Nyc and Cph: Building Resilience Together

NYC AND CPH: PARTNERSHIP GUIDE BUILDING RESILIENCE TOGETHER INTRODUCTION

Partnerships do not just fall from the sky – they This document serves as a blueprint for city-to-city require time and dedication from all partners. City- collaboration, using the New York City - Copenhagen to-city partnerships have the potential to accelerate (NYC-CPH) partnership as an example. It provides climate resilience and innovation. Establishing key insights in the establishment, accomplishments partnerships takes time and resources but provides and lessons learned and presents next steps and rewards at the end of the rainbow, if managed recommendations for peer-to-peer collaborations. appropriately. Participants at NYC-CPH kick-off meeting in March 2016 at Queens Museum, NYC

2 BACKGROUND

The partnership between New York and Copenha- lenges after both cities had been impacted by natural gen had its early beginnings in 2013 when a CPH disasters. The primary aspiration was to enable the delegation visited NYC to look for opportunities for cities to learn from one another and in turn share knowledge exchange, partnering and a platform for findings with other cities around the world facing providing Nordic Solutions within the field of climate similar climate related challenges, especially flooding. change adaptation and resiliency planning. It is the aim of this Blueprint to inspire and guide other cities in building efficient and fruitful partner- Later in 2015, the two cities signed a 3-year Memo- ships for increased knowledge sharing on resiliency randum of Cooperation (MoC) for the purposes of planning! exchanging knowledge on solutions to climate chal-

On October 29th, 2012, New York On July 2nd, 2011, Copenhagen experienced City was hit with Superstorm Sandy, a “Cloudburst” event in which they received which caused roughly $19 billion almost 6 inches of rain within a 2-hour in damages as a result of 80 mph peak wind speeds duration causing nearly $1 billion worth of and flooding in 51 square miles or 17% of the city’s damages. In the wake of this event it became evident total land mass. Although NYC has experienced storms that Copenhagen needed a better way to manage of greater magnitude in the past, Superstorm Sandy stormwater that inundated the city during extreme exposed the city’s vulnerability to coastal storms. precipitation events.

In response to Sandy, NYC built off of its 2007 In response Copenhagen issued a “Cloudburst sustainability plan, PlaNYC, and developed special Management Plan” in 2012, which set forth a strategy initiatives for rebuilding and resiliency to provide to utilize a mix of gray and green systems to absorb additional protection for New York’s infrastructure, and convey stormwater from these heavy rainfall buildings, and communities from the impacts of climate events. Currently, Copenhagen is working towards change. A Stronger, More Resilient New York – a implementation of 300 projects that aim to work as roadmap for producing a truly sustainable 21st century a networking for conveying stormwater and better New York - was the result. managing flooding.

3 4 NYC-CPH COLLABORATION

The NYC-CPH partnership had different scopes ment plans. While there are long term strategies to and expressions in the two cities, depending on the address flooding, such as sewer expansion, it became local challenges and opportunities. Below is a short evident that there was an opportunity to comple- summary of each. ment those projects with innovative, site-specific solutions, such as bluebelts and green infrastructure. New York City In 2016 NYC Department of Environmental Pro- Through the study, specific opportunities for in- tervention were identified within the study area to tection (DEP) hired the CPH-based consulting firm, provide retention and conveyance for extreme con- Ramboll, to provide insight into ways to advance cli- ditions, while offering community and environmental mate resiliency and traditional stormwater solutions benefits in normal conditions. to mitigate inland flooding and accommodate future increase in rainfall intensity through integration with NYC Housing Authority’s South Jamaica Houses was ongoing urban planning and development with a identified as a pilot area for Cloudburst Manage- focus on multi-functionality. ment. The pilot represents a tremendous opportu- The Cloudburst Resiliency Planning Study built upon nity for implementation of cloudburst management Ramboll’s experience and the NYC-CPH partner- by blue-green infrastructure (BGI) that can play a ship. It applied the methodology used to develop prominent role in flood relief within the community, the CPH Cloudburst Management Masterplans to a while enhancing the community’s aesthetics and so- NYC landscape. The Cloudburst Resiliency Planning cial and physical connectivity by providing numerous Study analyzes best-available data related to NYC co-benefits. rainfall projections, recommends methodologies for incorporating findings into ongoing resiliency The area of St. Albans, suffering from chronic flood- planning initiatives, and identifies best practices for ing, was identified as a another pilot area for Cloud- integrating climate change projects in future neigh- burst Management. A planned upgrade of St. Albans borhood-specific planning studies. pumping station could be optimized to integrate BGI typologies, thereby providing co-benefits and cloud- Southeast Queens, which spans over 3,200 acres and burst management. Site specific concepts were de- is home to approximately 110,000 people, was select- ed as a study area based on its history with chronic Visualizations of cloudburst management flooding and already ongoing infrastructure invest- in neighborhoods in CPH and NYC

5 signed to convey water from areas of 177th Street, pared for the growing risks due to climate change. 178th Street and the south end of 112th venue to reduce the peak flows and provide buffer volumes in Copenhagen the catchment area. In late 2011, the City of Copenhagen started work on its Cloudburst Management Plan. The work was In the 2018 OneNYC Progress Report, the cloud- divided into socio-economic and technical studies burst approach developed through the NYC-CPH consisting of calculations of systems needed to partnership was recognized as a measure under “Vi- handle large amounts of water, cost benefit analyses sion Four: Our Resilient City” for NYC to improve its ability to manage and treat stormwater, including Participants at workshop in New York sketch during extreme weather, and to ensure that it is pre- ideas for cloudburst management

6 and a definition for a new level of service required • The European Water Frame Directive: Like the for handling stormwater on the surface. The devel- Clean Water Act, the European Water Frame Di- opment of the Cloudburst Management Plan was rective calls for a reduction in sewer overflows carried out in the following steps: and other measures to improve water quality in both marine and freshwater systems. 1. Division of Copenhagen into water catchments based on topography and overland flows paths. There are many similarities, both in terms of barriers and opportunities in the legislation and reg- 2. Approval of the citywide Cloudburst Manage- ulation, between the two cities. The cooperation ment Plan and development of catchment specif- has provided an important insight in the ways of ic cloudburst masterplans. overcoming barriers and even turning some of them 3. Development of the “climate neighborhood”: into opportunities – e.g. the Legal Grade concept Piloting of adaptation solutions with a special in NYC which can provide the basis for regulating focus on their potential to also provide urban street levels in CPH space improvement and neighborhood revitali- zation. The lessons learned, especially in relation to mainte- nance and operation, of the first implemented BGI After the City Council’s approval of the catch- cloudburst projects in CPH, e.g. the cloudburst road ment specific masterplans, the city and the utility of Saint Annæ Square in the heart of city, has served co-developed the implementation plan, breaking as key insight for NYC to advance their work within each catchment masterplan into individual projects, BGI in the city across and between multiple agen- including descriptions of the hydraulic measures and cies. In addition, the strong visions set out by CPH the potential for urban space improvement for each early on in their climate adaptation agendas, which project. have proven to be highly effective and successful, have also served to inspire NYC to think in similar In terms of barriers Copenhagen was challenged by approaches. the following legislation and regulations: Furthermore, the City of Copenhagen started • Storm and Wastewater Management: In Den- preparation of a storm surge masterplan during the mark, storm and wastewater management is collaboration period. This was issued in 2018. NYC’s regulated through the “Water Sector Act” post-Sandy experience from disaster relief projects which describes the framework and financing of and resiliency planning has served as important wastewater management, in which stormwater inspiration for CPH’s work on the Storm Surge is included. In 2012, the legislation was changed Management Plan. to allow for financing through water fees.

7 CITY-TO-CITY EVENTS

Kick-o workshop: Coastal resiliency CPH’s PPP model NYC-CPH climate and future neighborhoods collaboration

Signing Co-beneﬁts Green roofs and of MoU through climate green infrastructure adaptation

2016 2017 2018 NEXT STEPS • Blueprint • Pilot designs Initial Hydraulic Masterplan Conceptual CLOUDBURST CBA • Implementation analyses calculations design designs RESILIENCY • Supplement PLANNING STUDY Risk international analysis networks

PROCESS Workshop II: Site visits and Workshop V: Masterplan Workshop IV: Implementation Pilot projects

Site visits and Site visits and NYC-CPH Workshop I: Workshop III: networking Knowledge sharing CBA and strategy 8 CITY-TO-CITY EVENTS

Kick-o workshop: Coastal resiliency CPH’s PPP model NYC-CPH climate and future neighborhoods collaboration

Signing Co-beneﬁts Green roofs and of MoU through climate green infrastructure adaptation

PROCESS Workshop II: Site visits and Workshop V: Masterplan Workshop IV: Implementation Pilot projects

Project process and time Site visits and Site visits and NYC-CPH line of events for the MoC Workshop I: Workshop III: networking Knowledge sharing CBA and strategy 9 Hydraulic model Risk model and CBA

PHYSICAL Catchmentwide approach

Interagency OUTCOMES collaboration Masterplan

GOVERNANCE

CLOUDBURST RESILIENCY IN NEW YORK CITY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Conceptual designs Socio-economic approach

Technical report and executive summaries

Knowledge sharing Integrated approach Executive Summary I 10 OUTCOMES

The NYC-CPH partnership is a clear example and engage the public and city stakeholders. of the value of city-to-city collaboration. It has A direct bilateral city-to-city collaboration can demonstrated how city officials across borders can enable more in-depth work on the unique differenc- inspire one another, exchange insights, accelerate es between cities. By addressing cities as complex action, and develop new trends and opportunities. systems, the bilateral collaboration can facilitate Some conclusions include: broader engagement across city agencies and stakeholders. City-to-city partnerships can: • Greater urban value and co-benefits for capital investments can be achieved by using BGI for • Provide a level of technical assistance to focus ex- stormwater management. pert assistance on designing specific steps and strat- • It is possible to add a buffer from extreme rain egies for stakeholder engagement (including other events using BGI for a similar budget as traditional city agencies, private or other non-governmental stormwater infrastructure. groups or partners), workshopping and planning, and overcoming implementation challenges • Increased cooperation across city agencies and stakeholders through integrated planning maxi- • Establish convening power, where a visiting city mizes output of invested money. provides an opportunity to convene various arms of the host city, creating a forum for the • Adaptation and mitigation must go hand in hand host city to collaborate on climate solutions – through integrated planning approaches. and even design iconic and inspirational projects • City-to-city collaboration facilitate hard conver- • Foster a tested relationship that can allow for mu- sations that otherwise may not be had. tual support in other areas and sectors (e.g. begin a • Peer-to-peer knowledge-sharing fosters relationship on stormwater management exchange innovation. that evolves to build off existing relationships to also explore energy systems resilience) The NYC-CPH partnership also demonstrated how • Provide communication and messaging resources peers can serve as catalysts for inter-agency cooper- by creating living examples to showcase ation and provide unbiased peer review of planning documents and implementation strategies. In this case, the partnership has even led to more detailed Examples of outcomes of the NYC-CPH designs of specific construction projects that inspire collaboration

11 12 RECOMMENDATIONS

Many lessons learned from the NYC-CPH agencies. The collaboration requires prioritization partnership are valuable beyond the two cities. from the leadership of both cities, even though Some key steps have been critical in ensuring a there is no money involved between the cities. The balanced and successful collaboration: collaboration can lead to activities that will require funding – but then it is based on the expected Insight to your challenges is fundamental outcome, not as part of the agreement. First of all, identifying and gaining insight to your city’s challenges form the basis for any potential Concretize goals and themes collaboration. Define simple and specific common goals and themes! Too often, city-to-city collaborations Partner with a city with similar challenges resemble broad declarations of friendship and By partnering with a city with similar challenges leave little impact. In the NYC-CPH partnership the motivation to collaborate will be higher and key topics of interest were carefully identified and the partnership more balanced. The collaboration served as guidance for the collaboration and related should be voluntary and allow cities to leave the activities. As the collaboration develops, new topics collaboration when they want and to deliver only emerge, but a simple setup makes initiation more what they are capable of. The key is to make the effective. Concrete collaboration agreements are outcome of the collaboration fruitful for both cities. more effective in providing actual actions and real impact. The NYC-CPH collaboration was initiated by a few people in both cities, and initially it was not easy Also, set a fixed end date for the collaboration to to get other stakeholders to participate. Once the manage expectations. Proper planning and specific Mayor’s Office in NYC promoted the work in the milestones are key. city, it became easier to get people on board. And typically, once they are involved, participants see Build trust by working together the benefits and some even become champions A close partnership requires trust, and trust comes of the collaboration. Local anchoring and local from working together and from being open about champions are necessary to ensure a dynamic and strengths and weaknesses. Participate in workshops lively partnership. Find colleagues who will support and champion the discussions within their own Conceptual design of the pilot project of South Jamaica Houses in Southeast Queens

13 and meetings together! Some of the most interesting sessions in the NYC-CPH partnership were those where the cities worked together to solve a specific INSIGHT problem, e.g. flooding issues in Southeast Queens or Understand your storm surges in Copenhagen. citys challenges Furthermore, equity is key! No matter the size, location or demography of the partnering cities, they should join in a balanced agreement, as equals. PARTNER Copenhagen and New York are very different in Find city with size. CPH has 600,000 citizens, whereas NYC similar challenges has more than 8 million. However, in the NYC- CPH partnership, the difference in size was not an issue. Differences in organization, legislation, CONCRETIE political environment and culture were much more Identify specific themes important. Comparing and understanding the for knowledge sharing context of the two cities took time. For instance, representatives from CPH needed – and benefited from – an overview of the stakeholder landscape in NYC and insight into how these stakeholders, TRUST including relevant agencies, work together. We all Build trust, ensure have something to learn from one another. equity, and share

Co-create, test, and learn Co-create, test, fail and succeed together - CO-CREATE knowledge sharing and innovation will multiply! Design, develop, test, and learn Disseminate your learnings Share, so other cities can learn from and build on recognized experiences. Together, cities can DISSEMINATE advance resilience on a global scale - it’s our shared responsibility! Implement and disseminate

Recommended steps to follow for optimum city-to-city collaboration

14 NEXT STEPS

The next step in the NYC-CPH partnership is to two cities can go deep into the actual solutions and work together on specific planning and construction thereby supplement the work of important national projects. Furthermore, the work that we have done and international networks. together has inspired NYC to expand its cloudburst work citywide to study and respond to future We believe our NYC-CPH partnership is a valuable cloudbursts. It does not take a disaster to prompt example of how cities have the potential to build climate resilience--we can take action in our own resilient futures together and we hope, that we cities by learning from other cities’ experience. can inspire other cities to engage in city-to-city collaboration. Our NYC-CPH partnership can hopefully serve Children play near water features in Queens as a model for other cities in many ways. There is Botanical Garden no one-size fits all, but the close collaboration of

15 CONTACT

Lykke Leonardsen Head of program for Resilient and Sustainable City Solutions City of Copenhagen [email protected]

Read more about the Cloudburst Resiliency Planning Study at: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/climate/nyc-cloudburst-study.pdf

A SPECIAL THANK YOU TO:

2nd Ed, published by Ramboll, 2018