Local management of storm Control of stormwater Moving vulnerable
water: Plan B solutions, runoff: disconnection of functions and installations
separation of stormwater stormwater using SUDS. to safe places: moving
from sewer Preparedness: sandbags etc., electrical cabinets for light
Raised building raised building regulation, pumping
Street
67
bee incorporated into all releevant municip
pal plans. 2) S
Separation of common sew
wer in SUDS
so
olutions is to be promoted and implemeented (City off Copenhagenn 2011, 27)”.
sh
hown in Tab
ble 1 were ree-categorized
d into three m
main headinggs with the ccorrespondinng
co
ontinuum off measures: 1)
1 reduction of quantitiess of flood w
water going innto the seweer
sy
ystem (disco
onnection off storm waterr from combbined sewer ssystem, deteention/retentiion
(rredesign sew
wer system, pumping
p watter to sea, ettc.); protectioon of infrasttructure and
asssets (raising
g levels, mov
ving sensitiv
ve facilities, building dikkes; and general emergenncy
ru
un in parallel to ensure adequate
a clim
mate proofinng of Copenhhagen.
Figure 3.7: Ph
hasing Modeel applied to
o the Copenhhagen Climatte Adaptatioon Plan (2011)
68
Monitoring is planned for four-year periods. In addition to plan updates,
ATPs, these windows of opportunity provide the chance to address context specific
necessary to reduce the likelihood of extensive run-off from extreme climate events
The plan’s ATPs are based on indicators of total flooded area (from extreme
precipitation and wave surge) and sea wave surge. Similar to the Clarence case study, a
financial metric is used to evaluate every step of the adaptation implementation. The risk
adaptation measures. The risk index is calculated as the difference of the public cost of
adaptation measures and the cost of potential risks based on a specific ATP condition.
The application of the model to these two exemplary cases demonstrates that
uncertainty involved. While the plans vary in the areas addressed, context, and
methodology, both plans recognize the need to move ahead with adaptation because the
costs of ignorance are too high. In the context of uncertainty of information about the
69
and incrementally adds measures as needed using information, advance technology, and
address the barrier of the high cost of adaptation, both cities anticipate moving gradually
while monitoring the need for next measures. Focusing on conditions rather than time
Urban areas need to build resilience to climate change and variability. Implicit in
the approach presented in this article is the subtle but radical suggestion that phasing of
policy be linked to locally experienced outcomes, rather than a strongly pre-defined plan
that rolls out over time. This allows a focus on the local experience of environmental
change and the outcomes of interventions put into place. Allowing this flexibility reduces
reduced. Action will only be taken when it is warranted – but plans are in place so that
tipping points (ATPs) allows for the explicit inclusion of local knowledge, and reduces
the need to differentiate between climate change and climate variability. Indicator sets
be translated to common language such that communities can readily use them. National
or state level agencies may wish to develop suggestions for local indicators, to help jump-
start community considerations. While we have used an urban planning framework, the
70
basic approach of adaptive planning with pre-determined thresholds is also applicable to
starting with no-regrets policies (Biesbroek et al. 2010; Juhola, Peltonen, and Niemi
2012), many of which are well-established best urban planning practices anyway. These
are the policies of sustainable social and environmental development, including strategies
for increasing green infrastructure in urban systems, increasing public and non-motorized
implementing these policies for cleaner, greener, healthier cities can slow the need for
change.
There is a great deal that is not addressed here. Perhaps the most pressing item is
the difficulty of large dollar and long-time-frame investments, those that do not yield to
many years, and storm water piping lasts decades; for these major, long-term
projections is needed now. Other challenges come from the need to balance scientific
with the stakeholders and elected officials, accustoming them to working around
uncertainty and time concepts suggested by this approach to the planning process.
71
Given the long time horizons of urban land use and infrastructure, it is essential
that local officials begin including climate adaptation in their planning, but given the
uncertainties inherent in climate projections, it is difficult for them to move forward. The
strength of the approach presented in this paper is the ability to make incremental
view that minimizes maladaptation. And at this point in time, the imperative is to
72
CHAPTER 4
4.1 Introduction
When considering the range of spatial planning actions that cities can take to
adapt to climate change, many of them fall under the conceptual umbrella of green
infrastructure (GI). GI has been defined as the spatial planning of landscape systems at
multiple scales and within varying contexts to provide open space, safeguard natural
systems, protect agricultural lands, and ensure ecological integrity for cultural, social, and
ecosystem benefits (Benedict and McMahon, 2002, 2006; Ahern, 2008). While the
traditional definition of GI refers to areas of land that are least intervened by human
action, in this expanded definition, we are deliberately including areas that are engineered
Although climate adaptation is a fairly new policy goal for GI (Gill et al., 2007;
CCAP, 2011), three key characteristics qualify GI as a suitable tool for adaptation
needs), multi-scalar nature of the spatial elements, and a ‘no-regrets approach’. However,
GI needs to be matched to the character of the urban environment and coordinated across
jurisdictions and planning scales to become an effective adaptation policy. In this chapter,
we present a policy framework, the green infrastructure transect, that can help planners
and policymakers identify appropriate GI policies for different urban environments and
describe how these policies can create a regional adaptation planning framework.
73
One of the primary principles of green infrastructure (GI) planning is to reconnect
communities in urban regions to natural environments (Lewis 1964; McHarg 1969; Noss
and Harris 1986; Benedict and McMahon 2002, 2006; Jongman 1995; Jongman et al.
2004; Fabos 2004). This is achieved through practices within and around cities that
identify, protect, and create spatial elements that provide ecosystem services that
community parks and recreation trails, greenways, ecological networks, restored streams,
natural reserves, gardens, engineered natural systems, green roofs and facades, and
conserved agricultural land are all within the scope of GI. Furthermore, the same spatial
areas also provide urban cooling, storm water management, flood water storage, flora and
fauna habitat, and biking and walking routes. All of these urban functions must be
accepted practice (Benedict and McMahon 2002; Ahern 2008). GI has become part of
current sustainable planning and design practices in many cities (EPA 2011; Newman
and Jennings 2008; Farr 2008). These initiatives function at multiple scales to improve
urban living conditions. These may include retention ponds and swales (at the parcel
scale), green streets and parks (at the neighborhood scale), increased tree canopies (at the
urban scale), and greenways (at the regional scale). As an accepted practice, GI is also a
74
beneficial regardless of whether climate change scenarios materialize. For example, urban
greening results in cleaner air and cooler temperatures that would address current
problems (pollution and urban island heat effect) as well as ameliorate future increasing
sea levels, communities can take advantage of the cultural, social, and health benefits of
cleaner and greener environments, regardless of the future magnitude of climate change
impacts.
within urban regions (notably GI’s multifunctional and multi-scalar properties) make it
adaptation into current planning practices. The GI transect is a conceptual tool that
integrates GI measures across varying urban contexts and across planning scales. It builds
13
In the early twentieth century, the natural transect became one of the foundational tools
of ecological research. The evidence that certain flora and fauna flourished symbiotically
together within specific mineral and climactic environments became the ethical basis for
the protection of species. Patrick Geddes (1854–1932) adopted the ecological transect as
75
specifically use the urban transect as a stepping stone to develop this framework.
The urban transect (Duany and Talen 2002) was devised as an urban planning tool
live and work. The urban transect identifies six zones (urban core, urban center, general
urban, suburban, rural, and natural) with distinct physical boundaries as units of study.
These zones form a planning model applicable within many urban contexts. The zones
provide the basis for a neighborhood structure based on walkable streets, mix of uses,
transportation options, and traditional architectural styles and housing diversity. The
strength of the urban transect is in describing the appropriate built forms and identifying
interventions within each urban zone in a simple and comprehensible manner. The
concept falls short of specifying the respective open spaces and natural functions that
respond to the specific urban contexts and needs within each transect zone.
and interdependencies between eco-zones and used to assess the physical, biological, and
natural processes within and across eco-zones. Contrary to the urban transect, it does not
specify distinct spatial zones. Rather, the characteristics of different local ecosystems
define different habitat zones and the relationship between them. This same principle is
later adopted within landscape and regional planning to assess and understand
a model to devise the ‘valley section’ (Geddes 1915). Taken from ridgeline to shoreline,
the ‘valley section’ shows natural conditions with their associated human presence and
occupation to show a gradation of human preference for location and work. Based on
Geddes, Lewis Mumford’s (1895–1990) concept of human ecology was used to develop
a decentralized regional vision of metropolitan areas (Mumford 1937). Ian McHarg
(1920–2001) applied the natural transect for land conservation in landscape planning
showing transitions and relationships within and across natural eco-zones (McHarg
1969).
76
relationships between land, and natural and human systems in order to plan and manage
natural resources within urban regions (McHarg 1969; Picket 2004;Berger 2006).
Overall, the GI transect combines the general principles of urban and natural
transects into a single assessment model. The primary characteristics are three: first, the
indicators); second, the designation of urban zones as unique spatial contexts that may
impact the adaptive capacity of communities within; and third, the explicit consideration
boundaries.
tation policies across the GI zones increasing the local capacity for adaption. We qualify
this level of policy integration as ‘horizontal integration’. The term is meant to generate
boundaries14 (within scales). This is achieved by mapping and assessing each GI zone
against a set of criteria to be able to recommend targeted GI measures. Six GI zones are
identified and are intended to represent an alternative model (to the urban transect) of
contemporary urban regions. These include coastal (if present), urban core, urban,
transition (the middle ground), suburban, and peri-urban zones. In addition, we use the
following criteria to assess each GI zone: vulnerability assessment using spatial data
14
Cross-jurisdictional coordination was identified as a primary concern when assessing
the 4,000 GI networks across the conterminous USA for their ecological connectivity
where 10% of the hubs and links cross administrative and political boundaries. When
down-scaling the same observation to regional and local scales, forest stands, water
bodies, and wetlands are not restricted to regional, city, town, or property boundaries.
77
(p
physical and
d social), iden
ntifying the primary clim
mate change impact baseed on spatiall
co
onfiguration
n and charactter, identifyin
ng the spatiaal character of each GI zzone,
determining the
t spatial co
onfiguration of pervious and imperviious surfaces (existing aand
ap
ppropriate GI
G measures within each GI zone (Figgure 4.1). T
The sequential process off
prroviding a sp
pecific policcy focus to lo
ocal communnities for adaaptation andd the possiblee
reesponses thro
ough GI.
en
ngineering swales
s and raain garden sy
ystems. The se GI spatiall elements arre not restriccted
to
o regional, ciity, town, orr property bo
oundaries as they are subbject to condditions (i.e.
to
opography, geology,
g and
d hydrology)) beyond the control of ggoverning boodies. Thereffore,
an
nalysis and assessment
a should
s consiider recomm
mendations w
within each zzone and the
ou
utward exten
nsions of GII. By mappin
ng adjacent sspatial configgurations, hoorizontal
in
ntegration is attained. Th
his enhances the adaptatiion capacity of local com
mmunities
th
hrough coord
dination of policies.
p Yet, it does not account for coordinationn across
ju
urisdictional boundaries and plannin
ng scales neccessary for reegional resiliiency.
78
Developing a network of GI increases the resiliency of a region. It provides
alternative evacuation routes, species migration routes, CO2 sinks, flood water storage,
buffer zones against rising sea water and reduction in regional temperatures. To achieve a
urban, regional) into a single regional planning framework providing a platform for
hierarchal especially when planned within urban contexts. When considering GI for
hierarchy of urban planning scales (street or parcel neighborhood, city, and urban region)
(Kato 2010). For example, several streets with bio-swales and retention ponds in
residential yards at the neighborhood scale can constitute a green corridor at the city scale
which, in turn, with city parks can be part of a regional park system (Jim and Chen 2003;
Girling and Kellett 2005). But each individual GI element (parcel to regional scales) is
planned and implemented differently, depending on the context, size, and planning
process. Vertical integration provides a way to unify these processes under a hierarchal
Integration across scales is necessary to increase the adaptive capacity at both the
regional and local levels. The adaptive planning meta-model developed by Kato (2010),
process designed for the US context. Similar to the GI hierarchy, neighborhood plans that
79
arre participato
ory in naturee form the baasis of an urrban plan. Thhe sum of thhe several urbban
participatory
(p y) could lead
d to a regionaal vision. Thhe reverse (toop-down plaanning) may also
of whether th
he vision (top
p-down) or local planninng (bottom-uup) comes firrst, the intenntion
here is to adv
vocate for a two-way
t and
d iterative appproach that includes botth and proviides
th
he flexibility
y and adaptab
bility to resp
pond as circuumstances arrise and channge.
80
4.3 Boston Metropolitan Region
The metropolitan region of Boston occupies the eastern shoreline of the state of
2
Massachusetts in the USA. It covers a land area of approximately 12,000 km , housing
4.5 million people with an average density of 366 persons per square kilometer (Census
Bureau 2010). The metropolitan region incorporates 120 towns and 8 regional
core (Boston) as the center of governance, business, and transportation. From the urban
corridors and around commercial centers is interspersed by forest, wetlands, river basins,
and, to lesser extent, agricultural land (Figure 4.3 and Figure 4.4). At the planning level,
the state of Massachusetts (MA) has adopted and is implementing smart growth
principles to control development and preserve natural and cultural assets.15 Part of the
smart growth initiative is the Climate Action Plan (CAP 2007, 2010). The plan is focused
management, and land use. In the 2010 update of the plan, recommendations for
adaptation were included as part of addressing causes and effects of climate change.
The NECIA (2007) report on climate change impacts within the New England
region shows that Massachusetts climate will resemble the southern states of the Eastern
Coast of the USA.16 Taking the year 2000 as the baseline, the report demonstrates that the
15
Since planning is locally based and participatory, the state of Massachusetts may only
advance these planning principles through financial incentive means. Towns and cities
may develop their comprehensive zoning, recreation and open space, and economic
development plans based on smart growth principles in return for financial incentives.
16
Under the high emissions scenario, the Massachusetts climate will likely resemble that
of the current Florida climate and under a lower emissions scenario will resemble the
current weather of Northern Carolina.
81
⁰
metropolitan
m region of Bo
oston will ex
xperience inccrease in tem
mperatures bby 4–7 C in tthe
⁰
winter
w and 3–
–8 C in the su
ummer, risin
ng sea level of 25–60 cm
m, and increaased precipittation
by
y 20–30%. To
T address th
hese impactss, the City off Boston ideentified guideelines for
ad
daptation plaanning (CAP
P 2010) that include, in aaddition to eeconomic annd social
measures,
m spaatial measurees that focuss on GI.
82
Figure 4.4: Metropolitan
M n region of Boston:
B greenn infrastructuure across toown boundarries
The ad
daptation reccommendatiions for Bostton (CAP 20010) set prioorities and deefine
th
he required information
i and
a planning
g priorities aand approachhes. Out of tthe thirteen
reecommendattions, many focus on GI principles ssuch as greenning the cityy, green roofs
fs,
su
ustainable water
w manageement, and protection
p annd increase oof large tractts of vegetateed
su
urfaces. In addition, plan
nning cross-jjurisdictionss and scales iis identified as a priorityy to
in
ncrease the adaptive
a capaacity of the urban
u regionn.
ap
pply the GI transect
t to assess
a the app
plicability off the multi-ttiered organiizational
frramework to
o Boston. In the assessmeent stage, wee map vulneerability, clim
mate change
im
mpacts, and the physicall environmen
nt across thee GI zones (F
Figure 4.5). V
Vulnerabilityy is
mapped
m g the followiing spatial data layers froom Mass GIIS17: topograaphy, open space,
using
17
7
Mass GIS is
i a spatial data
d portal managed
m by thhe state of M
Massachusettts that providdes a
83
ro
oads, locatio
on within thee watershed, and socio-ecconomic datta for each loocation. Clim
mate
im
mpact is map
pped accordiing to the NE
ECIA (20077) report show
wing the maagnitude andd
fo
ocus within each
e zone. Aerial
A imagees are used too map the urrban characteer identifyinng the
ph
hysical environment of work
w and ho
ousing.
th
he urban heaat island effect (UHI) and
d the gradatiion of imperrvious and peervious surfaaces
frree download
d service of available daata layers acrross the statee. See
htttp://www.m
mass.gov/mg gis/.
84
ch
haracteristics of the urbaan region of Boston are ggrounds to cconsider diffferent adaptaation
planning focu
uses for com
mmunities acrross the GI ttransect. To bbe able to deevise and
reecommend GI
G policies within
w existin
ng pervious ssurfaces, whhich address the variationn of
vu
ulnerability,, we map thee existing disstribution off GI across thhe zones.
ov
verlay the fo
ollowing lay
yers: imperviious surfacess, digital terrrain, open sppace layers
(p
public domain), waterwaays, forests, roads, and aadministrativve boundariees.
18
We fin
nd that open
n space and un-built
u lannd increases in area as w
we move tow
wards
th
he periphery (Figure 4.6)). What sign
nificantly inccreases, and nnot usually iincluded in tthe
in
nventory of GI,
G are un-bu
uilt spaces within
w the pri
rivate domainn (yards, garrdens, and scchool
grrounds). Sin
nce ecosystem
m benefits arre not boundded by adminnistrative lim
mits (Fabos,
18
Un-built land is considered as
a potential to increase greenn infrastructuree area within ann urban region
85
2004) and increase proportionally with GI area,19 it is critical to ensure that GI policies
The final step is to identify and recommend appropriate GI policies across the GI
needs, and vulnerability requirements (Figure 4.7). We list the typologies of GI elements
that already exist within each zone or those that could potentially be introduced or
enhanced. Ecosystem benefits that are complementary to community needs and climate
impacts are also listed in accordance with the spatial typology. By overlaying information
from steps one and two, we begin to identify the potential GI policies. For example, the
coastal areas will benefit from planned retreat where vulnerable built areas across the
coast may gradually be transformed into landscapes for recreation. The resulting coastal
landscape features. Therefore, the policy here would focus on preserving and intensifying
all existing GI elements and to define a long-term plan to allow time for legal procedures
and financial compensation to take place for the coastal zone transformation. Within the
(compounded by UHI) and retention of water run-off. Existing parks and open space,
green roofs, green facades, and street planting are spatial elements that should be
increased through revisions to building regulations, open space plans, and environmental
19
Ecosystem benefits are directly proportional to the amount of land available for GI: the
more forested land, the more the potential for temperature control, and the more the golf
courses and open land, the more water storage may be achieved.
20
Non-structural defenses are based on naturally occurring or engineered defenses such
as wetlands, marshes, sand coasts, and eastern dams.
86
policies. Thro otope Area faactor21, the ccity of Berlinn is an exam
ough the Bio mple where
zo
oning and fin
nancial incen
ntives resultt in an increaase in tree caanopy and ‘aat the sourcee’
water
w manageement. Towaards the periphery, policcies that enhaance connectivity and
prreserve, con
nserve, and in
ncrease foressts, large parrks, natural rreserves, andd biospheress are
in
ntegral for ru
un-off storag
ge, species migration,
m tem
mperature coontrol, and w
water infiltraation
to
o ensure ecosystem serviices at the reegional scalee.
21
1
See the Citty of Berlin, Senate Depaartment for U
Urban Devellopment:
htttp://www.staadtentwicklun
ng. berlin.de/u
umwelt/landscchaftsplanungg/bff/index enn.shtml.
87
To ensure consistency across local GI policies with the Boston region, vertical
participatory and happens at the local (town) scale. This means that parcel and
neighborhood scale plans should build up to form an overall town plan that explicitly
considers GI measures for adaptation. The open space plans that are mandatory to US
plans. Town plans then need to build the overall regional vision. This may be achieved by
expanding the mandate of regional planning bodies beyond transportation and economic
development towards a more active role to coordinate and integrate local plans. Even
more, regional bodies should be responsible to monitor and develop regional climate
projections that help in providing the vision for regional and local adaptation plans. A
hierarchal organizational structure that works in both directions (from local to regional or
from regional to local) ensures that all constituents and measures serve an intended local
role within a larger regional approach. The proposed structure that we have presented
may be a first step in integrating local adaptation planning across scales and jurisdictions
4.4 Conclusion
prescribe a green roof here and a rain garden there and hope that they will add up to a
proper systematic approach. However, the challenges of adaptation are too significant for
this to be effective. Framing GI planning through the transect approach provides a way to
88
conceptualize a whole system of GI spatial elements, identify coming climate challenges,
and plan to integrate local policies at site scale with adaptation needs at the
neighborhood, city, and regional scales. In this chapter, we briefly used Boston as a case
study to demonstrate how the GI transect may be applied and how it can assist in
environments (urban, suburban, and rural) and the needs of communities they are
89
CHAPTER 5
5.1 Introduction
When planning to retrofit cities with measures that address impacts of local and
impacts (increasing temperature, flooding due to extreme precipitation events, and rising
sea level) and ecosystem services that render green infrastructure as a no-regrets climate
depends on biological and ecological processes between soil, water, vegetation, and
reduce air and surface temperatures are highly dependent on the extent of coverage of
vegetative surfaces be it ground cover, shrubs or tree canopy. Assuming that all
biological components of an ecosystem are functioning well, the primary variable in the
calculation of ecosystem services is the amount of area that vegetative cover occupies
(Figure 5.1). This means that more vegetated surfaces will result in more ecosystem
services. But within urban contexts, high land values and competition for real estate
render urban land a highly contested commodity. Dedicating maximum possible area for
green infrastructure to effectively ameliorate the urban climate is not readily available,
but should be planned and pursued. As a direct result of this competition, different land
use classes impact the availability of possible current and future vegetative surfaces in
90
th
hree ways: determine
d thee morpholog
gy of the surffaces that pootentially couuld be vegettated
du
ue to foot prrint size and outdoor usees; define typpe of vegetattion suitablee for that landd
when
w accountting for morre drastic clim
mate changee impacts andd further urbbanization. T
The
prroblem of su
ufficient spacce within urb
ban contextss is more acuute when connsidering thee
ap
pplication off green infraastructure to reduce the im
mpacts of thhe urban heaat island.
The urban
n heat island onsidered as the earliest ddocumentedd form of hum
d (UHI) is co man
in
nduced locall climate chaange (Oke, 1976). The U
UHI is a phennomenon speecific to urbaan
teemperature difference
d beetween the city and its suurrounding ccontext (Okee, 1979; Kutttler,
an
nd reflectivee surfaces thaat absorb en
nergy and em
mit heat to the surroundinng air, increaasing
su
urface and air temperatu
ures. Within land use bassed measuress, green infraastructure
measures
m thatt are based on
o vegetated surfaces aree eligible to m
mitigate the UHI and addapt
to
o its impacts because theey specificallly reverse thhis trend in laand cover chhange. For thhat to
91
be effective there should be a substantial increase in hydrologically active surfaces
(Stone, 2012) that absorb the heat and reduce the air temperature. The biological
processes in vegetation qualify them as naturally occurring solution to the heat problem.
envisioned as a green infrastructure network across the whole urban area or region
(Rosenzeig et al., 2006). Such an ecological network may include urban forests, green
is a network that maximizes the allocation of land and built surfaces that are explicitly
To achieve these two planning objectives, land and built surfaces surfaces provide
effective in reducing temperatures. Patches of forested or dense tree areas less than three
(Bowler et al, 2010) or four hectares (Rosenzweig et al., 2006) may not be effective in
extending the benefits of heat reduction beyond patch limits. Similarly, flat building roofs
less than 200 meters may also not contribute to the heat reduction measures. When
considering types and sizes of effective surfaces for UHI, impacts of urbanization in
general and the impact of land use types on the morphology of vegetated surfaces (Figure
5.2), the allocation of sufficient surface area for an effective green infrastructure network
within an urban region becomes a challenge for planners. The problem persists as to how
move forward with green infrastructure policy within the constraints of available space
92
Figure 5.2: Im
mpact of land
d use classess on space avvailability annd morpholoogy of pervioous
su
urfaces.
asssessment method
m to esttimate potenttial space for green infraastructure veegetative surrfaces
an
nd urban heaat island as a treatment to
t limit the study and to identify speccific green
in
nfrastructuree measures su
uitable for th
he treatmentt. Pervious suurface is connsidered as
su
urrogate to existing
e and potential veg
getated surfa
faces. A perccent perviouss land metricc is
developed and used to asssess the exteent of availabble space acrross the urbaan-rural graddient
an
nd available pervious su
urfaces across different laand uses. Thhe objective is further
narrowed dow
wn to select suitable surfface areas thhat could be eeffective forr UHI reducttion.
Based
B on the results, a gradient of greeen infrastruucture policiees is proposeed to assist in the
ncrease tree canopy coveer and transfform imperviious surfaces to vegetateed surfaces. We
in
uttilize readily
y available sp
patial data from
fr Mass G
GIS (see footnnote 22). Thhis study
co
onsiders UH
HI as a surrog
gate to globaal climate chhange based on the fact tthat measurees
th
hat aim to reduce temperrature reducttion in urbann areas are syynergetic wiith adaptation
93
measures (Alcoforado at al., 2008). Impervious surface is considered as the direct result
of the different land use classes and is surrogate to the urbanization process.
The proposed method aims to answer the following research questions: 1) How does
pervious land surface vary across the metropolitan gradient? (2) How does pervious land
surface opportunity vary across land uses along the gradient? (3)When considering UHI,
what is the maximum opportunity of pervious surfaces for green infrastructure measures
across land-use categories? And (4) How does the percent pervious area metric inform
green infrastructure policy decisions when considering UHI treatment? This study
considers UHI as a surrogate to global climate change based on the fact that measures
that aim to reduce temperature reduction in urban areas are synergetic with adaptation
measures (Alcoforado at al., 2008). Impervious surface is considered as the direct result
of the urbanization process that limits availability of pervious surfaces. Land use classes
There are two objectives for the steps taken in the method: First, to answer the
research questions and second to conduct the analysis in a relatively expert-free approach
using readily available spatial data and basic geographic information systems (GIS)
skills. The first objective will be thoroughly discussed in the following sections. The
available space for green infrastructure addressed to planners in public and/or private
planning agencies. This is in contrast to more specialized and advanced techniques such
as remote sensing that are time consuming and costly. Mapping vegetative covers and
specifically tree canopy cover (TCC), requires specialized high resolution imagery with
expert knowledge of multiple techniques of classification, (Irani and Galvin, 2003; Goetz
94
et al., 2003; McPherson et al., 2011). When applying multiple reclassification tools in
becoming standard practice for scientists, specialized firms, and educational institutions,
it is still not standard practice for planning agencies. Such work is usually contracted to
third parties. On the other hand, basic GIS know-how has become standard skill for
planners to manage spatial data sets for states, towns and cities are common practice. The
basic data sets used in this study are readily available in many states, and specifically in
the North East of the US (Mass GIS, VCGI, NH GRANIT, MEGIS, and RIGIS 22), the
geographic context of this study. Therefore, a method for the use of planners that utilizes
readily available base data, knowledge and skills may be helpful in developing reliable,
fast, and inexpensive estimates of green infrastructure opportunities within urban regional
contexts.
The remainder of this chapter introduces the relationship between urban heat and
urban form and extracts suitable green infrastructure measures for UHI. The method is
then discussed followed with a detailed account of the results. The significance of the
findings and caveats of this research are discussed in the concluding section.
22
Mass GIS is the Massachusetts portal for geographic information systems; VCGI is
Vermont Center of Geographic Information; NH GRANIT is the New
Hampshire statewide GIS data clearinghouse; MEGIS is Maine office of GIS; and RIGIS
is the Rohde Island Geographic Information System.
95
5.2 The Urban Heat Island and Urban Form
The urban heat island (UHI) is a phenomenon specific to urban areas. The UHI is
defined as the measure of excess heating expressed in terms of the horizontal air
temperature difference between the city and its surrounding context (Oke, 1979; Kuttler,
2008; EPA, 2008). Urban areas manifest hotter surface and air temperatures than their
surroundings due to the imbalance in the energy budget. The air or surface temperature
that are impermeable and prone to energy absorption during the day (long wave energy)
and heat release during the night (short wave energy) (Oke, 1971). The urban heat island
indirect but significant influence on air temperatures (EPA). For example, parks and
vegetated areas have cooler surface area and contribute to cooler air temperatures. Within
highly built areas, surface temperatures are much higher and contribute to hotter air
temperature. Because air mixes within the atmosphere the relationship between surface
96
Figure 5.3: Ty
ypical Surfaace and air teemperature ddifferences dduring the daay and at nigght
(S
Source; EPA http://www.epa.gov/hirri/images/UH HI_profile-reev-
big.gifhttp://w
www.epa.gov v/hiri/imagess/UHI_profiile-rev-big.giif )
The ch
haracter and
d intensity off UHI format
ation has beeen documented through tthe
fiield of urban
n climatology
y (Chandler,, 1962; Oke,, 1982; Tahaa, 1997). UH
HI is typicallyy
prresent day an ut tend to be strongest duuring the dayy when the suun is shiningg.
nd night, bu
On
O average, the
t differencce in daytimee surface tem
mperatures bbetween deveeloped and rrural
ty
ypically smaaller, at 5 to 10°C
1 Oke, 2003). In
(9 to 18°F) (Roth eet al., 1989; Voogt and O
ad
ddition to citty location (i.e.
( coastal or
o inland), toopography, aand wind dirrection, the
ph
henomenon differs in magnitude
m and Oke, 1973) aand urban
d intensity bby city size (O
97
morphology (Kobayashi & Takamura, 1994; Nunez & Oke, 1977). Both characteristics
(Gartland, 2008;Kuttler, 2008; Alcoforado et al., 2008; Stone 2012a & b). Mills (2007)
distinguishes between two definitions of urbanization: the stock effect, which is created
by the physical presence of the city; and the flux effect, which is the outcome of activities
associated with cities, in other words, the urban system. Both effects have consequences
on the UHI.
The stock effect is the physical outcome of urbanization which is seen in the
impermeable land cover and closely spaced buildings. In many cities, the urban land
cover decreases from the center to the periphery with less defined edge boundaries due to
intertwining non-urban land cover (parks, forest, wetland, etc.). In its three dimensional
form, cities in the western hemisphere tend to have taller buildings in the urban center
with gradual decrease in height towards the periphery. While the concept of a dense and
concentrated city may reduce energy consumption and emissions (total miles travelled
and better insulation) (i.e. contributing less to air pollution), in return, a compact urban
form reduces total vegetated cover (i.e. reducing the evaporative cooling and shade
capacities).The combination of impervious surfaces and the three dimensional urban form
tend to exasperate hotter temperatures through four attributes of the city: reduction in
vertical surfaces and the contribution of hot waste heat to air temperatures from
98
The flux effect or the urban system links the central employment built-up area
with its economic and population hinterland. This link is governed by networks of
of resources, information and people. The physical manifestation of the urban system is
an urban form with settlements spread over large tracts of land connected by
to an urban region (Lewis and Brabec, 2005; Forman, 2008) or a metropolitan area (US
Census, 2010). The impact of dispersed and distributed urban form results in increased
emissions, energy use and resource consumption that negatively contribute to the urban
climate through air pollution and particulates in the air. The combination of radiating heat
from impermeable surfaces and the contribution of noxious gases interact and result in a
The feedback loop may be described as the continuous interaction between land
surface characteristics, urban activity and the sun’s energy (Figure 5.4). The stock effect
from urban and suburban areas within a metropolitan region increase impervious surfaces
and reduce vegetated surfaces by increasing number and spread of buildings, roads and
parking surfaces. This process reduces albedo 23 of the urban region and air temperatures
within street canyons increase. These land cover changes impact the urban climate by
radiant heat and heat production (Oke, 1979, 1987; Gartland, 2008; Kuttler, 2004,2008).
As a result of the flux effect, the impact of air pollution and the resulting heavy air from
23
Albedo: When sunlight hits an opaque surface, some of the sunlight is reflected. This
fraction is called the albedo (a). The rest of incoming energy is absorbed and designated
as (1-a). Low-a surfaces become much hotter than high-a surfaces (Akbari, 2005).
99
trransportation
n and energy
y use tend to confine hottter air closerr to the surfaace and withhin
th
he urban can
nopy increasiing the inten
nsity of the U
UHI across thhe whole reggion. This
negative feed
dback loop reesults in threee different ttypes of UHII: surface heeat island (SH
HI),
heat islands of
o the urban canopy
c layerr (HIUC), annd the urbann boundary laayer heat island
(U
UBH). The SHI
S is the heeating of urb
ban surfaces and the HIU
UC is the resuultant heatinng of
th
he air betweeen the groun
nd surface an
nd top of buiildings. In booth cases thee impact is loocal.
UBH
U is the fu
urther mixing of air beyo
ond the urbaan canopy wiith impacts iin the downw
wind
direction beyo
ond the urbaan core (Kutlller, 2008). T
The differennt types becoome more
ex
xtreme and acute
a depend
ding on the time
t of day, seasons, andd climate conditions (Fuurther
discussion on
n UHI types is provided in
i Appendixx A). The varriability andd different tyypes
of UHI occurrring at differrent times off the day rennder UHI a ddynamic pheenomenon.
100
The UHI varies in intensity depending on regional climatic conditions and
contexts. Oke (1982) developed generalizations of the intensity of UHI that show the
dynamic and uncertain nature of the phenomenon. The UHI intensity decreases with
increasing wind speeds as these provide direct breeze to residents and shifts the urban
boundary layer and plume downstream. This releases entrapped heat and replaced with
cooler air resulting in reduced temperatures (Figuerola and Mazzeo, 1998; Magee et al.,
1999; Morris et al., 2001; Unger et al., 2001). Cloud cover tends to reduce the intensity of
UHI because cloud cover screens the incoming sun energy which is the primary source of
absorbed and released heat (Ackerman, 1985; Ripley et al., 1996; Morris and Simmonds,
2000). UHI intensity is best developed in the summer due to the higher intensity of the
sun and reduced amounts of rain (reducing hydrant cooling), at least in the northern
latitudes (Philandras et al., 1999; Morris et al., 2001). UHI intensity is greatest at night
due to the nature of the phenomenon where impervious material absorbs the sun energy
during the day, stores it and radiates it back in short waves during the night (Ripley et al.,
1996; Jauregui, 1997; Magee et al., 1999; Mont´avez et al., 2000; Tereshchenko and
Filonov, 2001; Kuttler, 2008). It follows that UHI may disappear by day or the city may
be cooler than the rural environs (Tapper, 1990; Steinecke, 1999). In conjunction with the
above, cities with a larger footprint amplify the intensity of UHI due to the larger surface
area of impervious surfaces that increase absorbed sun energy and released heat.
Increased population size also increases radiant heat through increased car use and energy
consumption (Park, 1986; Yamashita et al., 1986; Hogan and Ferrick,1998). Furthermore,
rates of heating and cooling are greater in the surrounding area than built-up area because
101
UHI may be designated as an example of local climate change, as it is the best
documented instance of human induced climate modification (Oke, 1987; APA, 2007;
EPA, 2008; Stone, 2012). Climate change, broadly speaking, refers to any significant
change in measures lasting for an extended period resulting from natural processes or
anthropogenic reasons (EPA, 2008). Local climate changes resulting from the UHI
fundamentally differ from global climate changes in that their causes are different and
impacts are limited to the local scale and decrease with distance from their source. Global
climate changes, such as those caused by increases in the sun’s intensity or greenhouse
gas concentrations, are not locally or regionally confined. The impacts from urban heat
islands and global climate change are often similar. For example, some communities may
experience longer growing seasons due to either or both phenomena (Alcoforado and
Andrade, 2008). UHI and global climate change can both also increase energy demand,
particularly summertime air conditioning demand, and associated air pollution and
greenhouse gas emissions, depending on the electric system power fuel mix (EPA, 2008).
The influence of UHI on global warming is not the same as the converse.
relationship. Their review indicates that the influence of the UHI on global warming is
minimal because urban areas cover less than one percent of the Earth’s land area (Oke
1997), and the amount of energy released by man is much less significant than the energy
received by the earth from the sun. But, cities are a very important source of
anthropogenic greenhouse gases (Crutzen 2004; Lamptey et al. 2005; Makar et al. 2006;
Kahn 2006) and thereby contribute indirectly to global warming (Crutzen 2004;
Sherwood 2002) by exerting a slight influence upon the computation of global warming,
102
especially in studies utilizing fine grained spatial data (Brázdil and Budíková, 1999;
On the other hand, the impacts of global warming (including its impacts upon
human well-being and health, various ecosystems, and on levels of energy and water
and regional climate, global warming will either improve or worsen livability conditions
within metropolitan areas (Oke 1997; Stone 2005). From the point of view of the human
bio-climate, the high-latitude cities will probably improve, and low- and mid-latitude
cities, especially in the summer, will probably be worse. In general, global warming will
Therefore, warmer cities are likely to experience an increase in the levels of air pollution
and water consumption. From that point of view all cities will probably be in a worse
condition. Regarding energy consumption, colder climatic zones will have improved
variability and will depend on the future frequencies of weather types. For example, an
associated with higher temperatures can partially offset urban warming (Alcoforado and
Andrade, 2008). While some cities may benefit from increased temperatures, the
daily or seasonal basis and coupled with extreme heat events with decreased moisture
103
Elevated temperatures, particularly during the summer, can affect a community’s
environment and quality of life. Increased summer time temperatures increase energy
demand for cooling adding pressure to the electricity grid during electricity peak demand
periods as well as increasing heat loss from the use of cooling equipment. This demand
increases 1.5 to 2 percent for every 0.6°C (1°F) increase in summertime temperature
(EPA,2008). The implication is disruption of people’s activities and waste of money for
maintenance of buildings and infrastructure (Gartland, 2008). In urban centers, five to ten
percent of electricity consumption is used to compensate for the UHI effect (Akbari,
2005). This increased demand of electricity causes higher levels of air pollution and
fossil fuel combustion which is increased during peak demand periods emitting pollutants
such as carbon monoxide and sulfur dioxide. Furthermore, increased emissions and
higher temperatures tend to increase the level of ground level ozone formation (EPA,
Increased daytime surface temperatures, reduced nighttime cooling, and higher air
pollution levels associated with urban heat islands can affect human health by
non-fatal heat strokes, and heat-related mortality (EPA, 2008; Stone 2012). UHI can also
exacerbate the impact of heat waves, which are periods of abnormally hot, and often
humid, weather. Sensitive populations, such as children, older adults, and those with
existing health conditions, are at particular risk from these events. For example, in 1995,
a mid-July heat wave in the Midwest caused more than 1,000 deaths (Taha et al, 2004).
More recently, the heat wave of 2003 in Europe reached unprecedented high values
104
unseen in almost 350 years of keeping climatic records (Stone, 2012). In the UK, the
registered nighttime air temperatures in London reached 6-9⁰C higher than those
recorded for rural locations south of London. This event claimed 600 more deaths than
usually accounted for during August (COL, 2006). On August 11, 2013 temperatures in
Switzerland reached an unimaginable 42⁰C (107⁰F). In Paris, night time temperatures did
not go below 27⁰C (80⁰F). This resulted in an increase in hospital admissions reaching 20
to 30 percent in the first two days of the event. It was also observed that the majority of
fatalities were older citizens 65 years and above and a disproportionate number living
alone. Satellite24 images during the height of the heat wave in Europe registered many
areas being almost 11⁰C (20⁰F) above normal temperatures for the same period.
Furthermore, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC, 2004) estimates that from 1979 to
1999, excessive heat exposure contributed to more than 8,000 premature deaths in the
Furthermore, the UHI impacts urban and aquatic ecosystems. The barren
construction techniques that foster heat islands tend to be unattractive, unappealing and
unhealthy for urban flora and fauna (Gartland 2008). Increased temperatures tend to
foster early plant bloom and lead in many instances to extinction of local species or the
ecosystems are degraded by surface UHI by thermal pollution. Surface run-off from
pavement and roofs tends to be higher in temperature by 27⁰C-50⁰C than air temperatures
(EPA, 2008). Field measurements from one study showed that runoff from urban areas
24
Temperature anomalies (degrees below or above normal) in Europe on August 31,
2003, NASA.
105
was about 11°C -17°C hotter than runoff from a nearby rural area on summer days when
pavement temperatures at midday were 11°C -19°C above air temperature. When the rain
came before the pavement had a chance to heat up, runoff temperatures from the rural
and urban areas differed by less than 2°C (Roa-Espinosa et al., 2003). This excess heat is
The UHI is an urban specific phenomenon. Its impacts affect people, other species
and the environment. Strategies to reduce urban heat islands produce multiple benefits
that lower surface and air temperatures thus reducing health risks, energy demand, air
pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. The UHI compares in its impacts to global
climate change at the local scale. Therefore advancing measures to mitigate the UHI also
address adaptation to global climate change impacts (EPA, 2008; Stone, 2005, 2012,
2012a).
5.3 Effective Vegetated Green Infrastructure Measures for the Urban Heat Island
In environmental and urban planning, measures to mitigate the UHI are centered
on land-based measures that change the urban land cover (EPA; Akbari, 2003; Stone,
2012). Properties of urban materials, in particular low solar reflectance, high thermal
emissivity, and high heat capacity, influence urban heat island development, as they
determine how the sun’s energy is reflected, emitted, and absorbed, and consequently
radiated back into the air (Oke, 1988, 1997; Akbari, et al., 2001; Akbari, et al., 2003;
Rosenzweig et al., 2006; EPA, 2008; Stone, 2005,2012). Measures that disrupt this
process of energy absorption, storage and release of heat into the urban atmosphere are
106
increase albedo by increasing reflectivity or absorption of water to reduce latent heat; 2)
obstructing the UHI process by blocking the sun’s energy through shading or increasing
cooling by ensuring that water in its multiple forms is present in ample quantities in the
soil and air; and 3) technological advances that reduce heat waste from electrical and
mechanical equipment (Akbari, 2001). These measures include cool roofs; cool
pavements; green roofs and facades; and increasing vegetative cover in all its forms25.
that the combination of several measures can slow warming trends when implemented
planting and vegetative cover (including green roofs), albedo enhancement of surface
materials, and reductions in waste heat emissions were found to reduce city-wide air
temperatures from 1⁰C to 7⁰C (2⁰F and 13⁰F) (Kikegawa, Genchi,Kondo, & Hanaki,
2006; Lynn et al., 2009; Rosenzweig, Solecki, & Slosberg, 2006; Taha, 1997; Zhou &
Shepherd, 2010). Of the three classes of land-based UHI mitigation, tree planting and
other vegetative strategies are generally found to be the most effective, with surface
reflectivity and waste heat strategies typically accounting for lower reductions in near
surface air temperatures, depending upon the spatial extent of coverage and the regional
landscape type (Rosenzweig, Solecki, & Slosberg; Gill et al., 2007; Hart & Sailor, 2009;
Lynn et al., 2009; Zhou & Shepherd, 2010). Furthermore, vegetated green infrastructure
is a relatively inexpensive measure to install and maintain in the long run (Akbari, 2005).
This is true when considering other benefits that accrue when using vegetative green
25
Akbari (2005) provides a detailed discussion on each of three strategies.
107
infrastructure and the presence of administrative bodies in cities that already manage
combination of physical and biological properties (Akbari, 2001; EPA). The physical
properties of tree and shrub canopy provide shade to hard surfaces reducing surface
moisture in the air and soils. The presence of higher moisture content in the air and
soils have lower albedo coefficients reducing reflected energy resulting in reduced air
of water from soils and rain interception into the atmosphere (Jasechko et al., 2013). This
process results in evaporative cooling enhancing the urban breeze in general and cooling
surrounding air (Akbari, 2002; EPA). The process of carbon intake and release of oxygen
vegetation reduces air pollutants and cleans the air (Akbari et al., 2001). The removal of
pollutants reduces entrapment of hot air reducing the impact of the UHI. This process
also allows vegetated cover to become a CO2 sink contributing to the process of climate
change mitigation (EPA). These physical and biological processes are further explained
in Figure 5.5. To effectively impact the urban climate, vegetated green infrastructure
cover should be increased across any area to derive the maximum ecosystem benefit of
heat reduction.
108
Figure 5.5: Diagram
D showwing how inccreasing phyysical and biiological prooperties of
vegetated greeen infrastruccture decreases the urbann island heatt.
Indiviidual or grou
upings of trees, shrubs, aand green rooofs provide effective
measures
m to reduce
r surfacce and air tem
mperatures. The compouunded effectt of multiplee
measures
m acro
oss large areeas will effecctively increase the channces of temperature
Rosenzweig
R et
e al. (2006) conclude th
hat an “ecoloogical infrasttructure, a coombined straategy
26
6
Strategies are
a in bold and
a UHI mitiigation scenaarios are enuumerated as per Rosenzw weig
ett al. (2006, S-5).
S Urbann Forestry:1 1) Urban Forrestry/Grass--to-Trees (oppen space
planting); 2) Urban
U Foresstry/Street-to
o-Trees (curbbside plantinng); 3) Urbaan Forestry/GGrass
+ Street-to-Trrees (open sp pace + curbsside plantingg). Light Surfaces: 4) L Light
Surfaces/Roo of-to-High Albedo
A (light roofs); 5) L
Light Surfacees/Imperviouus-to-High
Albedo
A (roofss + sidewalk
ks/streets). Living
L Roofss: 6) Living RRoofs/Roof--to-Grass.
Ecological
E nfrastructurre: 7) Urban
In n Forestry/Grrass + Streett-to-Trees annd Living Rooofs.
Urban
U Foresstry + Lightt Roofs: 8) Urban
U Foresttry/Grass + S Street-to-Treees and Lighht
109
planting) to 0.4⁰C (0.7⁰F) for ecological infrastructure (vegetation planted for its
ecosystem services). At three in the afternoon (peak heat time), the impact ranges from
0.1⁰C (0.2⁰F) for open space planting to 0.7⁰C (1.2⁰F) for ecological infrastructure.
While these values may not seem significant when considering that the UHI for New
York is approximately 4⁰C (air temperature), they are averaged over all heat-wave days
and times and therefore generalized. To consider also that these values were determined
from four sample zones that were analyzed in detail and regressed to the whole city. The
actual localized temperature reduction is higher when considering specific local zones
In the context of using green infrastructure to adapt cities to climate change, Gill
et al. (2007) conducted simulation studies of different green infrastructure measures for
the city of Manchester, U.K. using the energy exchange model. Future climate and
several vegetated surface scenarios were developed. The study developed a baseline
condition for the period from 1961 to 1990 with temperature projections for 2020, 2050,
and 2080 with low, medium and high emissions scenarios for each year (IPCC, 2007).
These projections were conducted for different land uses with varying vegetated cover:
forest and agriculture (high evaporative cover), to residential with 66 percent evaporative
cover, and urban core areas at hundred percent built up with no evaporative cover. The
results indicate that increasing vegetative cover (trees and shrubs) and green roofs reduce
density residential areas, maximum surface temperatures in 1961–1990 with current form
Roofs. Combination of All: 9) 50% Open Space + 50% Curbside + 25% Living Roofs +
25% Light Roofs.
110
are 27.9°C. Adding 10 per cent green cover decreases maximum surface temperatures by
2.2°C in 1961–1990, and 2.4°C to 2.5°C by the 2080s Low and High emissions
2080s Low and increase by 1.2°C by the 2080s High, in comparison to the 1961–1990
current form case. Adding green roofs to all buildings in land uses where impervious
surfaces dominate can also have a dramatic effect on maximum surface temperatures,
keeping them below the 1961–1990 current form case for all time periods and emissions
scenarios. The difference made by the green roofs becomes greater with the time period
and emissions scenario. For example, in 1961–1990, greening roofs results in maximum
current form case of 31.2°C. By the 2080s High, greening roofs in town centers results in
temperatures of 28°C, 7.6°C less than if roofs are not greened and 3.3°C less than the
In all the scenarios presented for the city of Manchester, the determinant factor for
temperature reduction is the total amount of vegetated surfaces. Gill et al (2007) also
model developed by Forman (1985) improves the urban watershed hydrology (by storage
and retention of precipitation from intense events) which in turn supports healthy
Both simulation studies suggest that increasing vegetated cover in its many forms
in the form of a vegetated green infrastructure will have a high impact on the urban
climate within highly urbanized urban contexts. If the same conclusions are extended to
111
include metropolitan or regional system, the same would arguably apply. A metropolitan
scale network would add to the landscape typologies that would not be otherwise
included within an urban core focus. These may include river systems, forests and forest
stands, agricultural land, grass land, vegetation within suburban home yards, and natural
reserves. While these typologies maybe distant from the highly urbanized centers, the
cleaner air, removing pollutants, cooling air downstream, dissipation of latent heat and
the contribution to regulating the urban canopy effect of UHI. Furthermore, allocation of
larger tracts of land for green infrastructure beyond the urbanized limit would also
provide escape for residents during extreme heat events as well as refuge for other animal
species.
climate change impacts, a metropolitan scale network ensures the preservation of tracts of
vegetated surfaces for future UHI reduction and climate change adaptation. By planning
today for a future metropolitan network, policies that protect, conserve, and preserve
forests or agricultural land into the future will ensure that cities continue to be climate
proofed into the future. A metropolitan green infrastructure network that extends from
the roof of a building to the large tracts of forest and river systems across different land
uses would contribute to local UHI mitigation and global climate change adaptation.
comminutes at large. The ecosystem benefits derived from vegetated surfaces provide a
cost effective and no-regrets approach to climate proof cities. Trees, the urban canopy,
112
vegetated surfaces and green roofs are found to be most effective in reducing surface and
green infrastructure network provide the basis for effective temperature reduction
The primary impetus is to increase the amount of vegetated surfaces to address current
UHI and future potential climatic impacts. The framework defines four strategies that
respond to the literature findings and include: conservation and protection; intensification
and expansion; transformation; and impact reduction. The framework uses the term
pervious surfaces (McPherson, 2012) to suggest un-built areas with soil that potentially
can support vegetation (naturally or through amending soils); and impervious surfaces to
suggest all built form (buildings, roads, and parking) and considered as the primary
delimiter of space. The strategies are devised as planning tools to assess the potential
increase of vegetated surfaces within the constraint of space scarcity within urban
contexts.
forest and the conversion of pervious surface such agriculture into forest, when
conditions of ownership and use allow. Large stands of trees and forest cover in general,
provide multiple benefits. These benefits include reduction of evaporative cooling from
pervious surfaces, shade and urban breeze enhancements ameliorate. Large stands of
trees enhance local wind patterns in cities where cooler air over vegetated surfaces
113
replaces warmer air in adjacent city neighborhoods (Akbari, 2002). The effective size of
a stand of trees to begin to impact surrounding air is ranges between three to four
(2010) found that three hectares is the effective size of a tree stand or urban forest where
for temperature reduction extends beyond the patch size. This impact is reduced as the
distance increases from tree cover location. Rosenzweig et al. (2006, 2011) have also
found that a four hectare tree stand begins to impact surrounding areas. This means that
the more trees are present the more benefits are accrued and the morphology of patches
within a region define the extent of the benefits accrued beyond the stand itself.
Intensification and Expansion is the addition of trees, shrubs, and ground cover to
is the increase of total pervious surfaces dedicated for vegetated green infrastructure.
vegetal surfaces such as green roofs. Green roofs provide benefits by cooling the upper
limits of the urban canopy and reduce energy consumption in buildings. Green roofs in
some cases reduce surface temperature by 30-60°C and ambient (air) temperature by 5°C
when compared to conventional black roofs (EPA). Three examples demonstrate the
effectiveness of green roofs. These are organized by ascending scale: neighbored, city,
and urban region. In Portland, Oregon, a study estimated that a neighborhood with 100%
green roofs could reduce the UHI effects by 50-90 percent (Dunnett and Kingsbury,
available roof space in the city of Toronto would reduce summer temperatures by 1°C to
114
2°C overall (Ligeti, 2007). Additionally, a study in New York City estimates that a 0.4°C
reduction in the regional UHI effect can be achieved with the installation of green roofs
on 50 percent eligible roofs across the entire city (Rosenzweig, 2006). While these
studies differ in scale, regional landscape type and local climate conditions, the lesson is
that green roofs are effective in reducing the surface and air impacts of the UHI when
substantial coverage of green roofs is simulated for the scale of each individual study
area. It follows that transformation of impervious surfaces is a valid strategy to reduce the
UHI.
shading impervious surfaces or ensuring all un-built areas are planted. Trees and shrubs
provide shading of impervious and pervious surfaces. Shading by vegetation blocks the
pervious surfaces, and energy consumption that reduces heat waste generation. Shading
impervious surfaces such as streets, sidewalks and walkways reduce surface temperature
transmission of latent heat into the urban canopy layer. The smooth nature of urban
materials and usually darker color of concrete and asphalt increase absorption of energy
and reduces reflection of the sun’s energy. Shading reduces this absorption and
consequently the release of short wave energy during the night. When considering
parking surfaces, these are surfaces that radiate large amount of heat to their sheer size
and concentration within commercial uses. Davis et al. (2010) found in an estimate of
parking footprint in the Illinois region that parking surfaces are overdesigned and could
amount to double the actual use of parking spaces during peak hours. McPherson (2001)
in a study of a parking shading ordinance in Sacramento, California, that parking lots are
115
6% over desig
gned and 25% of parking spaces aree unused. Baased on thesee studies, thee
potential to in
ncrease tree shading and
d vegetative ccover seemss to be possibble within
parking surfaces.
This framework
f su
uggested abo
ove defines the overall m
methodologiical approachh to
asssess the pottential of spaace availabillity for vegettated green iinfrastructurre. The
fo
ollowings seection develo
ops the meth
hod of inquirry in detail w
within the connstraints of
urrbanization and
a the UHII.
116
5.5 Method
MB and test for availability of space. Maximum opportunities are then derived to address
the UHI as a treatment of the MB extending the notion of pervious surfaces beyond land
areas. Using the framework of strategies discussed in the previous section, the method
tests for the availability of space by identifying opportunities based reducing land cover
variables within the MB to two: Pervious surfaces, representing all un-built surfaces; and
impervious surfaces; representing buildings, roads, and parking surfaces and considered
as the primary delimiter of available space. These two variables vary according to land
use types and accordingly provide varied opportunities and maximum opportunities
(Abunnasr and Hamin, 2012) and the urban-rural characterization and assessment method
that connects ecosystem benefits and land-use classes (Gill et al., 2008; Alberti, 2009;
Radford and James, 2013). Using readily available spatial data sets from Mass GIS
(geographic information systems spatial data portal for the state of Massachusetts), the
following steps were carried out: (1) Define study area, (2) Calculate Percent Pervious,
(3) develop pervious surface data set, (4) characterize the metropolitan area into zones of
percent pervious, (5) assess pervious surface opportunities for vegetated green
infrastructure, (6) assess maximum pervious surface opportunities effective for the urban
117
heat island reduction, and
d (7) define a gradient off green infraastructure policies (basedd on
su
urface opporrtunities) suiitable to addrress the urbaan heat islannd.
5.5.1 Study
y Area
The Consolidated
C d Metropolitaan Statisticall Area (CMS
SA) of Bostoon,
million
m in 200
05. The CMSA of Bosto
on is comprissed of four M
Metropolitann Statistical aareas
(M
MSA) that in
nclude Bosto
on, Lowell, Lawrence,
L annd Brocton ((US Census bureau, 20112).
The
T total num
mber of town h an averagee town/city ssurface area of 16.6km2
ns is 161 with
reemainder of this article, the study areea will be reeferred to as Metropolitaan Boston (M
MB).
MB
M is an example of a metropolitan
m area
a The lannd use percenntage of the total study aare in
(1
18%), agricu
ulture (3%), recreation an
nd open landd (2%). Wheen comparedd to 1971
118
sttatistics, therre is a loss in
n agriculturee of (-54%), forest (-14%
%) and open land (-77%)) and
an
n increase in
n urban use (18%)
( and reecreation (399%) (Mass G
GIS). When considering
su
urface coverr (reduced to
o two variablles) across alll land uses w
within MB, pervious surrface
co 255km2 (72%
omprises 5,2 %) and impervious surfaaces 1,131.5kkm2 (16%). W
When averagged
accross the wh
hole MB, 16%
% imperviou may not be cconsidered hhigh27. Whenn
us surfaces m
co
onsidering th
hese percenttages across a rural-urbaan gradient, sseveral zonees within the MB
will
w include percentage
p of impervioussness of greaater than 50%
%. While cliimatic and
su
upport forestt cover and population
p did
d not exceeed three perccent increasee during the
GIS).
G This red
duction in peervious surfa
face supportiive of vegetaation has andd is resultingg in
th
he loss of sub
bstantial pottential in red
ducing air annd surfaces teemperatures.
27
7
A 10% imp perviousnesss within a waatershed is cconsidered ass the threshoold where waater
qu onsequently,, ecological quality is deegraded (Braabec et al., 2002).
uality and co
119
5.5.2 Percen
nt Pervious
Percen
nt pervious is
i introduced
d as a metricc to assess thhe availabilitty of space fo
for
co oil and include all grass and bare soiil (McPhersoon et al, 2011). Such surffaces
overed by so
caan or potentiially can be amended to support veggetation. In thhis study, peervious surfaace is
Im
mpervious su
urfaces is utiilized to reprresent all buuilt surfaces aand as the prrimary delim
miter
of space (Figu
ure 5.9).
Percen
nt pervious (PP)
( is defin
ned as the peercentage of pervious surrfaces from ttotal
laand area, exccluding wateer. Water surrfaces are exxcluded as thhe focus is onn vegetative
co
over that req
quires soil. Equation
E (1) defines the ccalculation m
method for P
PP where ‘p’’ is
to
otal area of pervious
p surffaces within the study arrea and, ‘impp’ is the totaal area of
120
impervious surfaces within the same study area. A secondary named pervious-to-
impervious ratio was also developed to assess the magnitude of the relationship between
pervious and impervious surfaces. This metric was only used in the characterization of
∑
PP= x 100% (1)
∑
estimate the potential surfaces that can be planted for a specific ecosystem benefit. The
PP is derived from readily available spatial data sets allowing planners with minimal
surfaces using current GIS skills and know-how. without utilizing specialized skills and
knowledge required for remote sensing The reduction to a single metric avoids
specialized and sometimes complex processes to calculate, for example, tree canopy
McPherson, 2012). This is not to say that these methodologies are not relevant. On the
contrary, remote sensing becomes a second step required at a finer scale after the initial
Four data layers corresponding to the most effective land based adaptation
measures to temperature reduction were developed. These land cover based data layers
are: pervious surfaces (Per-poly), roads, buildings and parking. The raw data was
downloaded (from December 2012 to March 2013) free of charge from MassGIS.
121
MassGIS provides extensive metadata explaining methodology, third party data
providers, and support. The reference date of the study is 2005, the date of the aerial
images that were used to develop the impervious surface data layer and land-use classes.
All effort was done to use data layers closest to this date. When this was not available,
removal of additional polygons were masked out using the pervious and impervious
conservation and recreation open space, forest stewardship, land-use, building footprint,
assessor’s maps level 3 and roads were cropped or compiled to correspond to the MB
boundary. Two main steps were carried: 1) derive polygon data layers for pervious and
impervious surfaces, and 2) transfer attributes from land use and town data to each of the
The pervious and impervious polygon layers were developed from converting the
raster impervious surfaces layer to polygons. Sixteen raster tiles, with one meter pixel
resolution (derived from 50cm resolution aerial imagery) were used to cover the study
area. Each tile was converted to polygons separately to reduce processing time and
aggregated into a single data layer corresponding to the MB boundary. Square edges
resulting from the raster origin were simplified. Polygons less than 1m2 (corresponding to
pixel size) were considered as error and were removed to match the resolution of the
original data. The conversion process resulted in two sets of polygons within the data
layer corresponding to the binary classification28 by MassGIS. Grid code one corresponds
28
Mass GIS classification of impervious and impervious surfaces during data set
extraction: Impervious surfaces include: (1) All constructed surfaces such
as buildings, roads, parking lots, brick, asphalt, concrete ;( 2) Also included are areas
of man-made compacted soil or material such as mining or unpaved parking lots (no
vegetation present). Non-impervious surfaces include: (1) All vegetated areas, natural
122
to the polygons representing impervious surface and zero polygons representing pervious
surfaces. Each set of polygons was extracted into a separate layer. Due to classification
limitations (shadow, dark spots in the aerial imagery) of the original raster layer, some
footprint configuration. An assessment of this error was carried out by superimposing the
footprint polygon over the impervious polygons. Residual polygons falling outside or
inside the building footprint polygons were extracted and compared. The area of
polygons falling outside the building foot prints were 3% more than the area of the
polygons falling within. Accordingly the error margin is minimal and both sets of
residual polygons approximately cancel each other. Rectified such inconsistencies would
have been time consuming. The inconsistencies were maintained in the data sets.
The attributes of the land-use classes were transferred to the buildings, Per-poly
and IMP-poly using GIS analysis tools. The land use layer includes 33 classes which
were maintained with no further classification. The same process was not repeated for the
roads data layer because when two different land use polygons meet at a street, the
adjacency is defined by the road center line. This results in multiple polygons for each
road within several land use classes, rendering the data unusable for this study.
Accordingly the road data layer did not include land use designation.
A data layer comprising all 161 towns and cities was compiled and used to
transfer town location and data to all four data layers. The result of this data processing is
five data layers, each corresponding to pervious buildings, roads, and parking and the
and man-made; (2) Water bodies and wetland area; (3) Ski runs; (4) Natural occurring
barren areas (i.e. rocky shores, sand, bare soil)
123
fifth is the study area including towns. Table 5.1 lists the five data sets and their
constructed to characterize the study area based on the PP land metric. The aim of the
characterization exercise is to develop gradient zones across the MB to assess the area
variation across the region. The percent impervious has been previously used to define
urban-rural gradients (Gill et al., 2008, Radford and James, 2013) as a measure of extent
impervious (PER: IMP) ratio is explicitly used in the characterization process to highlight
the potential of greening of urban areas and to measure the magnitude of available space
for vegetation. The resulting gradient zones also serve as the unit of study of the
The PP and PER: IMP are calculated by deriving the pervious and impervious
surface areas for each of the 161 towns and cities. PP is calculated as the percentage
pervious surface of total land area, excluding water. PER: IMP was calculated by
dividing both entities and used as a measure of space availability for vegetation when
124
compared to impervious surfaces. The town or city boundary rather than the watershed
was considered in these calculations since the focus of the analysis is on vegetation and
The two metrics were assigned to each town then mapped in GIS to determine the
gradient zones. The pervious surface gradient zones were determined by comparing three
interpretations of the data to account for the incremental change of pervious surfaces: (1)
natural breaks within the data for PP and PER: IMP, (2) aggregated frequency count
based on single values of PER:IMP, and (3) the table matching PER:IMP and PP values.
The process of using both metrics allowed for a fine determination of the gradient zones.
To understand the reasons behind the regional distribution, PER: IMP and PP were
compared to population density data and road network configuration. PER: IMP and PP
ratios were plotted for each town against distance gradient graphs using the City of
Boston as the origin. The city of Boston is the center of the MB (U.S. Census Bureau,
1999) and where higher temperatures are most felt. The plots were analyzed and
compared to similar distance plots of total population density of each town. The gradient
map was compared to the road network. Results are discussed in terms of pervious space
availability across the gradient and its relationship to impervious surfaces, road network
There are four dimensions for the definition of opportunity in this study. First, the
un-accounted vegetated surfaces across land uses that are usually not considered part of
125
public parks, for example) on the type and extent of vegetative land cover. Third, large
tracts of land, such as forests or wetlands, that are ecologically active but with no means
of protection for future permanency. Fourth, surfaces that could become ecologically
active vegetative surfaces in the future but are threatened by current and projected urban
expansion.
PP is explored within land use classes and across gradient zones derived in the
characterization step.
Land use classes are first categorized into three general levels of perviousness:
highly pervious, pervious and impervious, and highly impervious (predominantly water
related uses) (Table 5.2). These categories were defined after carefully studying the
metadata of land use classes identified by MassGIS and the methodology that specifies
the components included in each land use. All water related land uses are considered
impervious and excluded from the analysis ( Brabec, et al., 2002) except for forested
wetland which was included in the forest category because of the existence of forest
canopy. Water is excluded since the focus of the study is on vegetation that requires soil
for growth. Pervious land use classes were further divided into two categories: forest and
agriculture. The forest coverage is of high resolution and covers all tree stands of not less
2,000m2. Agricultural patches are considered future opportunity and included in the final
analysis. The land use classes that include pervious and impervious surfaces were all
126
Land-use Classes Status Land-use Classes Status
Impervious only Pervious and Impervious Include
Water Exclude Water-Based Recreation Include
Non-Forested Wetland Exclude Golf Course Include
Saltwater Wetland Exclude Marina Include
Cranberry Bog Exclude Multi-Family Residential Include
Saltwater Sandy Beach Exclude High Density Residential Include
Pervious only Medium Density Include
Residential
Forest Forest/incl. Low Density Residential Include
Forested Wetland Forest/incl. Very Low Density Include
Residential
Cropland Agriculture/inlc. Urban Public/Institutional Include
Pasture Agriculture/inlc. Commercial Include
Orchard Agriculture/inlc. Industrial Include
Nursery Agriculture/inlc. Transportation Include
Brush-land/Successional Agriculture/inlc. Cemetery Include
Pervious and Impervious Junkyard Include
Power line/Utility Include Mining Include
Participation Recreation Include Transitional Include
Spectator Recreation Include Waste Disposal Include
analyzed for their potential based on the percent pervious metric. Percent pervious
from the total of the same category. The analysis is conducted for the four green
infrastructure strategies within each land use class across the six gradient zones. For the
phase of the analysis percent pervious of total land use class per zone is calculated to
assess the extent of opportunity contribution of each land use class to the total zone
opportunity.
127
5.5.5.2 Opportunity in Pervious Land-use Classes: Forest and Agriculture
agricultural land. Forest in the land use data layer includes all contiguous stands of trees
present across all land uses. Forest may include stands of trees within residential or
commercial property.
The assumption is that pervious surfaces that already support vegetation should be
protected. Forest and agricultural land that are not under any level of protection are
considered potential to conserve. The conservation and recreation open space data layer
is used to transfer the ‘level of protection’ attribute to PER. Three protection levels out of
five are considered: ‘perpetuity’, ‘limited’, and ‘term limited’. Although ‘limited’ and
‘term limited’ have time constraints in protection terms, it is assumed that protection will
continue. Forest and agricultural land-use classes that are protected are considered as part
future opportunity.
The opportunity within pervious surfaces in the remaining land-use classes (with
pervious and impervious surfaces) is defined as the percentage of pervious surface that
could possibly be dedicated for an ecological vegetative cover after deducting land area
for outdoor people or activity use as defined by the land-use class. To achieve this,
further classification of land use classes was carried out based on PP and average
pervious patch size within each land use class across each gradient zone. PP of each land
use class measures the extent of contribution of each land use class to the total pervious
surface within the gradient zone. In addition, pervious patch size is an indicator of
128
availability of space based on tree planting standards resulting from the land use class.
Both metrics were calculated and compared for each land use class and across gradient
zones. Six categories were identified based on these metrics: intense urban use,
Land-use classes were then assigned a coefficient of use (CU) and a coefficient of tree
planting (CT). CU is a measure of how much of the pervious surface is used by people or
the activity as determined by the land-use class. It ranges from zero to one, where one
indicates that all pervious surfaces can be allocated for vegetative cover and zero
indicates no potential for increasing vegetative cover where all pervious surfaces are
To determine the CU, pervious data layers is spatially related to the assessor’s
maps level 3 (Mass GIS) to simultaneously include the land use attribute with the
property boundaries. This procedure allows the identification of land use classes within
property boundaries. The resultant layer was superimposed over the same aerial images
used to classify the land use data to visually inspect and describe space available within
each land use. A first quick inspection identified pervious surfaces within five land use
classes with evident CU values of either zero or one. ‘Transitional’ land use class as it
The remainder sixteen land use classes were then closely inspected and measured
using GIS. This was carried out in a systematic manner by laying a 0.25 km2 (Radford
and James. 2013) grid across each gradient zone with each quadrant . The CT was then
129
The mature tree size allocation was assigned for each land use class based on
three sizes used by McPherson et al. (2011): small (4.6 m crown diameter), medium
(9.1m crown diameter) and large (5.2m crown diameter) requiring a minimum pervious
surface footprint for soil of 1.5, 3.3, and 9.3 m2, respectively. Each size was allocated for
each land use class based on the average patch size derived for each land use class for
each gradient zone. The total qualifying potential PP for each land use across each
130
5.5.6 Assess Maximum Opportunities of Landover for the Urban Heat Island
defined as the maximum possible pervious area (land surfaces and transformed
impervious surfaces) that can be dedicated for vegetative cover based on the effective
measures of a specific condition. In this context, this means green infrastructure measures
that are effective for UHI as identified in the literature review. In addition, pervious
surfaces are not only limited for pervious land surfaces, but also include green roofs and
effective patch size of pervious surfaces. Further selection of forest patch size based on a
3Hectare (30,000m2) forest patch size is considered a priority for protection since
(Rosenzweig et al., 2006; Bowler et al., 2010; EPA). Total qualifying areas for forest and
agricultural land were calculated and percent pervious was derived. The percent
opportunity was graphed for each zone and compared. Pervious surfaces within the forest
land use class that comply with the identified size and are protected are considered as
functioning infrastructure. Patches that comply with the size requirement but not are
131
5.5.6.2 Green Roofs across land-use classes
Green roof opportunities were identified based on roof shape and footprint size.
Assessors’ maps provide the ‘building style’ attribute. These attributes were transferred
to the BLDG data layer by spatial relationship. All building styles that have pitched or
curved roofs were discarded as being unsuitable for green roofs (cape cod, bungalow,
colonial, conventional, raised cape, raised ranch, ranch/split, ranch gabled, and three
family). As a result, building footprints within all residential classes were excluded
expect for high density. From the remaining land use classes, buildings with footprints
less than 50m2 were discarded as these become ineffective and uneconomical when
accounting for 30% of the roof area for building equipment and other service
requirements (LEED). Buildings in the following land use classes were considered as
opportunities for green roofs: commercial, golf courses, high density residential,
based recreation. Total area of qualifying buildings was calculated and multiplied by a
coefficient of 0.7 to account for roof equipment and services. Percent of qualifying
building area of total buildings was calculated and average foot print size. Results were
to green streets and the extent of increasing tree cover within easements of roads and
streets. The analysis of potential opportunities within roads is conducted at the gradient
zone level and not land use classes due to limitations in the land use data layer, as
previously explained.
132
The selection of streets or roads appropriate for each green infrastructure measure
discussed in section 2.4.4. There are six primary types: 1) limited access highway, 2)
Multi-lane Highway (no limited access) 3) Other numbered highway, 4) Major Road
Arterial, 5) Minor Road Arterial, 6) Ramp. The street types are also an indicator of speed
Road types from four to six were selected for tree planting intensification within
easements. The lower speeds (<45miles/hr.) with adjacent dense tree cover may not
hinder driving safety. The selected road types were further selected by the available width
of pervious surface within the easement and the suitability for tree planting. The available
pervious surface was calculated by subtracting the width of the impervious surface area
(car travel surface, shoulders, and sidewalks) from the easement width. Roads were
further selected by excluding pervious surfaces within easement that are less than two
meters, based on large tree pit requirements. Area of pervious surface opportunity was
calculated by multiplying the width of the easement by the total length of each street.
Total areas for each gradient zone were calculated to derive percent pervious and percent
Parking opportunities are defined as the potential to transform paved surfaces into
planting areas for surface transformation or shade trees. Pervious surfaces within parking
spaces are accounted for within the land use types of pervious surfaces discussed
previously. The percentage value that is used to estimate potential transformation is 30%
133
of total impervious parking area. This is a measure is conservative when compared to the
35% vacant parking lots during peak hours and 6% over ordinance requirements
(McPherson et al., 2001) in the area of Sacramento. Similarly, Davis et al. (2010)
estimated across four northern mid states that available parking spaces are double the
Further processing of the PKG was required. The easement width buffered RD,
buffered train; BLDG layers were used to spatially erase the corresponding impervious
elements. The airport point layer from MassDOT was used to identify airport locations.
These were removed by mask. The remainder impervious polygons include small
property driveways and parking lots. The 10 Ha (10,000m 2) minimum threshold area
sizes that reflects large parking area was arrived at after 26 test iterations to remove
smaller polygon sizes. The 30% percent metric was then applied to all parking polygons.
Percent pervious of land use class and average parking lot size were calculated, graphed
and compared.
classes and across gradient zones. Areas of pervious surface opportunities in each land
use class are assigned a corresponding planning code based on Table 5.4. It is necessary
to conduct this step to be able to sum up total opportunities for vegetated green
infrastructure policies. All PP values for each land use class within each gradient zone are
summed up based on the same code designation. Total PP for each zone is calculated for
each green infrastructure strategy. The values are then assigned to gradient zone
134
boundaries and mapped. A series of maps and graphs for each green infrastructure
measure within each gradient zone are analyzed and compared. A final map output is
generated that sums total strategy opportunities based on space availability is discussed.
Table 5.4: Relationship between planning strategies, green infrastructure strategies, and
contribution to temperature reduction
5.6 Results
The characterization of the MB resulted in six zones (Figure 5.10) based on the
gradation of percent pervious metric. Zone one is characterized by pervious surfaces that
are less than fifty percent of total land area. Zones two to five increase in increments of
135
teen percent. PP
P in zone siix is greater than
t ninety ppercent. Tabble 5.5 provides a listingg of
th
he six zones and a compaarison to thrree other studdies. The perrcent impervvious was ussed to
ch
haracterize the
t urban areea of Manch
hester in the U
UK (Gill et aal., 2008; Raadford and
Jaames, 2013) and an urbaan area in Illiinois (Daviees et al., 20100). The valuues from the
in
ntense urban
n, urban coree, urban, sub--urban, peri--urban, and ssemi-rural. S
Since the
ob
bjective is to
o test for avaailably of space and provvide maximuum benefits of green
in
nfrastructuree, the increm
ments of ten percent
p betw
ween zones provide a reliiable measurre of
th
he possible opportunities
o s for vegetation increasee.
136
Characterization Results Comparable Studies
Zone Name Pervious-to- Percent Gill et al. (2008) - Davis et al. (2010)
Zone impervious Pervious Radford and
(PER:MP) (PP) James (2013)
1 Intense PER: IMP≤1 PP≤50% PP ≤50% Urban PP≤25% High
Urban urban
2 Urban core 1.0<PER: 50%<PP≤60% 12%<PP Sub- 25%<PP Sub-
IMP≤1.5 ≤88% urban ≤ 97% urban
3 Urban 1.5<PER: 60%<PP≤70%
IMP≤2.35
4 Sub-urban 2.35<PER: 70%<PP≤80%
IMP≤4.0
5 Peri-urban 4.0<PER: 80%<PP≤90% 88%<PP Peri-
IMP≤9.0 ≤95% urban
6 Semi-rural PER: PP>90% PP>95% Rural PP>97% rural
IMP>9.0
Table 5.5: Results of the Boston Metropolitan Area characterization and comparison to
similar studies.
When comparing the distribution of the six PP gradient zones across the
metropolitan area, there is a clear and direct relationship with population density and
major road network layout distributions (Figure 5.11). The lowest percent pervious
values (Intense urban, urban core, and urban) correspond to the higher population
densities within and immediate surroundings of major urban concentrations such as the
Cities of Boston and Lowell. The mid-range values of percent pervious (urban, sub-
major interstate highways. For example, towns along the I-90 corridor and the I-93
towards Lawrence and MA-Route 3 towards Lowell are clear areas in transition. While
the Boston Metropolitan Area may be characterized as an urban core with low pervious
surface concentration, there is a clear indication that the whole region is becoming more
urbanized with loss of clear boundaries between urban and non-urban land, a
characteristic of the New England Towns. Some anomalies exist such as the towns of
137
Holliston
H and
d Dover soutth of I-90 and
d Carlisle noorth of I-90, where high percent pervvious
th
he study areaa either towaards the north
h-western peerimeters, noorth-eastern coast and thhe
so
outhern areaa bordering Rohde
R Island
d.
Figure 5.11: Metropolitaan gradient zones comparred to popullation densityy an major rroad
network
16 percent im
mpervious an
nd 12 percentt water surfaaces of the tootal study arrea. The overrall
138
in
ncrease, plottting the PP for
f each tow
wn across thee zones offerrs a finer inteerpretation oof the
PP distributio
on along the urban-rural gradient (Fiigure 5. 12).. Pervious suurface cover is
Bureau,
B 2012
2). The pervious and imp
pervious surffaces are neggatively corrrelated acrosss the
siix and imperrvious surfacce is at 57% for zone onee and 7% in Zone 6.
Figure 5. 12: Distribution us, imperviouus and waterr surfaces acrross the urbaan-
n of perviou
ru
ural gradientt.
Of the land uses
u that aree totally perv
vious in surfa
face, 49.5 perrcent is forest and brushh-land
an
nd 3.2 perceent are agricu
ulture. The remaining 200.3 per cent oof pervious ssurfaces are
24
4 per cent bu
uilding footp
print and thee remainder 228 percent iss parking spaaces and
drriveways.
Pervio
ous surfaces across the 33
3 land uses (LU; Figuree 5.13) show
w a varied
distribution of
o PP within land use classes and acrross gradientt zones. The results indiccate
th
he three high
hest ranking LUs with hiighest PP vaalues are low
w, medium annd high denssity
139
reesidential. Th
he sum of PP
P values these three LUss is increasinng from zone 1 to zone 66.
The
T lowest raanking LUs with
w lowest PP values leess than 0.755% across alll zones are
marina,
m minin
ng, nursery, orchard, tran
nsitional, waaste disposall, and water based recreaation.
The
T highest th
hree ranking
g PP values for
f LUs acrooss the six zoones are repoorted here. T
The
su
um of the firrst three rank
king PP valu
ues within LU
U classes is 49 % for zonne 1, 62% foor
zo
one 2, 46% for
f zone 3, 56%
5 for zonee 4, 64% forr zone 5, andd 49% for zoone 6.
The
T first threee ranking PP
P values for LUs
L includee multi-familly residentiaal (27%), higgh
reesidential (26
6%), multi-ffamily resideential (20%)), and forest (16%) for zoone 2; forestt
(2
20%), mediu
um density reesidential (2
20%), high ddensity resideential (16%)) for zone 3;
fo
orest (31%), medium den
nsity residen
ntial (18%), and high dennsity residenntial (7%) foor
zo
one 4 forestt (44%), low
w density resiidential (11%
%), and foressted wetlandd (9%) for zoone
140
When analyzing the data on impervious surfaces, the distribution of road area is
constantly increasing across the gradient zones with zones five and six demonstrating a
sharp decrease of six and three percent from zone four, respectively. Zone one is 28
percent covered with road and side walk surfaces and zones two, three, and four are at 22
percent, 17percent and 11percent respectively. Across all gradient zones, the percentage
of road surface area is half the total impervious within each zone.
Results for buildings show that the trend of building footprint cover is decreasing across
the gradient with a range of 6 to 1 percent from zone one to zone six, respectively. When
compared to the total impervious surface area within each zone, surface area of buildings
shows an increasing trend from zone one to zone four ranging between 10 percent to 22
percent, respectively; while zones five and six are close in value, 15 and 14 percent,
respectively; still, both show a higher value by 5 and 3 percent than zones one and two,
respectively.
The results for pervious surfaces across land uses and across zones indicate that
residential land use types (all densities) offer the highest presence of pervious surfaces
followed by recreation and urban public/institutional land-uses, open land and then
functions related to commercial and industry. Land-uses with total pervious surfaces are
not discussed in this section. Opportunities are defined within land-uses that include
141
The fiirst three ran
nking classess are reportedd here and aany additionaal land use tyypes
th
hat are of sig
gnificance arre also mentiioned (
Figuree 5.14). The sum of perccentage coveerage of quallifying perviious surface area
fo
or zone 1 is 4.2%
4 distributed as follo
ows: minor rroad arteriall (1.5%), lim
mited access
(1
1.9%), limiteed access hig
ghway (6.5%
%), and majoor road arteriial (1.2%). T
The sum of
percentage co
overage of qu
ualifying roaad area for zzone 3 is 8.4%
% distributeed as followss:
minor
m road arrterial (6.5%
%), major roaad arterial (1..5%), and lim
mited accesss highway
(0
0.44%). The sum of perccentage coveerage of quallifying road area for zonne 4 is 3.35%
%
major
m road arrterial (0.44%
%). The sum
m of percentaage coveragee of qualifyinng road area for
zo
one 5 is 2.7%
% distributed
d as follows:: minor roadd arterial (2.1%), other nnumbered
highway (0.3%), and major road arterrial (0.0.3%)). The sum oof percentagee coverage oof
142
Figure 5.14: Percent
P perv
vious surfacees across land-use types within each gradient zonne
nd ranking of
an o the highesst three valuees
5.6.4 Maxim
mum Opportunities off Pervious Su
urfaces for the Urban H
Heat Island
d
su
urrounding ambient
a temp
peratures. Th
he results suuggest that loow, medium
m, and to som
me
ex
xtent, high density
d residential land-u
use classes pprovide the hhighest opportunity acrosss all
in
ndustrial, jun
nkyard, miniing, marinas, water-baseed recreationn across all zzones to a
maximum
m vallue 11% for medium den
nsity residenntial in zone two.
fo
our hectare patches
p are reported
r heree (Figure 5.115). For graddient zone onne participattion
143
density residential, golf courses, and open land rank third at an equal PP value of 0.63%.
Zone two land-use classes are high density residential (4.4%), followed by golf courses
(1.1%) and participation recreation (0.8%). Zone three is dominated by residential land
use classes and includes medium density (6.2%), high density (2.95), and low density
(0.8%). Similarly, residential land uses dominate zone four and include medium density
(11.1%), low density (3.3%), and high density (1.9%). Zone five land uses classes are
low density residential (9.5%), medium density residential (4.9%), and golf courses at
1.7%. Similarly, zone six is dominated by residential and golf course land uses classes.
The values are low density residential (5.0%), very low density residential (1.9%), and
What is surprising about these results is that in zones one and two, where PP is
lowest, four hectare patch opportunities reside in public or recreation land use classes.
This is an unexpected result since the characterization of zones by PP indicates that the
zones one and two have the least available space. It is worthwhile noting that the reported
values for zones one and two still represent a small fraction of the total land area. In
zones three and four where middle PP values are established, opportunities reside in
residential land-use classes and for zone six low residential and golf courses provide the
higher PP value of four hectare patches when compared to zones two and three.
144
Figure 5.15: Percent
P perv
vious values for four hec tare patches across land uses and theeir
raanking crosss the six zonees.
Opporrtunities to in
ntensify veg
getative coveer exist acrosss all land usses. By applyying
in
ntensify vegeetative coverr without jeo
opardizing thhe outdoor sspace use of the land-usee
cllass. The oveerall results indicate thatt residential classes rankk first acrosss all gradientt
zo
ones followeed by comm
mercial and op
pen land. Thhe results forr the first thrree ranking
fo
ollowed by open
o land (0.9%) and ind
dustrial (0.8%
%). Zone tw
wo is somewhhat similar w
with
145
multi-family
m residential class
c (2.0%) followed byy commerciaal (1.5%). Raank three is
sh
hared by ind
dustrial (1.0%
%) and publiic/institutionnal (1.0%) laand use classses. Zone thrree is
raanked by meedium densitty residentiall (1.9%) andd commerciaal (1.6%) seccond. Rank tthree
in
ncludes med
dium density residential (1.9%)
( in firrst rank, com
mmercial (1.66%) in seconnd
Zone
Z five includes low deensity resideential (4.7%)) in first rankk, open land (1.8%) in
zo
one five in laand uses claasses but difffers in rank oorder: low deensity resideential (3.2%)),
5.6.4.3 Transsforming Bu
uilding Roo
ofs to Green
n Roofs
146
Out of all the land use categories in the study area, building footprints in nine land
uses classes qualify for surface transformation to green roofs (Figure 5.17). The land-use
transportation, participation recreation, marina, water based recreation, and golf courses.
These land uses are dominated with large footprints and mostly flat roofs. Some land use
types such as high density residential, golf courses, marina, and water based recreation
may include buildings with pitched roofs and especially in the zones more distant from
the center. With the available data, it was not possible to determine roof type of every
single building.
The results indicate that building foot print areas across land uses are dominated
by commercial in zone 1, high density residential in zones two, three, and four; and with
industrial buildings in zones five and six significance reduction across zones. The first
three ranking area percentages are reported as percentage of total zone area. 21.4 per cent
is the sum of the highest three LUs for zone 1 and multi-family residential (10.4%), high
density residential (7.6%) and urban public/institutional (3.5%). 31 percent is the sum of
the highest three LUs for zone 2 and include high density residential (18.6%), multi-
family residential (10%), and participation recreation (1.1%). 33 percent is the total of the
highest three LUs for zone 3 and include medium density residential (15.5%), high
density residential (12.5%), multi-family residential (5.2%). 35 percent is the total of the
highest three LUs for zone 4 and include medium density residential (20%), low density
residential (8%), and high density residential (7%). 32 percent is the total of the highest
three LUs for zone 5 and include low density residential (19%), medium density
residential (9.6%), and low density residential (3.2%). 27 percent is the total of the
147
highest three LUs for zon
ne 6 and include low dennsity residenttial (15.6%), urban veryy low
The data
d shows th
hat the overaall opportuniities for pervvious surfacees within roaad
eaasements is predominant
p tly in class five
f roads (m
minor road arrterials) folloowed by class
on
ne roads (lim
mited access highways). The first thrree ranking cclasses are reeported heree
(F
Figure 5.18). The sum off percentagee coverage off qualifying road area foor zone 1 is 44.2%
otther numberred highway (1.3%). Thee sum of perccentage coverage of quaalifying roadd area
fo
or zone 2 is 4.8%
4 distributed as follo
ows: minor rroad arteriall (1.9%), lim
mited access
qu
ualifying roaad area for zone
z 3 is 8.4%
% distributeed as followss: minor roaad arterial (6.5%),
148
major
m road arrterial (1.5%
%), and limiteed access higghway (0.44%
%). The sum
m of percentaage
co
overage of qualifying
q ro
oad area for zone
z 4 is 3.335% distribuuted as follow
ws: minor rooad
arrterial (1.5%
%), limited acccess highwaay (1.4%), aand major roaad arterial (00.44%). The sum
of percentagee coverage off qualifying road area foor zone 5 is 22.7% distribuuted as folloows:
minor
m road arrterial (2.1%
%), other num
mbered highw
way (0.3%), and major rroad arterial
(0
0.0.3%). Thee sum of perrcentage coverage of quaalifying roadd area for zonne 6 is 1.5%
%
major
m road arrterial (1.2%
%).
ds to Vegetated Surfacees
5.6.4.5 Transsform Road
The ro
oads that quaalify for tran
nsformation to pervious surfaces all land uses annd
in
ndicate that class
c five haas the highestt potential accross all six zones (Figuure 5.19). Thhe
149
qu
ualifying roaad imperviou
us surface frrom zone onne to six are 44.3%, 8.7%,, 1.8%, 3.9%
%, 1,
an
nd1% , respeectively. Wh
hen accountiing for half tthe road surffaces that poossibly may
become perviious, these percentage vaalues are redduced by hallf as follows,, from zone one
trraffic study at
a multiple scales needs to conduct.
in
nstitutional and
a transporttation. Specttator recreatiion registereed the lowestt possible
co
ontribution across
a all zones.
percentage co
overage of qu
ualifying roaad area for zzone 1 is 5.8%
% distributeed as followss:
trransportation
n (3.3%), com
mmercial (2.8%), and inndustrial (2.77%), and The sum of
percentage co
overage of qu
ualifying roaad area for zzone 2 is 5.5%
% distributeed as followss:
150
in
ndustrial (2.5
5%), commeercial (2%), and
a urban puublic/instituttional (0.89%
%). The sum
m of
percentage co
overage of qu
ualifying roaad area for zzone 3 is 6.4%
% distributeed as followss:
percentage co
overage of qu
ualifying roaad area for zzone 4 is 5.5%
% distributeed as followss:
co
ommercial (2.6%), indusstrial (2%), and
a spectatoor recreation (0.94%). Thhe sum of
percentage co
overage of qu
ualifying roaad area for zzone 5 is 3%
% distributed as follows:
in
ndustrial (1.3
3%), commeercial (1.2%)), and urban public/instittutional (0.6%). The sum
m of
percentage co
overage of qu
ualifying roaad area for zzone 6 is 1.3%
% distributeed as followss:
151
5.6.5 Gradient of Green Infrastructure Policy Opportunities
When summing all PP values for the different strategies within each land use
class for each gradient zone, the extent of opportunity for each green infrastructure
matches surface temperature distribution for UHI for MB. The results indicate that
opportunity for the different measures varies differently across gradient zones. The total
PP value for four hectare patches increases from zone 1 (5.1%) to zone 3 (15.2%), levels
out for zones 4 and 5 at 21%, and dips for zone 6 (13.3%). For opportunities across
pervious surfaces when applying the use-coefficient, PP values are somewhat level for all
zones ranging from 8.7% for zone 1 to 10% for zones 5 and six. Intensifying tree canopy
within road easements shows a sharp increase in zone 3 with lower values for zones 1 and
6. The PP value slightly increases from zone 1(4.1%) to zone 2 (4.8%), then sharply
reaches 8.4% in zone 3 with sharp drop in zone 4 (3.3%) value reaching 1.5% for zone 6.
When considering transforming local arterial roads to green streets, PP values doubles
from zone 1 (4.1%) to zone 2 (8.7%). A gradual decrease is then observed from zone 3
(2%) to 1% in zone 6. Green roof show a gradual decrease from zone 1 (9.9%) to zone 6
(0.3%) with a single anomaly for zone 3 at 23.4%. PP values for transforming impervious
surfaces to pervious surfaces impact reduction gradually and consistently decreases from
When compared to the UHI, green roofs, parking transformation and intensifying
vegetation within pervious surfaces based on use coefficient provide the highest
opportunity to mitigate the UHI within zone 1. Four hectare patches, transforming roads
to pervious surfaces, and intensifying vegetation within pervious surfaces based on use-
coefficient show highest potential for zone 2. Four hectare patches, intensifying
152
vegetation wiithin perviou
us surfaces based
b on use--coefficient,, and green rroofs providee the
pervious surfa
faces based on
o use-coeffiicient and traansforming pparking surffaces show thhe
ntial for increeasing vegetation cover. Opportunitiies for zoness 5 and 6 reside
highest poten
in
n four hectarre patches, in
ntensifying vegetation
v w
within pervioous surfaces bbased on usee-
co
oefficient, an
nd vegetatio
on within roaad easementss (Figure 5.221).
153
Strategies in geneeral may be categorized
c aas follows: inntensifying vvegetation
within
w pervio
ous surfaces based
b on usee-coefficientt shows oppoortunity acrooss all zoness and
zo
ones. What is
i of significcance is that where the inntensity of thhe UHI (zonnes 1 to 3)
trransformatio
on of impervious surfaces (roads, buiildings and pparking) proovide substanntial
op
pportunities.
When co
onsidering ad
daptation to climate
c channge, accountting for foresst and
ag
gricultural laand uses beccomes a futu
ure opportuniity and challlenge to maintain in the near
an
nd distant fu
uture. When including fo
orest and agrriculture in thhe results, thhere is a cleaar
in
ndication (Fiigure 5.23) th
hat forest co
over will playy a significaant role in cliimate proofiing
Boston.,
B as th
he PP values consistently
y are increassing from zonne 1(6.2%) tto zone 2 (677%).
154
th
he priority heere would bee to devise policies
p that pprotect and ppreserve theese land usess into
th
he future.
When
n considering
g which land
d uses providde the highesst opportunitties for the
different greeen infrastructture strategiees, residentiaal uses are hhighest in rannk (Table 5.66).
The
T results allso allow forr the prioritizzation of pollicy across ggradient zonees based on sspace
av
vailability within
w each zone (Table 5.7)
5
Green
G Infra
astructure Policies
P nity Land-u
Opportun uses
Contiguous
C tree patchess All resideential categoories
Tree
T intensiffication All resideential, commmercial, openn land
Green
G Roofss High denssity residenttial, commerrcial, industrrial
Street
S shadin ng and greenn streets Class 5, loocal roads
Parking
P treee shading & Transform Industriall and comm mercial
Table
T 5.6: Highest provission of opporrtunity acrosss land-use cclasses by grreen
in
nfrastructuree policy.
155
Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3
Zone 1 Parking Green Roofs Tree Intensification
shading/transform
Zone 2 Tree Intensification Street shade & green Contiguous tree patches
streets
Zone 3 Green Roofs Contiguous tree patches Tree Intensification
Zone 4 Contiguous tree patches Tree Intensification Parking
shading/transform
Zone 5 Contiguous tree patches Tree Intensification Parking
shading/transform
Zone 6 Contiguous tree patches Tree Intensification Street shading
Table 5.7: Green infrastructure prioritization scheme across gradient zones.
The research findings presented here are significant because they begin to give an
infrastructure measures. The literature has made the connection between green
infrastructure and ecosystem benefits that accrue to communities and their environment
(Pauleit and Duhme, 2000). Small scale best management practices have been developed
and implemented predominantly at the local or parcel scale (EPA). There is growing
improving livelihoods (APA, 2012). Planning and design documents specify green
infrastructure as tools to improve physical urban contexts. While benedict and McMahon
(2002) provide steps to develop urban and metropolitan scale networks, the challenge
remains to plan and implant these networks within already established urban. Prior to
preserved should be the first step in developing responsive policy. The results from this
156
research may be considered as an initial step in identifying where possibilities reside,
what measures are applicable and what are the policy priorities that are needed to
planners and policy makers. Using a method based on basic GIS analysis tools using
readily available data sets provides an easy and relatively quick way to define policy
land metric allows planners to identify where opportunities and constraints are for
implementation. This becomes critical when considering the UHI, for example, where
certain extent and coverage of vegetated surfaces. The proposed method permits the
identification of the possible surface areas that can be dedicated for the provision of
ecosystems services. It follows, that the area metrics that result from this method allow
for the calculation of the environmental performance, as the surface area of land cover is
a primary input. These calculations will ultimate determine the extent that vegetated
surfaces may be able to reduce the UHI. Such calculations allow ecologists and
and/or green space and to conserve what exists. In the context of Boston, protecting the
36% of the total forested areas within the study area, that is situated within private and
public ownerships should be a priority. Then it becomes possible to intensify and expand
157
green cover by defining opportunities across land uses. By using the percent pervious
metric as the basis of the assessment method combined with the patch-corridor-matrix
network. This will require further exploration into the configuration aspect of green
There are several improvements that can be done to refine the proposed method.
Additional data layers should be added to ensure to refine the assessment and account for
variable that impact the provision of vegetated surfaces. Soil data and existing tree
canopy cover derived from remotely sensed images, will improve and refine the results to
This research focused on the assessment of space opportunity for vegetated green
infrastructure for the UHI. The UHI is considered as a form of local climate change\ and
represents a sample of what global climatic change may bring. The impacts of global
climate change are comparable to the UHI as both have direct local impact on
communities. Measures that are effective for the UHI are also applicable to adaptation to
climate change impacts. Green infrastructure is one of the most promising adaptive
strategies to climate proof cities. But this needs to be recognized in the planning process
at multiple scale and explicitly considered within the constraints of available space.
158
CHAPTER 6
6.1 Prologue
that we face today and will face in the future. In more specific, it is addressed to planners
who are constantly seeking out new ways of dealing with problems. Today’s
vast urbanization, depletion of resources, food security and climate change prompt us as
planners, to pursue practical, tangible, cost-effective, and imageable solutions that our
audience expects us to deliver. Yes, this is what we all wish: perfect solutions. But if not
seeking the best, most appropriate and “out-of-the-box” ideas is not our aim, then what
is?
The discussion brought forward in this dissertation was approached in this spirit:
and adaptation planning into a realm that begins to propose a continuum of theoretical
ideas and practical solutions that inform planners and improve the wellbeing of society.
Robert Young (2011) expressed this concern when he suggested that the underinvestment
has left planners with little experience to manage green infrastructure initiatives. I heed
his call and conclude this work with a brief review of the chapters, a discussion on green
infrastructure and adaptive capacity and propose a framework that integrates the ideas in
the chapters.
159
6.2 Green Infrastructure and Adaptive Capacity
climate change adaptation planning and policy. The three primary chapters identify
explicit contributions that address different components of this argument. The model
proposed for incremental adaptation implementation identifies planning issues that are
infrastructure strategies according to context and scale. This prompted the development
of an assessment method that aims to evaluate the maximum potential of space that could
be allocated for green infrastructure implementation at the metropolitan scale. The three
Chapter three argued for an implementation method for adaptation plans based on
policies to transformational ones depends on the extent that future climate projections
materialize. The aim was to provide a way where policy makers may be readily to accept
of adaptation agendas through long term phasing of policies and resources. The risk for
policy makers is that they will be accountable if climate change intensifies and no action
160
is carried out. A long term vision with clear but flexible objectives will allow for
environments. The results of testing the model on current case studies suggest that
adjustable plan that evolves as climate impacts materialize; investment is spread across
longer time frames allowing for monitoring to indicate the need to increase or reduce
advancements are achieved. This long term and phased approach is critically relevant to
along the transect and the prioritized climate impact, green infrastructure policies are
policies for adaptation across administrative jurisdictions and scales. When applied to the
metropolitan Boston, the results suggest that the limitations of space and character along
the transect will prompt varying green infrastructure measures. Prioritizing climate
161
change impacts across the transect will prompt communities to develop policies and plans
that suite their needs (horizontal integration) while contributing to an overall vision of
integrated local and regional planning, allocation of green infrastructure resources could
be matched to needs, provide redundancy of systems when required, and define enhance
One of the primary observations from chapter four is that space for green
this issue and a method is proposed to estimate surface areas across land uses usable for
green infrastructure to form a network at the metropolitan scale. Within urban contexts,
un-built surfaces are highly determined by land uses. The morphology of available space,
soils, and vegetation types vary according to land use types. Percent pervious (PP) is
developed as a land metric to identify the variations across land use types. The area
estimation method is applied to the metropolitan area of Boston (MOB) taking the urban
The MOB was characterized using the PP into gradient zones of perviousness. PP within
each land use type in each gradient zone is identified allowing the comparison of PPs
across land uses and zones. A gradient of potential green infrastructure policies is then
reducing temperatures: contiguous tree canopy, green roofs, street and parking tree
shading. Four strategies were also set: conservation of what is present, intensify pervious
surfaces, transform impervious surfaces and reduce impact. When considering the urban
162
heat island, the results suggest the potential of developing a network across the urban
region varies based on space availability and type of green infrastructure measure. For
example, where highest intensities of UHI dominate (in and close to urban core), green
roofs, parking transformation, and street shading are highly possible to implement
compared to contiguous patches of forest or pervious land surfaces. Farther from the core
where the UHI is less prominent, the results indicate a reversal of space potential
availability. The significance of these findings suggest that there is a clear need to
expedite implementation of specific green infrastructure measures within the urban core
to address the UHI. On the other hand, longer term planning to preserve and expand
patches of pervious land surfaces for future urban expansion should be accounted for
starting today.
with a green infrastructure transect that matches measures and contexts across scales and
the exploration of potential surface area allocation for green infrastructure aim to enhance
the ability of communities, cities and urban regions to better cope with climate change
now with multiple benefits accrued to the future. While green infrastructure may not be
sufficient to climate proof cities, it highly contributes to increasing the adaptive capacity
change impacts, they aim to enhance their adaptive capacity across multiple sectors to
163
vulnerabilities are a challenge to address due to the local-to-regional extent of impacts
based approach, green infrastructure is a suitable set of measures and policies that
enhance the adaptive capacity of specific communities and the urban area at large. The
complimentary between ecosystem services and climate impacts, no-regrets and multi-
systems and resources to cope with short and long term impacts. In human dominated
dependent on recognizing a specific threat (or threats) followed by policies and planning
initiatives that respond to this threat over time (Walker and Salt, 2008). In the context of
climate change impacts, adaptive capacity is the “the ability of a system to adjust
2007, p. 35)”. Two key ideas are relevant to green infrastructure. First, green
necessary to adjust and expand open space planning to include un-built land and natural
29
Urban System is a network of towns and cities and their hinterlands which can be seen
as a system since it depends on the movements of labor, goods and services, ideas,
and capital through the network. Crucial to the interactions within the system are efficient
systems of transport and communication (Forman, 2008)
164
The first idea is that green infrastructure can function in three adaptation
the mere fact that open spaces exist within metropolitan regions. Remnants of the natural
landscape, in the form of parks and private yards, are already providing ecosystem
services at the local scale regardless of the explicit recognition of climate change. But
this is dependent on the autonomous adaptation of natural elements within these open
spaces. These services depend on the health of vegetation and soils and the availability of
water. Increasing temperatures may lead to tree canopy death due to lower hardiness or
ecological succession resulting in species migration towards the north (Lerner and Allen,
2012). But climate change seems to be increasing at a faster pace than anticipated with
projections reaching 2⁰C by mid-century and 4⁰C by 2100 (Frumhoff et al., 2007). Such
a time frame is arguably too short for natural adaptation to occur. As a planned system
for climate adaptation, green infrastructure could account for the inherent vulnerability of
the network itself as well as ensuring the continued delivery of ecosystem benefits. For
that to occur, adjustments to open space planning must be made, and very soon.
30
Anticipatory adaptation is “adaptation that takes place before impacts of climate
change are observed; also referred to as proactive adaptation (IPCC 2007, p.35)”.
31
Autonomous adaptation is “adaptation that does not constitute a conscious response to
climatic stimuli but is triggered by ecological changes in natural systems and by market
or welfare changes in human systems; also referred to as spontaneous adaptation (IPCC
2007, p.35)”.
32
Planned adaptation is “adaptation that is the result of a deliberate policy decision,
based on an awareness that conditions have changed or are about to change and that
action is required to return to, maintain, or achieve a desired state (IPCC 2007, p.35)”.
165
The second idea is the adjustment or transformation of open space into a green
impacts of climate change. In the USA, open space planning is centered around
conservation and recreation of predominantly public land. Land and natural assets in
metropolitan areas include both publicly and privately-held open spaces. Arguably, these
assets are not counted as part of an infrastructural metropolitan network but as disparate
and distinct elements that provide localized ecosystem services. When accounting for
ecosystems services necessary for adaptation, land and natural assets within private and
public land should qualify to be part of a green infrastructure system. To transform these
current and future ecosystem benefits must be understood and measured. Under future
scenarios, recent studies have measured the extent of reduction of temperature and
flooding (Gill et al., 2007) and removal of pollutants and CO2 (Currie & Basse, 2008) of
green roofs, trees, and shrubs in Manchester (UK) and Vancouver (Canada) respectively.
These studies have focused on small-scale BMPs within urban cores. Small-scale BMPs
include local, neighborhood, urban and regional natural and engineered systems, then the
augmented. For example, the metropolitan Area of Boston boasts the provision of high
166
level of open space and forested cover (51%). Yet, only 15% of these forests are
property (from single homes to housing projects) include large tracts of un-built surfaces.
Residential pervious surfaces account 25% of total land area (excluding water). These are
predominantly lawn areas that could be transformed into functioning green infrastructure,
while maintaining recreational open space. The two examples in Boston demonstrate that
the potential to account land as part of green infrastructure to increase the adaptive
Few studies explicitly connect ecosystem services33 and adaptation beyond the
urban or sub-urban cores. It is true that the focus of climate change adaptation is at the
local scale, as this where the impacts are directly felt, at the individual level (ECLEI,
YR). Yet, there are multiple benefits to considering the metropolitan or even the regional
scale when considering GI for adaptation. Recognizing large and small patches and
corridors across a metropolitan region for the capacity as a CO2 sink (Stone, 2012) or
reduce regional temperatures (Gartland, 2008) or act as water storage from excess
precipitation (Gill et al., 2007), are complimentary to small scale BMPs within the urban
core. Studies that focus on the benefits of forest canopies (Nowak and Greenfield, 2012,
2012a), natural resources (Forman,T.T., 2008), and the impact of detention and retention
33
Ecosystem services (values and functions) are biological and ecological processes that
include, but not limited to, the water cycle, carbon cycle, nutrient cycle, air and water
pollutant removal and photosynthesis. The benefits accrued to communities from these
services maintain the quality and quantity of water (Brabec, 2009; 2002); clean the air
and act as a CO2 sink (McPherson, 2002); provide recreation spaces; improve health
conditions (REF); and ameliorate temperatures of urban climates (Akbari, 2002;
Gartland, 2007).
167
basins at the watershed scale primarily focus on total ecosystem benefits without
in addition to large scale parks, golf courses, etc. are maintained, temperatures within the
metropolitan climates may be ameliorated. The point here is that adaptation to climate
change impacts has been focused on solutions from within the urban core. It is time that
we begin looking beyond to compliment the local approach. Green infrastructure can play
the role of ameliorating metropolitan or urban-regional climate at least in the early stages
Approaching open space (or the un-built realm) planning in a metropolitan region
ecosystem benefit and suitability to respond to climate change impacts allows the
infrastructural system. This incorporates existing land resources as well as planning for
the future development of the GI system based on projected climate threats. These land
resources are available today and should be protected, enhanced, or expanded. When
considered as a metropolitan system, towns and cities may be able to concentrate their
land resource planning efforts depending on the contribution to the overall system and
168
adaptation targets. A metropolitan system should incorporate the plethora of current
policies, programs and regulations (DCR, DEP, Smart growth, conservation) that ensure
explicitly connect them to climate change adaptation. Still, it can be argued that these
also require an extensive period of time to implement. This is true. But starting inventory,
assessment, and adjustment of an existing stock of land with the purpose of developing
the GI system may be a more viable approach than beginning with what is not there or
requiring establishment through new policies and regulations. Furthermore, lower land
values beyond the urban core provide opportunities to aggressively pursue land
purchases. When considering urban expansion in the future and the likely increase in
climate impacts, land areas beyond the core will probably be transformed in character to
emulate urban core areas. This may lead to loss of more vegetated, ecological and natural
surfaces that inherently provide adaptation ecosystem services. So thinking about future
conditions and locking land today for future green infrastructure is another way that open
space planning should be adjusted and thought of more along the line of a necessary and
reduce the likelihood of large scale investments in the future. Thus an incremental and
phased approach is arguably the way forward to invest in a future green infrastructure
scale begins to immediately accrue adaptation benefits early in the adaptation process. At
the same time, a vision of a green infrastructure system provides flexibility to pursue
169
expansion and development of the green infrastructure system. In this manner, adaptation
using green infrastructure may begin today, monitoring its effectiveness while expanding
the existing stock of land into a multi-scalar infrastructural green infrastructure system
with multiple ecosystem benefits pertinent to adaptation. To achieve this, the following
principles are proposed to formulate a framework that adjusts open spaces to become a
green infrastructure network capable of enhancing the adaptive capacity of urban regions.
These principles are envisioned to contexts similar of the North East of the United States.
should articulate a metropolitan green infrastructure spatial vision to ensure that local
initiatives of green infrastructure contribute to the overall adaptation targets. The regional
dimension is critical because climate variability and impacts occur at this scale. At the
same time, when considering urban spread, reserving land assets is critical for future
climate proofing. Targets for adaptation set at the regional scale will ensure that local and
(Benedict and McMahon, 2006) and actively pursued. This may be achieved by
170
Principle 2 - Integrate top-down and bottom-up planning: Building on a vision,
policies.
and accounting of how singular and aggregated ecosystem benefits accrue from vegetated
land surfaces at the site, neighborhood, urban and metropolitan scales should be
are fundamental to establishing a system and an infrastructure that can respond to climate
impacts. Being able to determine how much tree canopy is available and size of tree
crowns will assist in determining how much rain water could be intercepted from an
support monitoring efforts of climate change and continuously enhance and improve the
adaptive capacity.
approach to intensifying urban tree canopy, natural vegetated surfaces, and engineered
vegetated surfaces on existing and newly acquired plots of land, regardless how small or
impervious surfaces, creating green roofs and transforming derelict land become core
171
use and land cover on privately or publicly owned land become crucial to maximize
ecosystem benefits as the relationship of ecosystem services and vegetated surface area is
directly proportional.
temperatures and drought regimes will impact the flora of a region, likely leading to the
death of forest cover and resulting in higher impacts from desertification and heat
indexes. Anticipating this possible change would require replacing vegetation species by
more drought tolerant types to ensure to ensure longevity and biodiversity, ensuring
maximum possible ecosystem services in the short and long terms. Knowing how much
ecosystem services (adaptive capacity) may be derived within a specific context is crucial
and categorization of GI measures and policies into a continuum that builds from local
small scale measures into a more transformative regional network. In the context of GI, a
as cities become greener. The purpose is to actively pursue strategies that respond to
will also need to be implemented in an incremental and phased manner. For green
infrastructure expansion, this may be the only way forward as challenges to valuation
172
remain as well as the long term nature of transformation of land uses and covers over
time. Gradual implementation begins with accounting what is available, build a vision
based on climate impacts, define extent of green infrastructure contribution, and then
green infrastructure planning span environmental and biological sciences, social sciences,
planning and design. Management and economic planning are also core fields. To
achieve a planning result that addresses social needs and climatic impacts and that is well
objectives. This is not an easy task that questions how conventional planning and
implementation have been carried out. The task to bring together a climate scientist, an
policy maker, a financial manager, and a community representative to achieve tha goal of
adaptation planning will require new ways to organize and manage that accounts for the
multi-layered process.
There are several reasons why the above principles are useful to planners and
policy makers concerned with using green infrastructure for adaptation. Understating the
typologies and their respective land covers, thus providing a single data layer for
173
system and considered as equal to other utility or infrastructural systems. By deriving the
current adaptive capacity from GI, thresholds of how much GI may contribute to
supplementary policies and measures are needed to be bundled with GI. A regional
administrative boundaries. Lastly, all the above compelling reasons will contribute to
the efficiency of the GI system itself and increasing the resilience of any metropolitan
region.
green infrastructure and climate change adaptation. As much as this has been a learning
and educational experience, the process has also brought about many questions that
complement this research and/or develop it further. The ideas and questions suggested
below define a long term research agenda that connects practice and research; planning
Adaptation Planning: The recent surge of adaptation plans may define the way
risk management planning defining approaches to adaptation. This research will aim to
174
analyze the extent of application of theoretical work into adaptation plans and how the
adaptation plans developed by cities across the world (developed and developing
countries) will be analyzed to draw generalizations that define previous experience and
show the way forward for future adaptation plans and these should move forward. The
frameworks 2) define common principles and themes across case studies, 3) develop a
common framework between a majority of adaptation plans, 4) define the basis that plans
are carried upon, 5)Compare case studies to theoretical frames, 6) identify and categorize
adaptation plans, and 8) develop cross cutting generalizations and themes that include
not? Are the objectives the same or differ? What are the overlaps and the contradictions?
Such a study may provide a way to better define sustainability in the context of climate
change and to mainstream adaptation under the sustainability umbrella. This may change
communities rather than a political agenda, action on the adaptation front may be pursued
more aggressively.
175
6.4.2 Green Infrastructure Planning
measures. Research and experiments are being conducted to operationalize the use of
green infrastructure in adaptation plans. The extent of reliance on green infrastructure and
the expected outcome is not clear. Similar to the first research objective set above, this
project will set to survey adaptation for their extent of use of green infrastructure. The
research will address and investigate the following: 1) how is GI defined in the context of
adaptation? 2) How much do the adaptation plans rely on green infrastructure for
effective response? 3) What are the implementation steps that have been taken to
implement green infrastructure strategies? 4) What are the gaps apparent in the adaptation
Chapter five of this dissertation focused on the urban climate as a surrogate for
larger scale climate adaptation. Green infrastructure spatial typologies were defined
across different land-uses at the regional scale that are suitable to mitigate the urban heat
island in Boston Metropolitan area. This same research is to be expanded to include other
climate change impacts such as flooding from increased precipitation, the threat of rising
sea level on coastal areas and the potential role of green infrastructure. Such an approach
will “complete” the study on Boston area to develop a green infrastructure regional scale
adaptation framework that accounts for the dominant and relevant climate impacts in
metropolitan Boston. Furthermore, the research will investigate the relationship of spatial
176
metrics, spatial statistics and socio-economic data will be sued to develop an effective
with the potential to develop it into an operational green infrastructure planning tool with
multiple objectives. The procedural framework and practical aspects will require further
development and verification. Literature from landscape ecology, urban planning, growth
management, and landscape planning will be analyzed to further develop the conceptual
idea.
Develop the work completed in chapter five of this dissertation into a comparative
study between several US cities. Such a study will aim to understand the relations ship
between regional urban form and the distribution of pervious surfaces (surrogate for
green infrastructure). Patterns at the regional, urban and neighborhood scales may be
identified as being potential best practices for retrofitting cities for climate adaptation. In
addition to the general objectives, several issues will also be pursued: 1) compare the
distribution of pervious surfaces across the urban-rural gradient of selected case studies,
2) develop patterns and common insights on pervious land distribution across land-uses
and compare, and 3) develop generalized land metrics that account for the urban form
The research was conducted within the context New England, US. While this was
done for several practical reasons, several lessons and methods may be could be
transferred to the Middle East. This projected project will aim to analyze the applicability
of environmental planning in general, and the use of green infrastructure within the
177
context of planning in the Middle East. Case studies from cities will be analyzed for their
planning systems and the potential to introduce environmental planning as a core part of
the planning system. This is particularly important because planning remains very
deterministic, top-down and environmental planning is still in its infancy. In specific, the
research will: 1) analyze metropolitan areas in the Middle East for the planning system,
identify and study any cities with an environmental dimension in its planning structure,
and 3) How do the climatic, geographic, and social context impact the application of
green infrastructure within the ME context. It is important to note while the Middle East
is imagined as a single entity in the Western mind, the contexts vary putting forward
6.5 Epilogue
Lastly, while this is not a future research objective, the research conducted in this
infrastructure and climate change as symbols of what humanity’s value have come to. I
would like to reflect on one aspect not directly related to green infrastructure but stems
from some conclusions that I have developed during reading and research.
There is still much more to be done on green infrastructure and adaptation. But
the mere fact of combining these two elements under a planning paradigm signifies two
important issues: green infrastructure is based on biological and ecological processes and
adaptation is about the climate. These are two components necessary for life, to our
existence.
178
What is surprising is that there are few adherents to the natural, ecological and
biological potential of green infrastructure. The benefits seem obvious, but may not be
appreciated and understood in our current society. In an age where every activity, object
consumption. I am not claiming that monetary value is not important in our day and age,
but there are values and benefits that are important to us as humanity but may not be
tagged. So what do we do? The simple answer is account for it, consider it and protect
until the day we are able and ready to value nature and the environment in a more
concrete way that could be understood by humanity. What is most surprising is that we,
as humans, have emanated from this same nature that we seek to destroy.
I hope that the ideas and thoughts presented here help to elevate the understanding
179
APPENDICES
180
APPENDIX A
Three types of UHI may occur at different times of the day and cover different
areas of the metropolitan area (Kutller, 2008). Surface heat island (SHI) and heat islands
of the urban canopy layer (HIUC) are affected by the ground and caused by high surface
temperatures. They occur due to the following mechanisms: anthropogenic heat from
building sides; greater shortwave absorption due to canyon geometry, decreased net long-
wave loss due to reduction of sky view factor by canyon geometry (sky view factor is the
ratio of the amount of the sky “seen” from a given point on a surface to that potentially
available); greater daytime heat storage (and nocturnal release) due to thermal properties
of building materials greater sensible heat flux due to decreased evaporation resulting
from removal of vegetation and surface waterproofing; and convergence of sensible heat
due to reduction of wind speed in canopy. SHI and HIUC mainly occur in built-up areas
and therefore have clearly defined boundaries and HIUC affect the atmosphere between
Urban boundary layer heat islands (UBH) form above the canopy layer as a result
of heat transfer (entrainment of heat from warmer canopy layer), artificial heat input
(anthropogenic heat from roofs and stacks), and increased absorption of radiation by
atmospheric pollutants (shortwave radiative flux convergence within polluted air) with
resulting thermal re-emission (entrainment of heat from overlying stable air by the
process of penetrative convection). This type of heat island already extends so far
upwards into the atmosphere above a city that it is propagated downwind by the overall
wind patterns and gives the well-known “urban plume”. The UBH occurs over built-up
181
arreas and exteends over su
urrounding areas
a downw
ward of wind direction (O
Oke, 1979;
Kuttler
K 1997, 2008). The variability and
a differentt types of UH
HI occurringg at differentt
The UHI
U varies in
n intensity deepending onn regional cliimatic condittions and
dy
ynamic and uncertain naature of the phenomenon
p n. The UHI iintensity deccreases with
in
ncreasing wiind speeds ass these proviide direct brreeze to residdents and shiifts the urbann
boundary layeer and plumee downstream. This releeases entrappped heat andd replaced wiith
co
ooler air resu
ulting in red
duced temperratures (Figuuerola and M
Mazzeo, 19988; Magee et
all.,1999; Mo
orris et al. ,20
001; Unger et
e al.,2001). Cloud coverr tends to redduce the
in
ntensity of UHI
U because cloud coverr screens the incoming suun energy w
which is the
prrimary sourcce of absorbeed and releaased heat (Acckerman,19885; Ripley ett al.,1996; M
Morris
182
and Simmonds,2000). UHI intensity is best developed in the summer due to the higher
intensity of the sun and reduced amounts of rain (reducing hydrant cooling), at least in
the northern latitudes (Philandras et al., 1999); Morris et al., 2001). UHI intensity is
greatest at night due to the nature of the phenomenon where impervious material absorbs
the sun energy during the day, stores it and radiates it back in short waves during the
night (Ripley et al., 1996; Jauregui,1997; Magee et al., 1999; Mont´avez et al., 2000;
Tereshchenko and Filonov, 2001; Kuttler, 2008). It follows that UHI may disappear by
day or the city may be cooler than the rural environs (Tapper, 1990; Steinecke,1999). In
conjunction with the above, cities with a larger footprint amplify the intensity of UHI due
to the larger surface area of impervious surfaces that increase absorbed sun energy and
released heat. Increased population size also increases radiant heat through increased car
use and energy consumption (Park, 1986; Yamashita et al., 1986; Hogan and Ferrick,
1998). Furthermore, rates of heating and cooling are greater in the surrounding area than
built-up area because of the difference of surface characteristics between both contexts
(Johnson, 1985).
183
APPENDIX B
THE TABLES
Imperviou
Estimated
2000-2010
s Surfaces
POP 2000
POP 2010
Populatio
Populatio
Town/Cit
n change
Pervious
Surfaces
Surfaces
Area of
Area of
Area of
y Area
n 2005
Water
Name
Town
(m2)
(m2)
(m2)
(m2)
Town #
184
5 A 39.612, 68.158.85 13.317.15 103.641, 54.738.06
00 5,15 2,82 83 0,50
1 BLACKST 8804 9026 222
6 ONE 8.915,0 29.474.86 3.382.997 1.205.07 24.886.79
0 6,80 ,66 1,28 7,86
1 BOLTON 4159 4897 738
7 4.528,0 52.003.96 3.176.749 3.537.70 45.289.50
0 0,66 ,58 7,03 4,05
1 BOSTON
8 588.95 617.59 28.63 603.27 129.913.8 72.411.82 6.055.07 51.446.95
7,00 4,00 7,00 6,00 49,95 3,52 3,71 2,72
1 BOXBORO 4868 4996 128
9 UGH 4.932,0 26.951.58 2.377.793 2.290.11 22.283.67
0 4,41 ,16 2,09 9,16
2 BOXFORD 7921 7965 44
0 7.943,0 63.204.67 4.154.998 5.933.65 53.116.02
0 5,54 ,49 2,07 4,98
2 BRAINTRE 33828 35744 1916
1 E 34.786, 37.369.75 10.663.59 3.926.95 22.779.20
00 5,56 9,31 3,12 3,13
2 BRIDGEW 25185 26563 1378
2 ATER 25.874, 73.451.63 8.604.039 12.205.7 52.641.79
00 1,19 ,58 99,71 1,90
2 BROCKTO 94304 93810 -494
3 N 94.057, 55.724.09 19.891.66 2.176.53 33.655.88
00 1,46 4,44 8,25 8,77
2 BROOKLI 57291 58732 1441
4 NE 58.012, 17.676.10 6.887.936 217.607, 10.570.55
00 3,60 ,79 13 9,68
2 BURLINGT 22876 24498 1622
5 ON 23.687, 30.723.42 8.189.952 1.211.32 21.322.14
00 2,28 ,52 3,85 5,91
2 CAMBRID 101355 105162 3807
6 GE 103.25 18.400.88 10.753.45 1.879.64 5.767.786
8,00 7,15 6,39 4,08 ,68
2 CANTON 20775 21561 786
7 21.168, 50.541.64 8.492.730 6.909.40 35.139.50
00 0,10 ,98 3,66 5,46
2 CARLISLE 4717 4852 135
8 4.784,0 40.207.03 2.370.547 4.985.93 32.850.55
0 4,49 ,33 0,38 6,78
2 CARVER 11177 11509 332
9 11.343, 102.880.6 11.445.96 28.305.8 63.128.83
00 48,17 9,05 42,62 6,50
3 CHELMSF 33858 33802 -56
0 ORD 33.830, 59.787.67 12.102.83 3.420.77 44.264.05
00 3,83 8,84 9,06 5,93
3 CHELSEA 35116 35177 61
1 35.146, 5.730.029 4.323.118 47.986,0 1.358.925
00 ,66 ,62 1 ,03
3 COHASSE 7261 7542 281
2 T 7.402,0 26.048.18 2.866.451 2.543.03 20.638.70
0 4,25 ,49 1,69 1,07
3 CONCORD 16993 17668 675
3 17.330, 66.904.55 6.144.843 6.598.87 54.160.83
185
00 7,65 ,11 6,36 8,18
3 DANVERS 25212 26493 1281
4 25.852, 35.705.00 9.823.624 2.721.01 23.160.36
00 9,18 ,08 6,24 8,86
3 DEDHAM 23464 24729 1265
5 24.096, 27.669.92 6.169.084 3.438.25 18.062.58
00 5,45 ,77 6,44 4,24
3 DIGHTON 6175 7086 911
6 6.630,0 57.418.09 4.278.902 6.957.35 46.181.83
0 1,61 ,85 2,32 6,44
3 DOVER 5558 5589 31
7 5.574,0 39.933.24 2.789.778 2.518.11 34.625.35
0 4,03 ,53 1,46 4,04
3 DRACUT 28562 29457 895
8 29.010, 55.522.00 8.635.846 3.800.31 43.085.83
00 5,05 ,77 8,72 9,56
3 DUNSTAB 2829 3179 350
9 LE 3.004,0 43.387.64 1.659.098 2.380.15 39.348.39
0 7,35 ,25 8,53 0,57
4 DUXBURY 14248 15059 811
0 14.654, 62.340.79 5.872.869 11.394.3 45.073.57
00 7,73 ,59 51,70 6,44
4 EAST 12974 13794 820
1 BRIDGEW 13.384, 45.428.30 5.268.365 6.130.12 34.029.81
ATER 00 9,99 ,70 7,81 6,48
4 EASTON 22299 23112 813
2 22.706, 75.713.80 8.005.411 11.062.1 56.646.27
00 3,60 ,07 16,23 6,30
4 ESSEX 3267 3504 237
3 3.386,0 36.924.44 1.704.579 10.233.5 24.986.31
0 5,06 ,35 54,78 0,93
4 EVERETT 38037 41667 3630
4 39.852, 8.904.846 6.127.534 65.146,2 2.712.166
00 ,86 ,33 8 ,25
4 FOXBORO 16246 16865 619
5 UGH 16.556, 53.987.52 7.713.648 4.675.56 41.598.31
00 9,59 ,95 6,06 4,58
4 FRAMING 66910 68318 1408
6 HAM 67.614, 68.642.06 16.482.78 4.671.13 47.488.14
00 0,19 0,74 2,40 7,05
4 FRANKLIN 29560 31635 2075
7 30.598, 69.998.12 10.206.00 3.482.27 56.309.84
00 6,01 9,62 1,12 5,27
4 GEORGET 7377 8183 806
8 OWN 7.780,0 34.054.31 3.511.600 3.793.27 26.749.43
0 2,33 ,30 5,35 6,68
4 GLOUCES 30273 28789 -1484
9 TER 29.531, 69.154.95 8.168.946 7.935.62 53.050.38
00 9,49 ,57 9,58 3,34
5 GROTON 9547 10646 1099
0 10.096, 87.479.47 4.927.314 7.937.22 74.614.93
00 0,74 ,18 0,07 6,49
5 GROVELA 6038 6459 421
1 ND 6.248,0 24.338.16 2.484.271 3.402.66 18.451.22
0 9,30 ,29 8,14 9,87
186
5 HALIFAX 7480 7518 38
2 7.499,0 45.028.53 3.313.086 13.738.2 27.977.17
0 4,81 ,48 70,85 7,48
5 HAMILTO 8315 7764 -551
3 N 8.040,0 38.592.24 2.644.280 7.305.53 28.642.43
0 3,68 ,08 1,37 2,23
5 HANOVER 13164 13879 715
4 13.522, 40.478.06 6.252.058 4.329.04 29.896.96
00 8,49 ,67 5,94 3,88
5 HANSON 9515 10209 694
5 9.862,0 40.748.13 4.071.997 10.236.7 26.439.40
0 6,49 ,66 35,49 3,34
5 HARVARD 5981 6520 539
6 6.250,0 70.327.48 5.478.348 4.831.33 60.017.80
0 4,64 ,60 0,94 5,10
5 HAVERHIL 58969 60879 1910
7 L 59.924, 92.457.99 15.251.63 9.074.98 68.131.38
00 8,43 1,83 5,45 1,15
5 HINGHAM 19882 22157 2275
8 21.020, 58.912.61 8.614.047 3.990.24 46.308.31
00 4,75 ,32 7,46 9,97
5 HOLBROO 10785 10791 6
9 K 10.788, 19.070.45 3.156.003 1.290.83 14.623.61
00 4,52 ,48 5,50 5,54
6 HOLLISTO 13801 13547 -254
0 N 13.674, 49.344.83 4.759.852 4.514.26 40.070.72
00 7,13 ,51 2,10 2,52
6 HOPEDAL 5907 5911 4
1 E 5.909,0 13.836.17 2.167.438 923.340, 10.745.39
0 5,47 ,56 53 6,38
6 HOPKINTO 13346 14925 1579
2 N 14.136, 72.137.07 7.303.724 7.303.72 57.529.62
00 4,96 ,82 4,82 5,32
6 HUDSON 18113 19063 950
3 18.588, 30.726.32 5.921.626 2.714.36 22.090.33
00 5,75 ,35 2,09 7,31
6 HULL 11050 10293 -757
4 10.672, 7.726.340 2.368.711 1.240.49 4.117.139
00 ,72 ,03 0,30 ,39
6 IPSWICH 12987 13175 188
5 13.081, 85.641.53 5.381.461 21.437.4 58.822.66
00 7,40 ,58 09,95 5,87
6 KINGSTON 11780 12629 849
6 12.204, 49.210.26 6.912.890 6.001.50 36.295.86
00 1,84 ,14 7,38 4,32
6 LAKEVILL 9821 10602 781
7 E 10.212, 93.548.11 6.266.380 28.520.6 58.761.07
00 6,10 ,73 65,20 0,17
6 LANCAST 7380 8055 675
8 ER 7.718,0 72.477.53 5.747.417 5.313.14 61.416.96
0 3,44 ,89 6,86 8,69
6 LAWRENC 72043 76377 4334
9 E 74.210, 19.238.17 10.157.22 1.294.58 7.786.363
00 3,74 2,00 8,18 ,56
7 LEXINGTO 30355 31394 1039
187
0 N 30.874, 43.093.41 9.075.687 1.958.80 32.058.92
00 3,64 ,31 5,01 1,32
7 LINCOLN 8056 6362 -1694
1 7.209,0 38.800.94 3.519.122 4.425.80 30.856.01
0 3,94 ,04 9,94 1,96
7 LITTLETO 8184 8924 740
2 N 8.554,0 45.351.16 5.644.772 4.570.11 35.136.28
0 8,62 ,88 4,54 1,20
7 LOWELL 105167 106519 1352
3 105.84 37.630.65 15.760.32 2.616.96 19.253.37
3,00 7,87 2,36 1,28 4,23
7 LYNN 89050 90329 1279
4 89.690, 29.910.09 12.486.40 2.469.36 14.954.32
00 4,17 3,84 7,81 2,52
7 LYNNFIEL 11542 11596 54
5 D 11.569, 27.046.60 4.052.119 3.959.55 19.034.93
00 1,42 ,25 0,66 1,51
7 MALDEN 56340 59450 3110
6 57.895, 13.127.93 7.205.063 106.982, 5.815.885
00 1,50 ,81 57 ,12
7 MANCHES 5228 5136 -92
7 TER 5.182,0 20.164.50 2.237.103 2.237.10 15.690.29
0 0,47 ,52 3,52 3,43
7 MANSFIEL 22414 23184 770
8 D 22.799, 52.902.10 8.789.856 4.236.25 39.875.99
00 4,54 ,47 0,81 7,26
7 MARBLEH 20377 19808 -569
9 EAD 20.092, 11.326.81 4.197.372 244.656, 6.884.783
00 2,54 ,84 64 ,06
8 MARLBOR 36255 38499 2244
0 OUGH 37.377, 57.241.19 12.011.94 4.717.39 40.511.85
00 1,63 1,08 2,16 8,39
8 MARSHFIE 24324 25132 808
1 LD 24.728, 73.955.19 8.649.453 12.806.9 52.498.77
00 7,07 ,39 63,74 9,94
8 MAYNAR 10433 10106 -327
2 D 10.270, 13.903.41 2.483.314 1.171.32 10.248.76
00 0,00 ,32 9,12 6,56
8 MEDFIELD 12273 12024 -249
3 12.148, 37.955.73 4.044.229 6.294.66 27.616.83
00 0,41 ,03 1,40 9,98
8 MEDFORD 55765 56173 408
4 55.969, 21.880.87 8.569.100 1.105.60 12.206.16
00 8,05 ,21 7,96 9,88
8 MEDWAY 12448 12752 304
5 12.600, 30.216.56 3.942.380 2.224.06 24.050.11
00 6,71 ,22 7,03 9,46
8 MELROSE 27134 26983 -151
6 27.058, 12.348.56 4.189.917 320.695, 7.837.952
00 5,78 ,68 63 ,47
8 MENDON 5286 5839 553
7 5.562,0 46.586.50 3.055.503 3.099.94 40.431.05
0 2,60 ,09 1,87 7,64
8 MERRIMA 6138 6338 200
8 C 6.238,0 23.057.17 2.264.470 1.652.92 19.139.78
188
0 8,08 ,85 0,34 6,89
8 METHUEN 43789 47255 3466
9 45.522, 59.557.81 12.552.75 4.886.47 42.118.59
00 3,69 2,48 0,46 0,75
9 MIDDLEB 19927 23116 3189
0 OROUGH 21.522, 187.001.1 13.705.70 45.231.3 128.064.0
00 09,86 9,30 87,68 12,88
9 MIDDLET 7744 8987 1243
1 ON 8.366,0 37.520.73 3.707.048 5.514.13 28.299.55
0 0,69 ,93 0,44 1,32
9 MILFORD 26799 27999 1200
2 27.399, 38.909.66 7.923.312 2.664.76 28.321.58
00 5,27 ,71 6,68 5,88
9 MILLIS 7902 7891 -11
3 7.896,0 31.760.62 2.833.861 6.267.99 22.658.76
0 4,08 ,30 4,81 7,97
9 MILLVILL 2724 3190 466
4 E 2.957,0 12.863.78 1.132.085 575.124, 11.156.57
0 2,68 ,51 76 2,41
9 MILTON 26062 27003 941
5 26.532, 34.464.52 6.177.461 2.025.31 26.261.74
00 4,19 ,78 6,69 5,72
9 NAHANT 3632 3410 -222
6 3.521,0 3.249.309 880.816,5 564.033, 1.804.459
0 ,47 4 12 ,81
9 NATICK 32170 33006 836
7 32.588, 41.337.98 8.733.016 4.335.59 28.269.37
00 1,60 ,28 3,29 2,03
9 NEEDHAM 28924 28886 -38
8 28.905, 32.947.76 7.576.580 3.708.45 21.662.73
00 6,82 ,40 4,64 1,78
9 NEWBURY 6717 6666 -51
9 6.692,0 62.628.19 3.481.428 20.836.6 38.310.11
0 8,76 ,72 57,91 2,13
1 NEWBURY 17189 17416 227
0 PORT 17.302, 22.644.70 4.721.518 1.838.19 16.084.99
0 00 9,41 ,19 6,50 4,72
1 NEWTON 83829 85146 1317
0 84.488, 47.019.52 16.662.43 1.553.45 28.803.62
1 00 0,88 1,41 9,88 9,59
1 NORFOLK 10460 11227 767
0 10.844, 39.875.15 3.768.750 4.516.76 31.589.63
2 00 1,89 ,41 3,77 7,71
1 NORTH 27202 28352 1150
0 ANDOVER 27.777, 71.785.07 9.781.970 8.332.17 53.670.92
3 00 6,42 ,20 7,25 8,97
1 NORTH 13837 14892 1055
0 READING 14.364, 34.936.71 5.638.685 4.140.52 25.157.50
4 00 0,79 ,46 0,10 5,23
1 NORTON 18036 19031 995
0 18.534, 75.918.56 7.176.126 13.870.9 54.871.49
5 00 1,77 ,09 43,51 2,17
1 NORWELL 9765 10506 741
0 10.136, 54.975.19 4.762.735 8.026.38 42.186.07
6 00 8,71 ,60 4,61 8,50
189
1 NORWOO 28587 28602 15
0 D 28.594, 27.193.61 8.645.782 3.037.61 15.510.21
7 00 6,79 ,70 9,46 4,63
1 PEABODY 48134 51251 3117
0 49.692, 43.520.40 13.387.71 2.660.99 27.471.69
8 00 6,41 2,42 6,92 7,07
1 PEMBROK 16927 17837 910
0 E 17.382, 60.993.78 6.861.154 14.825.9 39.306.63
9 00 2,37 ,12 96,33 1,92
1 PEPPEREL 11142 11497 355
1 L 11.320, 60.068.09 4.469.198 3.324.88 52.274.01
0 00 9,32 ,29 7,39 3,64
1 PLAINVIL 7683 8264 581
1 LE 7.974,0 29.776.04 4.362.360 2.434.61 22.979.06
1 0 2,24 ,17 5,47 6,60
1 PLYMOUT 51701 56468 4767
1 H 54.084, 266.178.9 27.253.34 25.408.2 213.517.2
2 00 22,91 1,16 89,59 92,16
1 PLYMPTO 2637 2820 183
1 N 2.728,0 39.121.04 2.869.928 9.925.07 26.326.03
3 0 1,82 ,03 8,52 5,27
1 QUINCY 88025 92271 4246
1 90.148, 44.840.77 14.967.95 4.284.32 25.588.49
4 00 7,05 7,03 5,98 4,04
1 RANDOLP 30963 32112 1149
1 H 31.538, 26.971.97 6.235.209 2.994.65 17.742.10
5 00 5,03 ,32 9,37 6,34
1 RAYNHA 11739 13383 1644
1 M 12.561, 53.774.79 7.207.969 7.343.19 39.223.63
6 00 7,24 ,02 4,59 3,63
1 READING 23708 24747 1039
1 24.228, 25.874.49 5.185.104 5.109.91 15.579.47
7 00 7,04 ,69 9,85 2,50
1 REVERE 47247 51755 4508
1 49.501, 15.961.56 7.739.138 2.956.47 5.265.954
8 00 4,47 ,45 1,71 ,31
1 ROCKLAN 17670 17489 -181
1 D 17.580, 26.209.25 4.944.818 3.919.18 17.345.25
9 00 0,36 ,19 1,51 0,66
1 ROCKPOR 7767 6952 -815
2 T 7.360,0 18.173.63 4.944.818 1.008.03 12.220.78
0 0 4,24 ,19 0,75 5,30
1 ROWLEY 5500 5856 356
2 5.678,0 48.015.90 3.119.261 11.304.8 33.591.76
1 0 2,20 ,83 73,89 6,48
1 SALEM 40402 41340 938
2 40.871, 21.576.22 8.090.837 842.777, 12.642.60
2 00 2,19 ,92 32 6,95
1 SALISBUR 7827 8283 456
2 Y 8.055,0 40.926.01 4.288.956 12.364.2 24.272.78
3 0 2,88 ,94 66,04 9,90
1 SAUGUS 26078 26628 550
2 26.353, 29.371.04 7.798.816 3.896.46 17.675.76
4 00 1,98 ,94 2,81 2,23
1 SCITUATE 17863 18133 270
190
2 17.998, 44.862.40 5.859.523 7.253.73 31.749.14
5 00 9,24 ,74 7,49 8,01
1 SHARON 17408 17612 204
2 17.510, 63.334.44 6.022.301 7.243.89 50.068.25
6 00 8,65 ,95 1,29 5,41
1 SHERBOR 4200 4119 -81
2 N 4.160,0 41.841.24 2.149.712 4.452.59 35.238.93
7 0 0,89 ,59 7,76 0,54
1 SHIRLEY 6373 7211 838
2 6.792,0 41.177.88 3.362.522 2.464.59 35.350.76
8 0 0,36 ,25 1,83 6,28
1 SOMERVIL 77478 75754 -1724
2 LE 76.616, 10.698.16 8.241.635 32.124,2 2.424.400
9 00 0,36 ,79 1 ,36
1 SOUTHBO 8781 9767 986
3 ROUGH 9.274,0 40.205.35 4.838.714 4.900.08 30.466.55
0 0 8,50 ,78 5,38 8,34
1 STONEHA 22219 21437 -782
3 M 21.828, 17.213.71 4.953.268 1.823.69 10.436.74
1 00 4,04 ,57 5,54 9,93
1 STOUGHT 27149 26962 -187
3 ON 27.056, 42.644.40 7.768.140 2.987.62 31.888.64
2 00 6,87 ,01 5,07 1,79
1 STOW 5902 6590 688
3 6.246,0 46.608.28 2.895.983 5.617.03 38.095.26
3 0 6,51 ,26 3,28 9,97
1 SUDBURY 16841 17659 818
3 17.250, 64.092.08 6.371.480 7.416.37 50.304.22
4 00 1,29 ,88 5,30 5,11
1 SWAMPSC 14412 13787 -625
3 OTT 14.100, 8.030.877 3.047.403 359.355, 4.624.118
5 00 ,99 ,32 95 ,72
1 TAUNTON 55976 55874 -102
3 55.925, 124.959.8 18.444.40 16.946.4 89.568.99
6 00 92,70 3,66 94,27 4,77
1 TEWKSBU 28847 28961 114
3 RY 28.904, 54.771.58 9.493.179 4.785.50 40.492.89
7 00 0,86 ,14 7,57 4,15
1 TOPSFIEL 6141 6085 -56
3 D 6.113,0 33.164.42 2.647.882 4.920.64 25.595.90
8 0 7,89 ,05 4,83 1,01
1 TOWNSEN 9198 8926 -272
3 D 9.062,0 85.405.10 4.077.107 3.560.09 77.767.90
9 0 5,51 ,39 0,26 7,86
1 TYNGSBO 11081 11292 211
4 ROUGH 11.186, 46.800.58 5.013.704 4.030.45 37.756.41
0 00 2,87 ,61 9,61 8,65
1 UPTON 5642 7542 1900
4 6.592,0 56.547.64 3.670.105 4.224.41 48.653.11
1 0 1,91 ,19 7,35 9,37
1 WAKEFIEL 24804 24932 128
4 D 24.868, 20.704.63 6.275.487 2.877.79 11.551.35
2 00 6,13 ,26 5,53 3,34
1 WALPOLE 22824 24070 1246
4 23.447, 54.554.21 8.494.618 5.951.08 40.108.51
191
3 00 9,63 ,02 5,76 5,85
1 WALTHA 59226 60632 1406
4 M 59.929, 35.649.43 12.848.81 3.059.77 19.740.84
4 00 0,24 9,44 0,61 0,19
1 WAREHA 20335 21822 1487
4 M 21.078, 96.101.33 12.269.63 17.201.0 66.630.60
5 00 6,28 2,14 94,83 9,31
1 WATERTO 32986 31915 -1071
4 WN 32.450, 10.681.44 5.258.087 351.803, 5.071.556
6 00 6,61 ,05 29 ,27
1 WAYLAN 13100 12994 -106
4 D 13.047, 41.063.12 4.122.368 6.780.27 30.160.48
7 00 3,72 ,36 4,88 0,48
1 WELLESL 26604 27982 1378
4 EY 27.293, 27.269.57 6.671.186 1.634.15 18.964.23
8 00 6,39 ,58 6,29 3,52
1 WENHAM 4440 4875 435
4 4.658,0 21.085.80 1.656.085 5.339.10 14.090.60
9 0 0,09 ,66 9,37 5,06
1 WEST 6634 6916 282
5 BRIDGEW 6.775,0 40.594.00 4.178.756 7.956.17 28.459.07
0 ATER 0 7,16 ,81 2,50 7,85
1 WEST 4149 4235 86
5 NEWBURY 4.192,0 38.137.76 2.044.766 5.106.82 30.986.17
1 0 8,26 ,87 2,28 9,11
1 WESTFOR 20754 21951 1197
5 D 21.352, 81.226.63 9.143.410 9.236.07 62.847.14
2 00 4,07 ,85 7,16 6,06
1 WESTON 11465 11261 -204
5 11.363, 44.885.98 5.657.816 2.871.25 36.356.91
3 00 1,63 ,36 1,42 3,85
1 WESTWOO 14117 14618 501
5 D 14.368, 28.965.19 5.177.484 1.755.70 22.032.00
4 00 2,71 ,27 0,69 7,75
1 WEYMOU 53988 53743 -245
5 TH 53.866, 46.183.62 11.623.50 5.271.99 29.288.11
5 00 0,40 5,21 9,39 5,80
1 WHITMAN 13882 14489 607
5 14.186, 18.022.24 3.457.571 2.270.97 12.293.69
6 00 5,92 ,35 8,10 6,47
1 WILMING 21367 22325 958
5 TON 21.846, 44.399.12 9.700.889 4.835.30 29.862.93
7 00 3,03 ,87 3,05 0,11
1 WINCHES 20810 21374 564
5 TER 21.092, 16.439.01 4.991.372 868.279, 10.579.36
8 00 5,81 ,61 24 3,96
1 WINTHRO 18303 17497 -806
5 P 17.900, 5.897.573 2.363.820 874.648, 2.659.105
9 00 ,54 ,07 10 ,37
1 WOBURN 37258 38120 862
6 37.689, 33.522.27 12.057.32 1.594.61 19.870.32
0 00 4,04 8,84 6,73 8,47
1 WRENTHA 10554 10955 401
6 M 10.754, 58.538.61 6.190.167 4.783.81 47.564.63
1 00 7,35 ,87 2,27 7,21
192
Totals 1453
4.209.1 4.354.4 05 4.281.8 7.237.619 1.131.525 852.421. 5.253.672
66,00 71,00 25,00 .944,17 .341,45 794,70 .808,02
Average
26.143, 27.046, 902,5 26.595, 44.954.16 7.028.107 5.294.54 32.631.50
89 40 2 19 1,14 ,71 5,31 8,12
Table 5.8; List of towns included in the study area with basic population, area, and land
cover data.
193
LULC Code-2005 LULC Area (m2) Perce Description of LULC categories (MassGIS)
Code nt of
Study
Area
Cropland 1 1,73% Generally tilled land used to grow row crops.
125.110.023, Boundaries follow the shape of the fields and
06 include associated buildings (e.g., barns).
This category also includes turf farms that
grow sod
Pasture 2 1,25% Fields and associated facilities (barns and
90.185.069,5 other outbuildings) used for animal grazing
3 and for the growing of grasses for hay.
Orchard 35 0,17% Fruit farms and associated facilities
12.257.193,3
7
Nursery 36 0,13% Greenhouses and associated buildings as well
9.695.242,02 as any surrounding maintained
lawn. Christmas tree (small conifer) farms
are also classified as Nurseries.
Agr.
237.247.527,
98
Forest 3 41,08 Areas where tree canopy covers at least 50%
2.972.983.78 % of the land. Both coniferous and deciduous
8,46 forests belong to this class.
Brushland/Success 40 0,24% Predominantly (> 25%) shrub cover, and
ional 17.373.151,8 some immature trees not large or dense
2 enough to be classified as forest. It also
includes areas that are more permanently
shrubby, such as heath areas, wild blueberries
or mountain laurel
Forest
2.990.356.94
0,28
Open Land 6 1,21% Vacant land, idle agriculture, rock outcrops,
87.512.503,5 and barren areas. Vacant land is not
4 maintained for any evident purpose and it
does not support large plant growth.
Powerline/Utility 24 0,59% Powerline and other maintained public utility
42.848.973,0 corridors and associated facilities, including
3 power plants and their parking areas.
Open
land 130.361.476,
57
Saltwater Sandy 25 0,51% DEP Wetlands (1:12,000) WETCODEs 1, 2,
Beach 36.851.736,2 3, 6, 10, 13, 17 and 19
7
Participation 7 0,96% Facilities used by the public for active
Recreation 69.278.739,8 recreation. Includes ball fields, tennis courts,
1 basketball courts, athletic tracks, ski areas,
playgrounds, and bike paths plus associated
parking lots. Primary and secondary school
recreational facilities are in this category, but
university stadiums and arenas are considered
194
Spectator Recreation. Recreation facilities not
open to the public such as those belonging to
private residences are mostly labeled with the
associated residential land use class not
participation recreation. However, some
private facilities may also be mapped.
Spectator 8 0,07% University and professional stadiums
Recreation 5.005.543,52 designed for spectators as well as zoos,
amusement parks, drive-in theaters,
fairgrounds, race tracks and associated
facilities and parking lots.
Water-Based 9 0,03% Swimming pools, water parks, developed
Recreation 2.163.038,86 freshwater and saltwater sandy beach areas
and associated parking lots. Also included are
scenic areas overlooking lakes or other water
bodies, which may or may not include access
to the water (such as a boat launch). Water-
based recreation facilities related to
universities are in this class. Private pools
owned by individual residences are usually
included in the Residential category. Marinas
are separated into code 29.
Golf Course 26 0,87% Includes the greenways, sand traps, water
62.782.557,5 bodies within the course, associated buildings
5 and parking lots. Large forest patches within
the course greater than 1 acre are classified as
Forest (class 3). Does not include driving
ranges or miniature golf courses
Marina 29 0,02% Include parking lots and associated facilities
1.755.207,53 but not docks (in class 18
Recreati
on 177.836.823,
54
Multi-Family 10 3,12% Duplexes (usually with two front doors, two
Residential 225.855.059, entrance pathways, and sometimes two
32 driveways), apartment buildings,
condominium complexes, including buildings
and maintained lawns. Note: This category
was difficult to assess via photo
interpretation, particularly in highly urban
areas.
High Density 11 3,68% Housing on smaller than 1/4 acre lots. See
Residential 266.335.544, notes below for details on Residential
98 interpretation
Medium Density 12 6,91% Housing on 1/4 - 1/2 acre lots. See notes
Residential 500.108.414, below for details on Residential interpretation
68
Low Density 13 8,57% Housing on 1/2 - 1 acre lots. See notes below
Residential 620.566.580, for details on Residential interpretation
64
Very Low Density 38 1,94% Housing on > 1 acre lots and very remote,
Residential 140.652.680, rural housing. See notes below for details on
91 Residential interpretation.
195
Urban 31 1,73% Lands comprising schools, churches, colleges,
Public/Institutional 125.468.684, hospitals, museums, prisons, town halls or
96 court houses, police and fire stations,
including parking lots, dormitories, and
university housing. Also may include public
open green spaces like town commons.
Commercial 15 2,32% Malls, shopping centers and larger strip
167.942.285, commercial areas, plus neighborhood stores
29 and medical offices (not hospitals). Lawn and
garden centers that do not produce or grow
the product are also considered commercial.
Industrial 16 1,84% Light and heavy industry, including buildings,
133.049.169, equipment and parking areas
41
Transportation 18 1,57% Airports (including landing strips, hangars,
113.709.881, parking areas and related facilities), railroads
57 and rail stations, and divided highways
(related facilities would include rest areas,
highway maintenance areas, storage areas,
and on/off ramps). Also includes docks,
warehouses, and related land-based storage
facilities, and terminal freight and storage
facilities. Roads and bridges less than 200
feet in width that are the center of two
differing land use classes will have the land
use classes meet at the center line of the road
(i.e., these roads/bridges themselves will not
be separated into this class)
Cemetery 34 0,43% Includes the gravestones, monuments,
31.357.599,7 parking lots, road networks and associated
3 buildings
Junkyard 39 0,06% Includes the storage of car, metal, machinery
4.463.256,68 and other debris as well as associated
buildings as a business
Mining 5 0,29% Includes sand and gravel pits, mines and
20.745.274,0 quarries. The boundaries extend to the edges
9 of the site’s activities, including on-site
machinery, parking lots, roads and buildings.
Transitional 17 0,39% Open areas in the process of being developed
28.270.644,4 from one land use to another (if the future
7 land use is at all uncertain). Formerly
identified as "Urban Open"
Waste Disposal 19 0,14% Landfills, dumps, and water and sewage
10.472.701,7 treatment facilities such as pump houses, and
5 associated parking lots. Capped landfills that
have been converted to other uses are coded
with their present land use.
Urban
2.388.997.77
8,48
Forested Wetland 37 8,24% DEP Wetlands (1:12,000) WETCODEs 14,
596.196.348, 15, 16, 24, 25 and 2
34
Water 20 3,34% DEP Wetlands (1:12,000) WETCODEs 9 and
241.865.643, 22
196
95
Non-Forested 4 4,08% DEP Wetlands (1:12,000) WETCODEs 4, 7,
Wetland 295.238.654, 8, 12, 23, 18, 20, and 21.
78
Saltwater Wetland 14 1,45% DEP Wetlands (1:12,000) WETCODEs 11
104.763.752, and 27
16
Cranberry Bog 23 1,03% Both active and recently inactive cranberry
74.454.759,0 bogs and the sandy areas adjacent to the bogs
8 that are used in the growing process.
Impervious features associated with cranberry
bogs such as parking lots and machinery are
included. Modified from DEP Wetlands
(1:12,000) WETCODE 5.
Water
1.312.519.15
8,31
7.237.319.70
5,16
Table 5.9: Table of land-use classes used in the study (MassGIS).
197
Data Set Data Resolution and source of Information Date
Type
Community Vector Created by Mass GIS from latitude and 2011
Boundaries polygons longitude coordinates found in the 68-
(Cities and volume Harbor and Lands Commission Town
Towns) from Boundary Atlas and cross checked with USGS
Survey Points quad sheets; error ±12feet.
MA State Vector, MassGIS; Digitized from 1:25,000 linework 1991
Outlines Polygons from U.S. Geological Srvey Mylar map sheets
Boston Vector, US Census Bureau 1999
Metropolitan Polygons http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg_statpo
Statistical Area licy#ms
boundaries
New England Vector, Mass GIS; No information available 2007
Boundaries Polygons
Regional Vector, Mass GIS; Derived from town layer and list of 2007
Planning Polygons towns included within regional planning agency
Agencies (RPA)
Level 3 Vector, Mass GIS; Assessors surveys and Upda
Assessors' Polygons documentation, high resolution ted
Parcels 2013
Impervious Raster Mass GIS; 1 meter pixel size; reclassified from 2005
Surface 50 cm resolution near-infrared imagery derived
from an aerial Vexcel Ultra Cam sensor.
Land Use (2005) Vector, Delineating and coding the data was carried out Refer
Polygons using semi-automated methods for the ence
classification of the 4-band 2005 ortho imagery date
with resolution of 50cm using attributes from 2005
the manually-compiled 1999 data, and assessor Avail
parcels and other ancillary data. Smallest able
mapping unit is 1 acre with exceptions of ¼ 2007-
acres where assessor parcel maps were used to 2009
refine residential areas.
Building Vector, Two-dimensional roof outlines for all buildings 2012
Structures (2-D, Polygons larger than 15m2 (150 square feet), interpreted
from 2011-2012 by third party contractor using LiDAR sensor
Ortho Imagery) color imagery with 30 cm.
Mass DOT Vector, Center lines, from transportation department Upda
Roads Arcs surveys including detailed information such as te
width of paving, easement width, type, class, 2012
usage, destination cities and states etc.
Protected and Vector, From the Department of conservation and Upda
Recreational Polygons recreation. Digitized from survey maps. ted
Open Space 2013
198
Forest Vector, From the Department of conservation and 2008
Stewardship Polygons recreation. Digitized from survey maps.
Program
Properties
BioMap2 Vector, Mass GIS; The Massachusetts Natural Heritage Upda
Polygons & Endangered Species Program and The Nature te
Conservancy’s Massachusetts Program 2010
developed BioMap2 in 2010 as a conservation
plan to protect the state’s biodiversity.
http://www.nhesp.org/
Color Ortho Raster; 50cm, pan sharpened. 2005
Imagery (2005) JPEG or
MrSID;
Table 5.10: Original data set used to develop study data layers (adapted from MassGIS
web site, http://www.mass.gov/anf/research-and-tech/it-serv-and-support/application-
serv/office-of-geographic-information-massgis/datalayers/layerlist.html)
199
Land use CU CT Tree size Description of available pervious surface and
classes and related remarks
Categories
Intense urban use: low use – low % pervious
Industrial 0.0 1.0 Small- Spaces between buildings, roads and parking with no
medium obvious use. Soil would require amendment
Junkyard 0.7 0.3 Small- Areas not covered by cars and metal junk. Soil would
medium require amendment
Mining 1.0 0.0 n/a Not preferred since ground activities will impact tree
health. Once capped, surface area 100% planted
Transportatio 0.8 0.2 Small Spaces between buildings and roads with no obvious
n use. Soil would require amendment
Commercial 0 1.0 Small Spaces between buildings and roads with no obvious
use. Soil would require amendment
Marina 0.9 0.1 Small-
medium
Residential : Medium to high use -high % pervious
High Density 0.9 0.1 Small Narrow spaces between building structure and
Residential boundary limits and potential single trees in
backyards, depending on configuration of property.
All remaining surfaces as lawn or shrub are
contributing to temperature amelioration.
Multi-Family 0.8 0.2 Small- Variable spaces available especially around common
Residential medium parking. All remaining surfaces as lawn or shrub are
contributing to temperature amelioration.
Medium 0.8 0.2 Small Spaces available along side and front setbacks as well
Density as backyard All remaining surfaces as lawn or shrub
Residential are contributing to temperature amelioration.
Low Density 0.7 0.3 Large Spaces available alongside and front setbacks as well
Residential as backyard. All remaining surfaces as lawn or shrub
are contributing to temperature amelioration.
Very Low 0.6 0.4 Large Spaces available alongside and front setbacks as well
Density as backyard All remaining surfaces as lawn or shrub
Residential are contributing to temperature amelioration.
Urban Public/Institutional: High use intensity - medium %pervious
Urban 0.5 0.5 Medium- This land use category includes formal open space
Public/Institu large and spaces around institutional buildings. To
tional accommodate for the low use of spaces around
buildings and intense use of public parks, an equal
value is included for both coefficients.
Recreation: High use Intensity - high %pervious
Participation 0.9 0.1 Medium These categories are delineated in the land use layer
Recreation around the actual playing fields. Any forest or scrub
200
land is included in other land use categories such as
forest and brush land.
Spectator 0 1 Small- Spaces between buildings, roads and parking with no
Recreation medium obvious use. Soil would require amendment
Water-Based 0.85 0.15 Small- At front and near water edges and around facilities
Recreation medium when present.
Golf Course 0.85 0.15 Medium- Spaces available between par centerlines. If design
large standards are changed, then more available land for
tree planting could be accommodated.
Service: Low use intensity - high % pervious
Cemetery 0.8 0.2 Medium- These categories are delineated in the land use layer
large around the actual burial areas. Any forest or scrub
land is included in other land use categories such as
forest and brush land.
Nursery 0.85 0.15 Medium- These categories include the surfaces where
large vegetation is planted or stored and Christmas tree
plantations. Space is available at front and around
buildings for planting.
Open Land 0.2 0.8 large No obvious use and potentially 100% for tree
planting. A factor of 0.8 is included to account for the
presence of rock outcrops.
Powerline/Ut 1.0 0 none The presence of electrical cables does not allow the
ility growth of trees. Yet, as pervious surfaces covered
with ground cover they contribute to temperature
reduction.
Waste 0.85 0.15 Medium- Space available at entrances and around facility
Disposal large buildings. This is available land for 100% tree
planting when capped.
Excluded
Transitional n/a n/a n/a Final land use is not identified
Table 5.11: Detailed information on calculation of coefficient of use by land use class
201
BIBLIOGRAPHY
(APA) America Planning Association (2007). How cities use parks for climate change
management, City Parks Forum Briefing Papers. Chicago, IL: American
Planning Association. 4pp. Online available at
http://www.planning.org/cityparks/briefingpapers/climatechange.htm. Last
accessed March 01,2013 .
Adger, W.N., Arnell, N.W., and Tompkins, E.L. (2005). Successful adaptation to
climate change across scales. Global Environmental Change, 15, 77-86.
Ahern, J. (2008). Green Infrastructure for Cities: The Spatial Dimension. In Cities of the
Future: Towards Integrated Sustainable Water and Landscape Management,
Novotny, V. & Brown, P. (Ed.), IWA publishing, London.
Akbari, H. (2005). Energy Saving Potentials and Air Quality Benefits of Urban Heat
Island Mitigation. 2008 from http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/860475-
UlHWIq/860475.PDF Last Accessed March 2013.
Akbari, H., 2002. “Shade trees reduce building energy use and CO2 emissions from
power plants,” Environmental Pollution, 116:S119-S126.
Akbari, H., M. Pomerantz, and Taha, H. (2001). Cool Surfaces and Shade Trees to
Reduce Energy Use and Improve Air Quality in Urban Areas. Solar Energy
70(3): 295-310.
202
Alcoforado, M.J. & Andrade, H. (2008). Global Warming and the Urban Heat Island.
p.249-262. In: Marzluff, J.M., G.Bradley, E. Shulenberger, C. Ryan, W.
Endlicher, U. Simon, M. Alberti, & C. ZumBrunnen (eds.), Urban ecology: An
international perspective on the interaction between humans and nature, New
York, Springer.
Alley, R.B., Marotzke, J., Nordhaus, W.D., Overpeck, J.T., Peteet, D.M., Pielke, R.A.,
Pierrehumbert, R.T., Rhines, P.B., Stocker, T.F., Talley, L.D., Wallace, J.M.
(2003) Abrupt Climate Change. Science 299, 2005-2010.
Arnfield, A.J. (2002). Two decades of urban climate research: A review of turbulence,
exchanges of energy and water, and the urban heat island. International Journal
of Climatology, 23: 1-26.
Arnold, C.L.J., Gibbons, C.J. (1996) Impervious Surface Coverage: The Emergence of a
Key Environmental Indicator. Journal of the American Planning Association
62, 243-258.
BAF: Biotope area factor. Berlin City, Senate Department for Urban Planning. (March
27, 2010)
http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/landschaftsplanung/bff/index_en
.shtml
Bailey, T.C & Gatrell, A.C. (1995). Interactive Spatial Data Analysis. Prentice Hall,
London.
Barnett, J. & Beckman, J. (2007). Coastal cities face rising seas. Planning, 73 (8), 34-37.
Barnett, J., O Neill, S. (2010) Maladaptation. Global Environmental Change 20, 211-
213.
203
Benedict, M. A., & McMahon, M. T. (2006). Green infrastructure: Linking landscape
and communities. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Beranová, R.; Huth, R. (2005) – Long-term changes in the heat island of Prague under
different synoptic conditions. Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 82 (1–2):
113–118.
Berger, A. (2006). Drosscape: Wasting land in urban America. New York: Princeton
Architectural Press.
Berke, P.R. (2007). The Evolution of Green Community Planning, Scholarship, and
Practice. Journal of the American Planning Association, 74(4), 393-407.
Betts, R.A., Collins, M., Hemming, D.L., Jones, C.D., Lowe, J.A., Sanderson, M.G.
(2011) When could global warming reach 4 degrees C? Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering
Sciences 369, 67-84.
Bickman, L., Rog, D., Hedrick, T. (1998). Applied Research design: A practical
Approach. In Handbook of Applied Social Research Handbook, Bickman Ed.
Sage Publications. 5-38
Biesbroek, G.R., Swart, R.J., Carter, T.R., Cowan, C., Henrichs, T., Mela, H.,
Morecroft, M.D., Rey, D. (2010) Europe adapts to climate change: Comparing
National Adaptation Strategies. Global Environmental Change 20, 440-450.
Blakely, E. (2007). Urban Planning for Climate Change (Working Paper). Lincoln
Institute of Land Policy.
Blaschke, T.(2010). Object based image analysis for remote sensing, ISPRS Journal of
Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 2-16.
Boswell, M.R., Greve, A.I., Seale, T.L. (2012) Local Climate Action Planning. Island
Press, Washington DC.
204
Brabec, E. (2009) Imperviousness and Land Use Policy: Toward an Effective Approach
to Watershed Planning. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 14, 425-433.
Brabec, E., Schulte, S., and Richards, P.L.(2002). Impervious Surfaces and Water
Quality: A Review of Current Literature and Its Implications for Watershed
Planning. Journal of Planning Literature,16(4), 499-514.
Brabec, Elizabeth & Geoffrey McD. Lewis. (2002). “Defining the Pattern of the
Sustainable Urban Region,” C. A. Brebbia, J. F. Martin-Duque and L. C.
Wadhwa, eds. The Sustainable City. Southampton, England: WIT Press.
Brabec, Elizabeth. (2008). Imperviousness and Land Use Policy: Toward an effective
approach to watershed planning. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering 14 (4):
425-433.
Brázdil, R.; Budíková, M. (1999) – An urban bias in air temperature fluctuations at the
Klementinum, Prague, the Czech Republic. Atmospheric Environment, 33 (24–
25): 4211–4217.
Brooks, M.P. (2002) Planning Theory for Practitioners. Planners Press: American
Planning Association, Chicago.
Brooks, N., Adger, W.N., and Kelly, P.M. (2005). The determinants of vulnerability and
adaptive capacity at the national level and the implications for adaptations.
Global Environmental Change, 15, 151-163.
Busha, C. H., & Harter, S. P. (1980). Research methods in librarianship, techniques and
interpretation. New York: Academic Press.
Calthorpe, Peter (1996). The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Community and the
American Dream. Princeton, Princeton Architectural Press.
CAP. (2007/2010). The city of Boston’s climate action plan. City of Boston. December
2007. http:// www.abettercity.org/environment/bostoncap.html. Accessed 18
June 2011.
205
Carter, J.G. (2011) Climate change adaptation in European cities. Current Opinion in
Environmental Sustainability 3, 193-198.
Carter, T. and Jackson, C.R. (2007). Vegetated roofs for stormwater management at
multiple spatial scales. Landscape and Urban Planning, 80 (1),84-94.
Cathy Aniello, Ken Morgan, Arthur Busbey and Leo Newland, Mapping micro-urban
heat islands using LANDSAT TM and a GIS, Computers & Geosciences,
21(8), 965-967
CCAP. (2011). The value of green infrastructure for urban climate adaptation. Center
for Clean Air Policy, February 2011.
http://www.ccap.org/docs/resources/989/Green Infrastructure FINAL. pdf.
Accessed 18 June 2011.
CDC. 2004. Extreme Heat: A Prevention Guide to Promote Your Personal Health and
Safety. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
http://www.bt.cdc.gov/disasters/extremeheat/heat_guide.asp. Last Accessed
March 2013.
Chiesura,A.(2004). The Role of Urban Parks for the Sustainable City. Landscape and
Urban Planning 68, 129–138
Clarence City Council (2009) Climate change impacts on Clarence coastal areas, Final
Report. Clarence, TA City Council, Clarence, Tasmania.
206
COL (2010). Rising to the Challenge - The City of London Climate Change Adaptation
Strategy. First Published May 2007 Revised and Updated January 2010.
http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/services/environment-and-
planning/sustainability/Documents/pdfs/SUS_AdaptationStrategyfinal_2010up
date.pdf Last Accessed February 2013.
COL (2012). Tree Strategy Supplementary Planning Document, City of London, Local
Development Framework (Adopted 15th May 2012).
http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/services/environment-and-
planning/planning/heritage-and-design/trees-and-open-spaces/Pages/Trees.aspx
Last Accessed February 2013.
COL(2006). London’s Urban Heat Island: A Summary for Decision Makers. Mayor of
London. www.london.gov.uk/mayor/environment/climate_change/ .
Condon, P. M., Cavens, D., & Miller, M. (2009). Urban Planning Tools for Climate
Change Mitigation (Policy Focus Report. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy
Connors, J.P., Galletti, C.S., and Chow, W.T.L. (2013). Landscape configuration and
urban heat island effects: assessing the relationship between landscape
characteristics and land surface temperature in Phoenix, Arizona. Landscape
Ecology 28, 271-283.
Corburn,J. (2009). Cities, Climate Change and Urban Heat Island Mitigation: Localising
Environmental Science. Urban Studies, 46(2), 413-427.
Corner, J. (2004). Not unlike life itself: Landscape strategy now. Harvard Design
Magazine (21) (Fall-Winter): 32-4.
Crutzen, P.J. (2004).New Directions: The growing urban heat and pollution “island”
effect - impact on chemistry and climate. Atmospheric Environment, 38 (21):
3539–3540.
Currie, B. A., & Bass, B. (2008). Estimates of air pollution mitigation with green plants
and green roofs using the UFORE model. Urban Ecosystems, 11(4), 409-422.
Currie, B.A and Bass, B. (2008).Estimates of air pollution mitigation with green plants
and green roofs using the UFORE model. Urban Ecosystems, DOI
10.1007/s11252-008-0054-y
Davis, A.Y., Pijanowski, B.C., Robinson, K.D., and Kidwell, P.B. (2010). Estimating
parking lot footprint in Upper Great Lakes Region of the USA. Landscape and
Urban Planning, 96 (2), 68-77.
207
De Graaf.R.E.(2008). Reducing flood vulnerability of urban lowland areas. Proceedings
of the 11th International Conference on Urban Drainage, Edinburgh, Scotland,
UK, 2008
De vries, J. and Wolsink, M. (2009). Making Space for Water: Spatial Planning and
Water Management in the Netherlands. In Planning for Climate Change:
Strategies for Mitigation and Adaptation for Spatial Planners, Davoudi, S.,
Crawford, J., and Mehmood, A. (Ed.). Earthscan, London, Sterling VA.
Duany, A., & Talen, E. (2002). Transect planning. Journal of American Planning
Association, 68(3), 245–266.
Duany, Andres, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk and Jeff Speck (2005). Smart Growth: New
Urbanism in American Communities.
DuMont, R. R. (1975). The large urban public library as an agency of social reform,
1890-1915. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania.
Ellis, J.B. (2013). Sustainable surface water management and green infrastructure in UK
urban catchment planning. Journal of environmental Planning and
Management, 56 (1), 24-41.
Emory, C. W., & Cooper, D. R. (1991). Business research methods. (4th ed.). Boston,
MA: Irvin.
208
EPA (2010).Green Infrastructure Case Studies: Municipal Policies for Managing Strom
water with Green Infrastructure. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Online
available at http://www.epa.gov/greeninfarstrcture.htm. Last accessed 15 Jan.
2013.
EPA . U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . "Heat Island Effect." Online available at
http://www.epa.gov/heatisland/. Last Accessed February 2013.
European Environment Agency (2011) Observed global fossil fuel CO2 emissions
compared with six scenarios from the IPCC. European Environment Agency.
Ewing, R., Bartholomew, K., Winkelman, S., Walters, J., & Chen, D. (2007).Growing
Cooler: The Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change. ULI–the
Urban Land Institute.
F´abos, J. G. (2004). Greenway planning in the United States: Its origins and recent case
studies. Landscape and Urban Planning, 68, 321–342.
Fabos, J.Gy. & Ryan, R.L. (2006). An Introduction to greenway Planning Around the
World. Landscape and urban Planning. 76(1-4), 1-6.
Farr, D. (2008). Sustainable urbanism: Urban design with nature. Hoboken: Wiley.
Feiden, W., Hamin, E.M. (2011) Assessing Sustainability: A Guide for Local
Governments. American Planning Association (Planners Press), Chicago.
Few, R. (2007) Health and climatic hazards: Framing social research on vulnerability,
response and adaptation. Global Environmental Change 17, 281-295.
Forman (2010). Urban Ecology and the arrangement of Nature in Urban regions. In
Ecological urbanism. Ed. Mostafavi, M and Doherty, G. Harverd University,
Graduate School of Design. Lars Muller Publishers, Germany.
209
Forman, R. T. T. (2008). Urban regions: Ecology and planning beyond the city.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Foster, J., Lowe, A. and Winkelman, S. (2011). The Value of Green Infrastructure for
Urban Climate Adaptation. Center for Clean Air Policy. Available Online
at http://ccap.org/assets/THE-VALUE-OF-GREEN-INFRASTRUCTURE-
FOR-URBAN-CLIMATE-ADAPTATION_CCAP-February-2011.pdf Last
Accessed December 2012.
Frumhoff, P.C., McCarthy, J.J., Melillo, J.M., Moser, S.C., Wuebbles, D.J., (2007)
Confronting Climate Change in the U.S. Northeast: Science, Impacts, and
Solutions. Synthesis report of the Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment
(NECIA), Cambridge, MA.
Frumhoff, P.C., McCarthy, J.J., Melillo, J.M., Moser, S.C., Wuebbles, D.J., Wake, C.,
Spanger-Siegfried, E. (2008) An integrated climate change assessment for the
Northeast United States. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global
Change 13, 419-423.
Gaber, John, and Sharon Gaber. 2007. Qualitative Analysis for Planning & Policy:
Beyond the Numbers. Chicago: American Planning Association.
Garde, A.M. (1999). Marginal Spaces in the Urban Landscape: Regulated or Incidental
Open Spaces? Journal of Planning Education and Research, 18, 200-210.
Gartland, L. (2008). Heat Islands: Understanding and Mitigating Heat in Urban Areas.
Earhscan, London.
Gasteyer, S., Flora, C.B. (2000) Measuring ppm with tennis shoes: Science and locally
meaningful indicators of environmental quality. Society & Natural Resources
13, 589-597.
Gedzelman, S.D., Austin, S., Cermak, R., Stefano, N., Partridge, S., Quesenberry, S.,
and Robinson, D.A. (2003). Mesoscale aspects of the urban heat island around
New York City. Theoretical Applied Climatology. 75(1-2), 29-42
210
Gerring, J. (2007). Case study research : Principles and practices. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Gill, S.E., Handley, J.F. Ennos, A.R., and Pauleit, S. (2007). Adapting Cities for
Climate Change: The Role of the Green Infrastructure. Built Environment,
33(1),115-133.
Gill, S.E., Handley, J.F., Ennos, A.R., Pauliet, S., Theuray, N., and Lindley, S.J. (2008).
Characterizing the urban environment of UK cities and towns: A template for
landscape planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 87 (2),210-222.en, N.
Girling, C., & Kellett, R. (2005). Skinny streets and green neighborhoods: Design for
environment and community. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Gober et al. (2010). Using Watered Landscape to manipulate Urban Island Heat Effect.
Journal of the Amercian Planning Association. 76(1), 109-121.
Gober, P., Brazel, A., Quay, R., Myint, S., Grossman-Clarke, S., Miller, A., & Rossi, S.
(2010). Using Watered Landscapes to Manipulate Urban Heat Island effects.
Journal of the American Planning Association, 76(1), 109-121.
Gonzales, G. A. (2005). Urban sprawl, global warming and the limits of ecological
modernization. Environmental Politics, 14(3), 344-362.
Guhathakurta, S. and Gober, P. (2007). The Impact of the Phoenix Urban Heat Island on
Residential WaterUse. Journal of the Planning Association, 73(3), 317-329.
Hacker, J. N., & Holmes, M. J. (2007). Thermal comfort: Climate change and the
environmental design of buildings in the United Kingdom. Built Environment,
33(1), 97-114.
211
Hall, J.M., Handley, J.F., and Ennos, A.R. (2012). The potential of tree planting to
climate-poof high density residential areas in Manchester, UK. Landscape and
Urban Planning, 104 (2),27-33.
Hamel, J. (with Dufour, S., & Fortin, D.). (1993). Case study methods. Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.
Hamin, E., and Gurran, N. (2008). Urban form and climate change: Balancing
adaptation and mitigation in the U.S. and Australia. Habitat International (33),
238-245.
Hardoy, J., Pandiella, G. (2009) Urban poverty and vulnerability to climate change in
Latin America. Environment and Urbanization 21, 203-224.
Hart, M. A., & Sailor, D. J. (2009). Quantifying the influence of land-use and surface
characteristics on spatial variability in the urban heat island. Theoretical and
Applied Climatology, 95(3), 397–406.
Heinz. (2006). A survey of climate change adaptation and planning. Washington DC:
The H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics and the Environment.
Heltberg, R., Siegel, P.B., Jorgensen, S.L. (2009) Addressing human vulnerability to
climate change: Toward a `no-regrets' approach. Global Environmental Change
19, 89-99.
Henry, James A. and Steven E. Dicks (1987). "Association of Urban Temperatures with
Land Use and Surface Materials." Landscape and Urban Planning 14: 21-29.
House-Peters,L.A. and Chang, H. (2011). Modeling the impact of land use and climate
change on neighborhood-scale evaporation and nighttime cooling: A surface
energy balance approach. Landscape and Urban Planning, 103, 139-155.
212
Huang, G., Zhou, W., and Cadenasso, M.L. (2011). Is everyone hot in the city? Spatial
pattern of land surface temperatures, land cover and neighborhood
socioeconomic characteristics in Baltimore, MD. Journal of Environmental
Management 82, 184-197.
Huq, S., Kovats, S., Reid, H., & Satterthwaite, D. (2007). Editorial: Reducing risks to
cities from disasters and climate change. Environment and Urbanization, 19(3),
3-15.
ICLEI (2007).Preparing for Climate Change: A Guidebook for Local, Regional, and
State Governments. Center for Science in the Earth System (The Climate
Impacts Group) Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean
University of Washington, King County, Washington and ICLEI – Local
Governments for Sustainability. Available at
http://www.cses.washington.edu/db/pdf/snoveretalgb574.pdf Last Accessed
January 2013.
IPCC, (2012) Summary for Policymakers. , in: Field, C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, D.
Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, S.K.
Allen, M. Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (Ed.), Managing the Risks of Extreme
Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation: A Special Report
of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY USA, pp. 1-
19.
IPCC. (2007). Climate change: Synthesis report No. 4th Assessment Report)
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Jabreen, Y.R. (2006). Sustainable Urban Forms: Their Typologies, Models, and
Concepts. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 26, 38-52.
213
Jacobson, C., Hughey, K.F.D., Allen, W.J., Rixecker, S., Carter, R.W. (2009) Toward
More Reflexive Use of Adaptive Management. Society & Natural Resources
22, 484-495.
Jasechko, S., Zachary D. S, Gibson, J.J., S. Jean Birks, S.J., Yi Yi, and Peter J. Fawcett,
P.J. (2013). Terrestrial water fluxes dominated by transpiration. Nature.
doi:10.1038/nature11983. Retrieved 4 April 2013
Jongman, R. H. G., K¨ulvik, M., & Kristiansen, I. (2004). European ecological networks
and greenways. Landscape and Urban Planning, 68, 305–319.
Joshi, M., Hawkins, E., Sutton, R., Lowe, J., Frame, D. (2011) Projections of when
temperature change will exceed 2 [deg]C above pre-industrial levels. Nature
Clim. Change 1, 407-412.
Juhola, S., Peltonen, L., Niemi, P. (2012) The ability of Nordic countries to adapt to
climate change: assessing adaptive capacity at the regional level. Local
Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 1–18.
Kahn, M.E. (2006) – Green Cities. Urban Growth and the Environment. Brookings
Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Kates, R.W., Travis, W.R., Wilbanks, T.J. (2012) Transformational adaptation when
incremental adaptations to climate change are insufficient. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109, 7156-
7161.
Kato, S. (2010). Green space conservation planning framework for urban regions based
on a forest bird-habitat relationship study and the resilience thinking. Ph.D.
dissertation, Umass, Amherst; AAT 3409604.
Kato, S., Ahern, J. (2008) 'Learning by doing': adaptive planning as a strategy to address
uncertainty in planning. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management
51, 543-559.
214
Kazmierczak, A. and Carter, J. (2010). Adaptation to climate change using green and
blue infrastructure: A data base of case studies.GRABS project, University of
Manchester, U.K.
Kazmierczak, A., and Cavan, G. (2011). Surface water flooding risk to urban
communities: Analysis of vulnerability, hazard and exposure. Landscape and
Urban Planning, 103, 185-197.
Kikegawa, Y., Genchi, Y., Kondo, H., & Hanaki, K. (2006). Impacts of city-blockscale
countermeasures against urban heat-island phenomena upon a building’s
energy-consumption for air-conditioning. Applied Energy, 83(6), 649–668.
Kirkpatrick, J.S. and M.D. Shulman (1987) A statistical evaluation of the New York
City – Northern New Jersey urban heat island effect on summer daily minimum
temperature. National Weather Digest, 12(1), 12.
Kirshen, P., Ruth, M., & Anderson, W. (2008). Interdependencies of urban climate
change impacts and adaptation strategies: A case study of Metropolitan Boston
USA. Climate Change, 86, 105-122.
Klein, R. J. T., Lisa, E., Schipper, F., & Dessai, S. (2005). Integrating mitigation and
adaptation into climate and development policy: Three research questions.
Environmental Science & Policy II, 8(6), 579-588.
Klein, R., Nichols, R.,Thomalla,F. (2003). Resilience to natural hazards: How useful is
this concept?. Environmental Hazards 5, 35-45
Klok, L., Zwart, S., Verhagen, H., and Mauri, E. (2012). The surface heat island of
Rotterdam and its relationship with urban surface characteristics.
Kurn, D.M., S.E. Bretz, B. Huang, and H. Akbari (1994). The potential for reducing
urban air temperatures and energy consumption through vegetative cooling.
Pacific Grove, CA: American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy
Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings. 31pp. Online available at
http://www.epa.gov/heatisland/mitigation/trees.htm. Last Accessed March
2013.
Kuttler, W. (2008). The urban Climate-Basic Applied Aspects. p.233-248. In: Marzluff,
J.M., G.Bradley, E. Shulenberger, C. Ryan, W. Endlicher, U. Simon, M.
Alberti, & C. ZumBrunnen (eds.), Urban ecology: An international perspective
on the interaction b etween humans and nature, New York, Springer.
215
Kwadijk, J.C.J., Haasnoot, M., Mulder, J.P.M., Hoogvliet, M.M.C., Jeuken, A.B.M.,
van der Krogt, R.A.A., van Oostrom, N.G.C., Schelfhout, H.A., van Velzen,
E.H., van Waveren, H., de Wit, M.J.M. (2010) Using adaptation tipping points
to prepare for climate change and sea level rise: a case study in the Netherlands.
Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 1, 729-740.
Lamptey, B.L.; Barron, E.J.; Pollard, D. (2005). Impacts of agriculture and urbanization
on the climate of the Northeastern United States. Global and Planetary Change,
49 (3–4): 203–221.
Lerch, D. (2007). Post Carbon Cities: Planning for Energy and Climate Uncertainty.
Post Carbon Institute.
Lerner, J. and Allen, W.L. III (2012). Landscape-Scale Green Infrastructure Investments
as a Climate Adaptation Strategy: A Case Example for Midwest United Sates.
Environmental Practice, 14 (1),45-56.
Lewis, G.McD., and Brabec, E. (2005). Regional land pattern assessment: development
of a resource efficiency measurement method. Landscape and Urban Planning,
72, 281-296.
Lewis, Geoffrey McD. (2006). Evaluating effects of land pattern with regional
characteristic curves: Land cover indicators and estimating building energy use
from thermal image data. PhD Dissertation. University of Michigan School of
Natural Resources and Environment.
Lewis, P. H., Jr. (1964). Quality corridors for Wisconsin. Landscape Architecture, 54,
100–107. McHarg, I. (1969). Design with nature. Garden City: The Natural
History Press. Mumford, L. (1937). What is a city? New York: McGraw-Hill.
Nassauer, J. (2006). Landscape planning and conservation biology: Systems
thinking revisited.
216
Lindblom, C.E. (1959) The Science of "Muddling Through". Public Administration
Review 19, 79-88.
Lindley, S. J., Handley, J. F., Theuray, N., Peet, E., & McEvoy, D. (2006). Adaptation
strategies for climate change in the urban environment: Assessing climate
change related risk in UK urban areas. Journal of Risk Research, 9(5), 543-568.
Lynn, B. H., Carlson, T. N., Rosenzweig, C., Goldberg, R., Druyan, L., Cox, J., et al.
(2009). A modification to the NOAH LSM to simulate heat mitigation
strategies in the New York City metropolitan area. Journal of Applied
Meteorology and Climatology, 48(2), 199–216.
Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, S.K. Allen, M. Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (Ed.),
Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate
Change Adaptation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New
York, NY USA, pp. 437-486.
Makar, P.A.; Gravel, S.; Chirkov, V.; Strawbridge, K.B.; Froude, F.; Arnold, J.; Brook,
J. (2006) – Heat flux, urban properties, and regional weather. Atmospheric
Environment, 40 (15): 2750–2766.
McAdams, D. C. (1979). Powerful actors in public land use decision making processes:
A case study in Austin, Texas. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Texas, Austin.
McClure, C. R., & Hernon, P. (Eds.). (1991). Library and information science research:
perspectives and strategies for improvement. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
217
McPherson, E.G., Simpson, J.S., Xiao, Q., and Wu, C. (2011). Million trees Los
Angeles canopy cover and benefit assessment. Landscape and Urban Planning,
99 ,40-50.
McPherson, E.G., Simpson, Peper,P.J., Maco,S.E., and Xiao, Q., (2005). Municipal
Forest Benefits and Costs in Five US Cities. Journal of Forestry, December.
Mcpherson,G.,Nowak,D.,Heisler,G.,Grimmond,S.,Souch,C.,Grant,R.,And
Rowntree,R.(1997). Quantifying Urban Forest Structure, Function, and Value:
The Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project. Urban Ecosystems, 1997, 1, 49–61
Mell, I.C. (2008). Can green infrastructure promote urban sustainability? Engineering
Sustainability, 162, 23-34.
Mell, I.C. (2008a). Green Infrastructure: concepts and planning. FORUM Ejournal 8
(June): 69-80 Newcastle University.
Meyer,B.C. and Loibl,W. (2010). Climate change and spatial planning. Landscape and
Urban Planning, 98 ,139-140.
Miller, F. (1986). Use, appraisal, and research: A case study of social history. The
American Archivist: 49(4), 371-392.
Milly, P.C.D., Betancourt, J., Falkenmark, M., Hirsch, R.M., Kundzewicz, Z.W.,
Lettenmaier, D.P., Stouffer, R.J. (2008) Stationarity Is Dead: Whither Water
Management? Science 319, 573-574.
Mitchel, A. (2009). The ESRI Guide to GIS: Analysis, Volume2: Spatial Measurement
& Statistics. ESRI Press, Redlands, CA.
Moser, S.C., Ekstrom, J.A. (2010) A framework to diagnose barriers to climate change
adaptation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107, 22026-
22031.
National Research Council (2010) Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change. The
National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
218
Naumann, Sandra, McKenna Davis, Timo Kaphengst, Mav Pieterse and Matt Rayment
(2011): Design, implementation and cost elements of Green Infrastructure
projects. Final report to the European Commission, DG Environment, Contract
no. 070307/2010/577182/ETU/F.1, Ecologic institute and GHK Consulting.
NECIA. (2007). Confronting climate change in the U.S. Northeast: Science, impacts,
and solutions: A report of the Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment. Union of
Concerned Scientists. http://www.climatechoices.org/ne/resources
ne/nereport.html. Accessed 19 June 2011.
Neuman, M. (2005). The Compact City Fallacy. Journal of Planning Education and
Research, 25, 11-26.
Newman, P., & Jennings, I. (2008). Cities as sustainable ecosystems: Principles and
practices. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Nitschke, C.R., Innes, J.L. (2008) A Tree and Climate Assessment Tool for Modelling
Ecosystem Response to Climate Change. Ecological Modelling 210, 263-277.
NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory, (2011) The NOAA Annual Greenhouse Gas
Index (AGGI). U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic &
Atmospheric Administration, NOAA Research, Earth System Research
Laboratory Global Monitoring Division, Boulder, CO.
Noss, R. F., & Harris, L. D. (1986). Nodes, networks, and mums: Preserving diversity at
all scales. Environmental Management, 10(3), 299–309.
Nowak, D.J. and Greenfield, E.J. (2012a). Tree and impervious cover change in U.S.
cities. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 11, 21-30.
Nowak, D.J., and Greenfield, E.J. (2012b). Tree and impervious cover in the United
States. Landscape and Urban Planning, 107 (1),21-30.
Nowak, D.J., Rowntree, R.A., McPherson, E.G., Sasinni, S.M., Kerkmann, E.R., and
Stevens, J.C. (1996). Measuring and analyzing urban tree cover. Landscape and
Urban Planning, 36, 49-57.
219
NYC (2011).NYC Green Infrastructure Plan: A Sustainable Strategy for Clean
Waterways. City of New York, Offcie of the Mayor.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/stormwater/nyc_green_infrastructure_plan.s
html Last Accessed March 2013.
Oke, T.R., 1997. Urban climates and global change. In: Perry, A.; Thompson, R. (eds)
Applied Climatology: Principles and Practice. London: Routledge: 273–287.
Onishi, A., Cao, X., Ito, T., Shi, F., and Imura, H. (2010). Evaluating the potential for
urban heat-island mitigation by greening parking lots. Urban Forestry & Urban
Greening, 9, 323-332.
Pacala, S. and Socolow, R. (2004). Stabilization Wedges: Solving the Climate Problem
for the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies. Science 13 August 2004:Vol.
305. no. 5686, pp. 968 – 972.
Paris, M. (1988). Library school closings: Four case studies. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow
Press.
Park, S.E., Marshall, N.A., Jakku, E., Dowd, A.M., Howden, S.M., Mendham, E.,
Fleming, A. (2012) Informing adaptation responses to climate change through
theories of transformation. Global Environmental Change 22, 115¬
220
Pendall, R., Foster, K. A., and Cowell, M. (2007). Resilience and regions: Building
understanding of the metaphor. Berkeley, CA: IURD University of California.
Pham, T., Apparicio, P., Seguin, A., Landry, S., and Gagnon, M. (2012). Spatial
distribution of vegetation in Montreal: an uneven distribution or environmental
inequity. Landscape and Urban Planning, 107 (3), 214-224.
Pickett, S. T. A., Cadenasso, M. L., & Grove, J. M. (2004). Resilient cities: Meaning,
models, and metaphor for integrating the ecological, socio-economic, and
planning realms. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69(4), 369–384.
Pittock, A.B., Jones, R.N., Mitchell, C.D. (2001) Probabilities will help us plan for
climate change. Nature 413, 249-249.
Powell, R. R. (1985). Basic research methods for librarians. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Pozzi, P. & Small, C. (2001). Exploratory Analysis of Suburban Land Cover and
Population Density in the U.S.A. Paper 35, IEEE/ISPRS joint Workshop on
Remote Sensing and Data Fusion over Urban Areas,Rome, Italy, 8-9
November, 2001
Pozzi, P. & Small, C. (2002). Vegetation and population density in urban and Suburban
Areas in the U.S.A. Conference proceedings of Third International Symposium
of Remote Sensing of Urban Areas Istanbul, Turkey, June 2002.
Quereda-Sala, J.; Olcina, A.G.; Cuevas, A.P.; Cantos, J.O.; Amoros ,A.R.; Chiva, E.M.
(2000). Climatic warming in the Spanish Mediterranean: Natural Trend or
Urban Effect. Climatic Change, 46 (4): 473–483.
Radford, K.G. and James, P. (2013). Changes in the value of ecosystem services along
the rural-urban gradient: A case study of Greater Manchester, UK. Landscape
and Urban Planning, 109 ,117-127.
Rahmstorf, S., Cazenave, A., Church, J.A., Hansen, J.E., Keeling, R.F., Parker, D.E.,
Somerville, R.C.J. (2007) Recent Climate Observations Compared to
Projections. Science 316, 709.
221
Rannow,S., Loibl,W., GreivingS., Gruehn,D., and Meyer,B.C.(2010). Potential impacts
of climate change in Germany—Identifying regional priorities for adaptation
activities in spatial planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 98,160-171.
Richard, W., Palmer, J., and Kolokotroni, M. (2006). Increased Temperature and
Intensification of the Urban Heat Island: Implications for Human Comfort and
Urban Design, Built Environment 33(1), 85-96.
Roa-Espinosa, A., T.B. Wilson, J.M. Norman, and Kenneth Johnson. 2003. Predicting
the Impact of Urban Development on Stream Temperature Using a Thermal
Urban Runoff Model (TURM). National Conference on Urban Stormwater:
Enhancing Programs at the Local Level. February 17-20. Chicago, IL.
http://www.epa.gov/nps/natlstormwater03/31Roa.pdf Last Accessed February
2013.
Robert L. Wilby, R.L. (2003). Past and projected trends in London’s urban heat
island.Weather,58,251-260.
Romero Lankao, P. (2008). Urban Areas and Climate Change: Review of Current Issues
and Trends. Issues Paper for the 2011 Global Report on Human Settlements.
http://www.isse.ucar.edu/romero-lankao/
Rosenberg, E.A., Keys, P.W., Booth, D.B., Hartley, D., Burkey, J., Steinemann, A.C.,
Lettenmaier, D.P. (2010) Precipitation Extremes and the Impacts of Climate
Change on Stormwater Infrastructure in Washington State. Climatic Change
102, 319-349.
Rosenzweig, C., Major, D. C., Demong, K., Stanton, C., Horton, R., & Stults, M.
(2007). Managing climate change risks in New York city's water system:
Assessment and adaptation planning. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for
Global Change, 12(8), 1391.
Rosenzweig, C., Solecki, W.D., Hammer, S.A., and Mehrotra, S. (2011). Climate
Change and Cities: First Assessment Report of the Urban Climate Change
Research Network. Urban Climate Change Research Network (UCCRN),
Center for Climate Systems Research, Earth Institute, Columbia University.
222
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Rosenzweig,C., Solecki, W.D. , Slosberg, R.B. (2006). Mitigating New York City’s
Heat Island with Urban Forestry, Living Roofs, and Light Surfaces, New York
City Regional Heat Island Initiative Final Report. New York State Energy
Research And Development Authority.
Roth, M., T. R. Oke, and W. J. Emery. (1989). Satellite-derived Urban Heat Islands
from Three Coastal Cities and the Utilization of Such Data in Urban
Climatology. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 10, 1699-1720.
Schindler, D. (1996). Urban youth and the frail elderly: Reciprocal giving and
receiving. New York: Garland.
Seabrook, L., Mcalpine, C.A., and Bowen, M.E. (2011). Restore, repair or reinvent:
Options for sustainable landscapes in a changing climate. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 100, 407-410.
Shaw, R., Colley, M., and Connell, R. (2007). Climate Change Adaptation by Design: a
guide for sustainable communities. TCPA, London.
Shea, K.M., Truckner, R.T., Weber, R.W., Peden, D.B. (2008) Climate Change and
Allergic Disease. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 122, 443-453.
Simons, H. (1980). Towards a science of the singular: Essays about case study in
educational research and evaluation. Norwich, UK: University of East Anglia,
Centre for Applied Research in Education.
Small, C. (2002). Satellite Remote Sensing of Urban Structure and Evolution. Lamont
Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University
www.LDEO.Columbia.edu/~small/Urban.html
Smit, B. and Wandel, J. (2006). Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Global
Environmental Change, 16, 282-292.
223
Smith, M.S., Horrocks, L., Harvey, A., Hamilton, C. (2011) Rethinking adaptation for a
4 degree C world. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A:
Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 369, 196-216.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stedinger, J.R., Griffis, V.W. (2011) Getting from Here to Where? Flood Frequency
Analysis and Climate. Journal of the American Water Resources Association
47, 506-513.
Stone, B. (2005). An emerging Role for Planners in the Climate Change Debate. Journal
of the American Planning Association 71(2), 13-25.
Stone, B. (2005b). Urban heat and air pollution: An emerging role for planners in the
climate change debate. Journal of the American Planning Association, 71(1),
13-25.
Stone, B. (2008). Urban sprawl and air quality in large US cities. Journal of
Environmental Management 86, 688–698
Stone, B. (2012) The City and the Coming Climate: Climate Change in the places we
live. University of Cambridge Press, Cambridge.
Stone, B. Jr. (2009). Land Use as Climate Change mitigation. Environmental Science 7
Technology, 43(24), 9052–9056
Stone, B., and Norman, J.M. (2006). Land use planning and surface heat island
formation: A parcel-based radiation flux approach. Atmospheric Environment
40,3561–3573.
Stone, B., Mednick, A. C., Holloway, T., & Spak, S. N. (2007). Is compact growth good
for air quality? Journal of the American Planning Association, 73(4), 404-418.
Stone, B., Vargo, J., and Habeeb, D. (2012). Managing climate change in cities: will
climate action plans work? Landscape and Urban Planning, 107(3),263-271.
Stubbs,S. (2008).Natural Green Space and Planning Policy: Devising a Model for its
Delivery in regional Spatial strategies. Landscape Research, 33(1), 119-139.
224
Sun, R. and Chen, L. (2012). How can urban water bodies be designed for climate
adaptation? Landscape and Urban Planning, 105 (1),27-33
Swisher, R., & McClure, C. R. (1984). Research for decision making, methods for
librarians. Chicago: American Library Association.
Taha, H. (1997). Urban climates and heat islands: Albedo, evapotranspiration, and
anthropogenic heat. Energy and Buildings, 25(2), 99–103.
Taha, H. and L.S. Kalkstein, S.C. Sheridan, and E. Wong. 2004. The Potential of Urban
Environmental Controls in Alleviating Heat-wave Health Effects in Five US
Regions. Presented at the American Meteorological Society Fifth Conference
on Urban Environment. 25 August. See also NOAA. 1995. Natural Disaster
Survey Report: July 1995 Heat Wave.
http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/assessments/pdfs/heat95.pdf Last Accessed
March 2013
Thi Van & Xuan Bao (2009). Study of the Impact of Urban Development on Surface
Temperature Using Remote Sensing in Ho Chi Minh City, Northern Vietnam.
Geographical research, Institute of Australian Geographers. 48(1),86–
96.geor_607 86..
United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat) (2011) Cities and Climate
Change: Global Report on Human Settlements 2011. Earthscan, London.
US EPA, (2010) Climate Change Indicators in the United States. United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
Van de Voorde, T., Jacquet, W., and Canters F. (2011). Mapping form and function in
urban areas: an approach based on urban metrics and continuous impervious
surface data. Landscape and Urban Planning, 102 (1), 143-155.
225
Verbeeck, K, Orshoven, J.V., Martin Hermy, M. (2011). Measuring extent, location and
change of imperviousness in urban domestic gardens in collective housing
projects. Landscape and Urban Planning 100, 57–66
Voogt, J.A. and T.R. Oke. (2003). Thermal Remote Sensing of Urban Areas. Remote
Sensing of Environment, 86, 370-384.
Waldheim, C. and Berger, A. (2008). Logistics landscape. Landscape Journal 27(2), 55-
95.
Walker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter, S. R., & Kinzig, A. (2004). Resilience,
adaptability and transformability in Social–ecological systems. Ecology and
Society, 9(2), 5-13.
Walker, B.H., Salt, D. (2006) Resilience thinking : sustaining ecosystems and people in
a changing world. Island Press, Washington, DC.
Walmsley,A. (1995). Greenways and the making of urban form. Landscape and Urban
Planning 33, 81-127.
Watkins, R., Palmer, J., and Kolokotroni, M. (2007). Increased temperature and
intensification of the urban heat island: Implications for human comfort and
urban design. Built Environment, 33(1), 85-96.
Weiss, C.H., & Bucuvala, M. J. (1980). Social science research and decision-
making. New York: Columbia University Press.
Weng, Q. & Quattrochi, D.A. (2007). Urban Remote Sensing. CRC Press, Boca Raton,
London, New York.
Wheeler, S. (2008). State and Municipal Climate Change Plans. JAPA. 74 (4): 481-496.
Environment, 33(1), 31-45.
Wholey, J. S., Hatry, H. P., & Newcomer, K. E. (Eds.). (1994). Handbook of practical
program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
226
Wickham, J.D., Ritters, K.H., Wade, T.G., and Vogt, P. (2010). A national assessment
of green infrastructure and change for the conterminous United States using
morphological image processing. Landscape and Urban Planning, 94,186-195.
Wilson, E., (2009) Use of Scenarios for Climate Change Adaptation in Spatial Planning,
in: Davoudi, S., Crawford, J., Mehmood, A. (Eds.), Planning for Climate
Change: Strategies for Mitigation and Adaptation. Earthscan, London, pp. 223-
235.
Wolf, K. L. (2003). Ergonomics of the City: Green Infrastructure and Social Benefits. In
C. Kollin (ed.), Engineering Green: Proceedings of the 11th National Urban
Forest Conference. Washington D.C.: American Forests.
Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Young, R.F. (2011). Planting the Living City: Best Practices in Planning Green
Infrastrctures-Results from Majro U.S. Cities. Journal of the American
Planning Association, 77(4), 368-381.
Young, R.F. and McPherson, E.G. (2013). Governing metropolitan green infrastructure
in the United States. Landscape and Urban Planning, 109 (1),67-75.
Zahran, S., Grover,H.,Brody,S.D. and Vedlitz,A. (2008). Risk, Stress, and Capacity:
Explaining Metropolitan Commitment to Climate Protection. Urban Affairs
Review, 43,447-473
Zhou, & Shepherd, J. M. (2010). Atlanta’s urban heat island under extreme heat
conditions and potential mitigation strategies. Natural Hazards, 52(3), 639–668.
Zhou, W., Huang, G., and Cadenasso, M.L. (2011). Does spatial configuration matter?
Understanding the effects of land cover pattern on land surface temperature in
urban landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 102 (1),54-63.
227