DOCSLIB.ORG

Where the People Are Current Trends and Future Potential Targeted

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Where the People Are Current Trends and Future Potential Targeted Landscape and Urban Planning 177 (2018) 227–240 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Landscape and Urban Planning journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/landurbplan Research Paper Where the people are: Current trends and future potential targeted T investments in urban trees for PM10 and temperature mitigation in 27 U.S. Cities ⁎ Timm Kroegera, , Robert I. McDonaldb, Timothy Bouchera, Ping Zhangc, Longzhu Wangd a Office of the Chief Scientist, The Nature Conservancy, 4245 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 100, Arlington, VA 22203, USA b Global Cities Program, The Nature Conservancy, 4245 North Fairfax Drive Suite 100, Arlington, VA 22203, USA c NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA d China Regional Office, The Nature Conservancy, Beijing 100600, China ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Urban trees reduce respirable particulate matter (PM10) concentrations and maximum daytime summer tem- Urban forest peratures. While most cities are losing tree cover, some are considering ambitious planting efforts. Maximizing Particulate matter PM10 and heat mitigation for people from such efforts requires cost-effective targeting. We adapt published Urban heat methods to estimate the impact of a decade (2004–2014) of tree cover change on city-level PM10 and heat Return on investment mitigation in 27 U.S. cities and present a new methodology for estimating local-level PM and heat mitigation Targeting 10 by street trees and tree patches. We map potential tree planting sites in the 27 cities and use our local-level PM Ecosystem services 10 and heat mitigation methods to assess the population-weighted return on investment (ROI) of each site for PM10 and heat abatement for nearby populations. Twenty-three of the 27 cities lost canopy cover during 2004–2014, reducing estimated city-level PM10 removal by 6% (168 tons) and increasing city-level average maximum daily summer temperature by 0.1 °C on average across cities. We find large potential for urban reforestation to in- crease PM10 and heat abatement. Intra-city variation in planting site ROI – driven primarily by differences in population density around planting sites – exceeds four orders of magnitude, indicating large scope for targeting to increase PM10 and heat abatement from reforestation. Reforesting each city’s top 20% ROI sites could lower 3 average annual PM10 concentrations by > 2 μg/m for 3.4–11.4 million people and average maximum daily summer temperatures by > 2 °C for 1.7–12.7 million – effects large enough to provide meaningful health benefits – at a combined annual cost of $102 million. 1. Introduction mitigation per dollar spent. Yet, despite the increasing recognition of the pollution and heat mitigating effects of urban trees, many cities in Large-scale increases in urban vegetation cover have been suggested the U.S. are experiencing declines in urban tree canopy (Nowak & as an important strategy for mitigating urban summer temperature Greenfield, 2012), potentially impacting PM concentrations and air extremes (Akbari, Pomerantz, & Taha, 2001; Taha, Konopacki, & temperature. Gabersek, 1999) and reducing premature heat-related mortality (Stone In this paper, we quantify how current trends in urban tree canopy et al., 2014). Strategic deployment of urban vegetation additions also is cover have impacted urban air quality and summer temperatures, and considered highly effective for reducing local airborne particulate assess the potential for targeted investments in tree cover gains to im- matter (PM) concentrations (Maher, Ahmed, Davison, Karloukovski, & prove these two parameters. In this section, we present basic back- Clarke, 2013; Pugh, Mackenzie, Whyatt, & Hewitt, 2012) and enhan- ground information on what is known about urban tree canopy miti- cing the PM-related mortality and morbidity reductions urban tree gation of PM and temperature, and then present our specific research cover provides (Nowak, Hirabayashi, Bodine, & Hoehn, 2013). Indeed, goals. urban planners increasingly consider vegetation management for air pollution and heat mitigation (Andersson-Sköld et al., 2015), though rarely in a systematic manner that maximizes population-weighted ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (T. Kroeger), [email protected] (R.I. McDonald), [email protected] (T. Boucher), [email protected] (P. Zhang), [email protected] (L. Wang). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.05.014 Received 28 November 2016; Received in revised form 23 October 2017; Accepted 15 May 2018 Available online 26 May 2018 0169-2046/ © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/). T. Kroeger et al. Landscape and Urban Planning 177 (2018) 227–240 1.1. Urban tree effects on particulate matter greenspace-level PM concentration reduction studies (e.g., Cavanagh, Zawar-Rezab, & Wilson, 2009; Cowherd, Muleski, & Gebhardt, 2006; Airborne particulate matter is widely considered the most pressing Maher et al., 2013; Tiwary, Reff, & Colls, 2008; Zhu et al., 2011), and urban air quality problem globally and is a key factor in climate change by land use regression and other spatial-statistical analyses examining (Fuzzi et al., 2015). In U.S. urban outdoor environments, the main the relationship between PM concentrations and urban forests or other contributors to ambient concentrations of respirable particles (< 10 μm green areas (Eeftens et al., 2012; Irga, Burchett, & Torpy, 2015; Ross, in aerodynamic diameter, or PM10) generally are agriculture, traffic Jerrett, Ito, Tempalski, & Thurston, 2007; Wu, Xie, Li, & Li, 2015; Xu (fuel combustion; road, tire and break wear), household fuel burning et al., 2016). and powerplant and industrial emissions (Bauer, Tsigaridis, & Miller, Some modeling studies have shown that dense canopies in high- 2016; Hopke et al., 2006; Karagulian et al., 2015; Sowlat, emission street canyons under certain conditions can increase local PM Hasheminassab, & Sioutas, 2016), from local, regional and long-range concentrations if their aerodynamic effect (reduced ventilation and thus sources (Karnae & Kuruvilla, 2011; Kundu & Stone, 2014; Levy & pollutant dispersion) exceeds their pollutant removal effect (Janhäll, Hanna, 2011). In the western U.S., wildfires can be a seasonally im- 2015; Pugh et al., 2012; Vos, Maiheu, Vankerkom, & Janssen, 2013). portant source as well (Spracklen et al., 2009). Due to the high particle However, which of the two effects prevails depends on the microscale infiltration and indoor penetration factors of PM10 (Chen & Zhao, (leaf-level) deposition velocity used in the modeling (Santiago, Martilli, 2011), outdoor PM10 also is a major contributor to indoor PM10 con- & Martin, 2017), which in some studies may be set unrealistically low centrations (Almeida et al., 2011; Rovelli et al., 2014). (Maher et al., 2013; Santiago et al., 2017). Empirical evidence shows While coarse particles between 2.5 and 10 μm in aerodynamic dia- that such pollution “trapping” by dense streetside canopies may (Chen meter (PM10-2.5) are suspected to have similar health effects, evidence et al., 2015) or may not (Hofman, Stokkaer, Snauwaert, & Samson, of increased cardiovascular and respiratory morbidity and mortality 2013) occur at heights where human exposure occurs. Roadside treed from short-term and long-term exposure is strongest for fine particles areas experiencing high pedestrian use therefore should be managed for (PM2.5)(Correia et al., 2013; Hoek et al., 2013; Thurston et al., 2016; less dense canopy crowns, which facilitate pollutant dispersion while U.S. EPA, 2009) with specific pathways for cardiovascular effects re- still achieving high PM removal efficiency (Maher et al., 2013). cently demonstrated (Kaufman et al., 2016). In fact, PM2.5 is considered the dominant contributor to the health burden from outdoor air pol- 1.2. Urban tree effects on summer maximum daily air temperature lution both in the U.S. (Fann et al., 2012) and globally, being re- sponsible for an estimated 3.2 million (M) premature deaths per year Near-surface temperatures in cities generally significantly exceed worldwide (Lim & et al., 2012). PM2.5 has been linked to neurodegen- those in surrounding rural areas (Arnfield, 2003; Bounoua et al., 2015; erative disease and Alzheimer’s disease (Jung, Lin, & Hwang, 2015; Imhoff, Zhang, Wolfe, & Bounoua, 2010). This “urban heat island” Maher et al., 2016), and PM10 concentrations have a significant nega- (UHI) phenomenon is caused primarily by two factors: the replacement tive effect on worker productivity (Chang, Graff Zivin, Gross, & Neidell, of vegetation with impervious surfaces that have higher heat absorption 2016) and cognitive performance and development in children, re- capacity and produce no evaporative cooling; and the release of waste sulting in lower academic test scores and reduced lifetime earnings heat from anthropogenic processes like motor vehicle operation and air potential (Clark-Reyna, Grineski, & Collins, 2016; Dadvand et al., 2015; conditioning (Arnfield, 2003). The intensity of the UHI effect is sig- Freire et al., 2010; Lavy, Ebenstein, & Roth, 2014; Suglia, Gryparis, nificantly positively related to both impervious surface fraction and city Wright, Schwartz, & Wright, 2008). size (Bounoua et al., 2015; Imhoff et al., 2010). Over the last 30 years, regulatory controls have achieved large re- While the UHI effect is observed in both summer and winter ductions in urban PM concentrations (Darlington, Kahlbaum, Heuss, & (Bounoua
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Urban Forestry Management Plan
    Urban Forestry Management Plan Brownsburg Hendricks County, Indiana Prepared For: Town of Brownsburg Department of Planning and Building Department of Parks and Recreation 61 North Green Street Brownsburg, Indiana 46112 December 2011 Williams Creek Consulting, Inc. Corporate Office 919 North East Street Indianapolis, Indiana 46202 Satellite Offices: Columbus, Ohio St. Louis, Missouri 1-877-668-8848 [email protected] Urban Forestry Management Plan December 2011 Brownsburg, Indiana TABLE OF CONTENTS Urban Forestry Management Plan Page Executive Summary...........................................................................................................1 Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... 2 1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Project Description and Purpose 1.2 Municipal Government Coordination 1.3 Project Location 2.0 Existing Conditions .......................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Tree Inventory 2.1.1 Methodology 2.1.2 Data Analysis 2.1.3 Species Composition 2.1.4 Tree Health 2.2 Ecological and Economic Benefits 2.2.1 Ecological Values 2.2.2 Economic Values 3.0 Conclusions and Management Recommendations ....................................................... 9 3.1 Urban Reforestation Opportunities and Constraints 3.1.1 Street Trees 3.1.2 Park/Landscape Trees 3.1.3 Forest
    [Show full text]
  • The Urban Forest and Environmental Justice
    Author: Nicholas P. Boyd THE URBAN Faculty Adviser: Dr. Nisha Botchwey FOREST AND Date: April 28, 2017 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE A Review of the Literature Table of Contents: Introduction .............................................................................................. 2 Historic Background of Urban Forestry ........................................................................... 2 National Decline of Urban Tree Canopy and Local Efforts to Mititage That Decline ............... 4 Methods .................................................................................................... 6 The Benefits of Trees for Physical and Mental Health ............................ 7 Physical Health ...................................................................................................... 7 Mental Health ...................................................................................................... 10 The Benefits of Trees for Social and Economic Health .......................... 14 Social Health ........................................................................................................ 14 Economic Health .................................................................................................. 18 Urban Trees and Vulnerable Populations ................................................ 21 Perceptions of the Urban Forest ............................................................................. 21 Urban Forestry Programs and Tools for Vulnerable Populations .......................... 24 Conclusions
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Reforestation Site Assessment
    Urban Watershed Forestry Manual Chapter 2. Urban Reforestation Site Assessment The Urban Reforestation Site Assessment (URSA) is used to collect detailed information about planting site conditions. The URSA provides a tool to help organize important data to help determine where and what to plant, and what special methods are needed to prepare the site and reduce conflicts due to existing site constraints. The purpose of an URSA is to collect data at the most promising reforestation sites in an urban watershed, in order to develop detailed planting plans. The goal is to have all the available information about an individual planting area contained in a single form. This chapter describes the URSA in detail. For more information on methods to select, screen, and prioritize candidate planting sites across a watershed or development site, consult Part 1 (Chapter 2) and Part 2 (Chapter 2) of this manual series. Nine major elements are evaluated at each potential reforestation site to develop an effective planting strategy: 1. General Site Information – information about the location, property owner, and current land use at the site. 2. Climate – climate data, to help select tree and shrub species 3. Topography – local topographic features that may present planting difficulty 4. Vegetation – data on current vegetative cover, to determine if removal of vegetation is necessary and to select tree and shrub species 5. Soils – soil characteristics, to determine if soil amendments are needed, and to select appropriate tree and shrub species 6. Hydrology – site drainage, to determine if the site has capacity to provide water quality treatment of storm water runoff, and to select tree and shrub species most tolerant of the prevailing soil moisture regime 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Testimony of Dr. Joseph Fargione
    Testimony of Dr. Joseph Fargione Science Director, North America Region, The Nature Conservancy Before the US House of Representatives Select Committee on the Climate Crisis October 22, 2019 Chair Castor, Ranking Member Graves, and members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me to testify on natural solutions to cutting pollution and building resilience. I am Joseph Fargione, Science Director for the North America Region of The Nature Conservancy (TNC). Founded in 1951, TNC is a global environmental nonprofit working to create a world where people and nature can thrive. Thanks to more than a million members and the dedicated efforts of our diverse staff and more than 400 scientists, we work in all 50 U.S. states and impact conservation in 72 countries across six continents. Climate change is no longer a distant threat. We are currently living with its impacts, as Americans are seeing chronic drought, rising seas, record high temperatures, more frequent extreme storms and fires, and significant economic losses (USGCRP 2017). The climate crisis is endangering people, livelihoods, and decades of work on the conservation of America’s wildlife and environment. Addressing climate change is necessary to create a world where both people and nature thrive, where we provide food and goods for our growing population, design healthy and livable cities, and conserve and protect lands, freshwaters, and oceans. To create this world, American innovation and leadership is both capable and necessary. The Nature Conservancy is committed to tackling climate change and to helping vulnerable people and places deal with the impacts of a changing climate, including increasingly extreme weather conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Factors Driving Natural Regeneration Beneath a Planted Urban Forest T ⁎ Danica A
    Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 29 (2018) 238–247 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Urban Forestry & Urban Greening journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ufug Factors driving natural regeneration beneath a planted urban forest T ⁎ Danica A. Doroskia, , Alexander J. Felsona, Mark A. Bradforda, Mark P. Ashtona, Emily E. Oldfielda, Richard A. Hallettb, Sara E. Kuebbinga a School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, Yale University, 360 Prospect St., New Haven, CT 06511 USA b USDA Forest Service Northern Research Station, New York City Urban Field Station, 431 Walter Reed Rd., Bayside, NY 11359, USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Cities around the world are investing in urban forest plantings as a form of green infrastructure. The aim is that Afforestation these plantations will develop into naturally-regenerating native forest stands. However, woody plant recruit- Compost ment is often cited as the most limiting factor to creating self-sustaining urban forests. As such, there is interest in Invasive species site treatments that promote recruitment of native woody species and simultaneously suppress woody non-native New York city recruitment. We tested how three, common site treatments—compost, nurse shrubs, and tree species composi- Recruitment tion (six-species vs. two-species)—affected woody plant recruitment in 54 experimental plots beneath a large- Reforestation scale tree planting within a high-traffic urban park. We identified naturally regenerating seedling and sapling species and measured their abundance six-years after the site was planted. This enabled us to examine initial recruitment dynamics (i.e. seedlings) and gain a better understanding of seedling success as they transition to the midstory (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Shaken, Shrinking, Hot, Impoverished and Informal: Emerging Research Agendas in Planning
    Progress in Planning 72 (2009) 195–250 www.elsevier.com/locate/pplann Shaken, shrinking, hot, impoverished and informal: Emerging research agendas in planning Hilda Blanco a,1,*, Marina Alberti a,1 a Department of Urban Design and Planning, Box 355740, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-5740, USA Robert Olshansky b,2, Stephanie Chang c,2 b Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 611 Taft Drive, Champaign, IL 61829, USA c School of Community and Regional Planning, University of British Columbia, 242-1933 West Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z2, Canada Stephen M. Wheeler d,3, John Randolph e,3, James B. London f,3 d Landscape Architecture Program, Department of Environmental Design, University of California at Davis, One Shields Ave., Davis, CA 95616, USA e Department of Urban Affairs & Planning, Virginia Tech, 201-C Architecture Annex (0113), Blacksburg, VA 24061 USA f College of Architecture, Art, and Humanities, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA Justin B. Hollander g,4, Karina M. Pallagst h,4, Terry Schwarz i,4, Frank J. Popper j,4 g Urban and Environmental Policy and Planning Department, Tufts University, 97 Talbot Avenue, Medford, MA 02155, USA h Center for Global Metropolitan Studies, University of California at Berkeley, 316 Wurster Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720-1870 USA i Cleveland Urban Design Collaborative, Kent State University, College of Architecture and Environmental Design, 820 Prospect Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44115 USA j Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers University, 33 Livingston Avenue, Room 535, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1958, USA Susan Parnell k,5, Edgar Pieterse l,5, Vanessa Watson m,5 k Environmental and Geographical Sciences, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7700, South Africa l African Centre for Cities, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7700, South Africa m School of Architecture, Planning and Geomatics, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7700, South Africa * Corresponding author.
    [Show full text]
  • Reforestation GIP-08
    ACTIVITY: Reforestation GIP-08 Reforestation Description: Reforestation refers to trees planted in groups in urban areas such as: parking lots, right of ways (ROW), parks, schools, public lands, vacant land, and neighborhood open spaces, to provide shade and stormwater retention and to add aesthetic value. Advantages/Benefits: Selection Criteria: • Reduces effective impervious cover Twice the forest Rv factor for the • Reduces stormwater runoff • Provides aesthetic value corresponding soil type. • Provides rainfall interception Equal to the forest Rv factor if amended • Shade provides cooling and energy savings soils are used in conjunction with • Provides habitat reforestation. • Provides pollutant removal • Provides flow attenuation *This GIP is subject to City approval Disadvantages/Limitations: Land Use Considerations: • Poor quality urban soils may require soil amendments or remediation X Residential • Long-term maintenance is required for high tree survival rates • Must be implemented over large areas to see significant X Commercial reduction in stormwater runoff • Time required for trees to mature X Industrial • Poor soils, improper planting methods, conflicts with paved areas and utilities, inputs from road salt, lack of water, or disease can lead to low survival rate • Reforestation not allowed in riparian buffers Design Considerations: Maintenance: • Stormwater trees are limited to areas where there is enough • Trees may require irrigation in dry periods space for fully grown trees as well as utilities and a separation distance from structures. Maintenance Burden • Tree species with desirable stormwater control characteristics L L = Low M = Moderate H = High should be utilized. For trees receiving runoff, tree species must have a high tolerance for common urban pollutants. This includes salt tolerance if receiving runoff from areas treated for snow and ice.
    [Show full text]
  • Sicard Et Al (2018)
    Environmental Pollution 243 (2018) 163e176 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Environmental Pollution journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envpol Should we see urban trees as effective solutions to reduce increasing ozone levels in cities?* * Pierre Sicard a, , Evgenios Agathokleous b, c, Valda Araminiene d, Elisa Carrari e, Yasutomo Hoshika e, Alessandra De Marco f, Elena Paoletti e a ARGANS, Sophia Antipolis, France b Hokkaido Research Centre, Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute, Sapporo, Japan c Research Faculty of Agriculture, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan d Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry, Institute of Forestry, Girionys, Lithuania e Consiglio Nazionale Delle Ricerche, Sesto Fiorentino, Italy f Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development, Rome, Italy article info abstract Article history: Outdoor air pollution is considered as the most serious environmental problem for human health, Received 23 April 2018 associated with some million deaths worldwide per year. Cities have to cope with the challenges due to Received in revised form poor air quality impacting human health and citizen well-being. According to an analysis in the 23 July 2018 framework of this study, the annual mean concentrations of tropospheric ozone (O3)havebeen Accepted 15 August 2018 À increasing by on average 0.16 ppb year 1 in cities across the globe over the time period 1995e2014. Green Available online 20 August 2018 urban infrastructure can improve air quality by removing O3.Toefficiently reduce O3 in cities, it is important to define suitable urban forest management, including proper species selection, with focus on Keywords: Air pollution the removal ability of O3 and other air pollutants, biogenic emission rates, allergenic effects and main- Green infrastructure tenance requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Adaptation Design Principles for Urban Development
    Purpose of this Document The purpose of this document is to outline design principles that can be used to help develop policy and regulations for property in Honolulu’s transit-oriented development (TOD) and other urban areas that may be vulnerable to sea level rise (SLR) and other climate change-related hazards. The guidance in this document identifies recommended tools and best practices to consider in designing building sites and structures to be resilient to SLR, flooding, extreme heat, and groundwater inundation. A companion document, Climate Adaptation: Background Research, summarizes international best practices and local initiatives related to climate adaptation in the built environment, including recommendations for next steps. The companion document is available at www.honolulu.gov/tod. Why Design for Climate Resilience? Climate change will affect all aspects of addition to mitigating emissions, the City Scan here for life in Hawai‘i, from natural ecosystems to recognizes that adaptation will be needed the companion human health and the built environment. It is as SLR and other climate-related impacts Background imperative to plan for it now. Many U.S. cities intensify. This will require measures to Research are doing so by adopting new regulations protect or enhance existing development, document and design guidelines to make the built as well as determining when retreat or environment more resilient to SLR flooding, relocation is called for. heat, gradual inundation, and other hazards. Policies are being established in new and In developing this guidance, examples were existing documents, including sustainable consulted from New York, Boston, San community/development plan updates. Francisco, Miami, New Orleans, and other Changes to regulations for both public similar cities around the world to identify and private development are also being best practices applicable to Honolulu.
    [Show full text]
  • Colourful Street Trees." Nature 221(5175): 10-&
    (1969). "Colourful Street Trees." Nature 221(5175): 10-&. (1987). DE-ICING WITH SALT CAN HARM TREES. New York Times: C.7. (1993). "Urban arborcide." Environment 35(10): 21. (1995). Proceedings of the 1995 Watershed Management Symposium. Watershed Management Symposium - Proceedings. (1998). "Cooling hot cities with trees." Futurist 32(4): 13-13. (1998). "Tree Guard 5 - latest from Netlon." Forestry and British Timber: 36. (2000). "ANOTHER FINE MESH!" Forestry and British Timber: 24. (2000). "Nortech Sells Tree Guard Product for $850,000." PR Newswire: 1. (2000). "One Texas town learns the value of its trees." American City & County 115(16): 4. (2000). "Texas City relies on tree canopy to reduce runoff." Civil Engineering 70(10): 18-18. (2001). Proceedings: IEEE 2001 International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS). (2001). "Protective Gear for New York City Trees." American Forests 107(2): 18. (2001). "Trees May Not Be So Green!" Hart's European Fuels News 5(16): 1. (2002). "Fed assessment forecasts strong timber inventories, more plantations." Timber Harvesting 50(1): 7. (2002). Proceedings: 2002 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. 24th Canadian Symposium on Remote Sensing. International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS). (2002). "Toledo, Ohio - Recycled rubber mulch used on rooftop garden." Biocycle 43(12): 21-21. (2002). "TREE SHELTERS: Lower lining life." Forestry and British Timber: 58. (2003). "The forest lawn siphon project - An HDD success story." Geodrilling International 11(7): 12-14. (2003). "Trenchless technology." Public Works 134(1): 28-29. (2004). Brownfield sites II: Assessment, rehabilitation and development. Brownfield Sites II: Assessment, Rehabilitation and Development.
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Forestry and the Eco-City: Today and Tomorrow
    fI 32 oct .y Urbo q "f0r t'."l r ! >I. !>c c ::; y6+ C'Y" ).-~~d '-' 27 Urban Forestry and the Eco-City: Today and Tomorrow Margaret M. Carreiro and Wayne C. Zipperer In 1990, the Chicago Academy of Sciences held a conference, Sustainable Cities: Preserving and Restoring Urban Biodiversity, which led to the publication of a book entitled The Ecological City (Platt et aI., 1994). This symposium differed from others on cities at that time by focusing principally on cities as habitats for biodiversity. The thrust of the symposium was that interactions between people and nonhuman biological entities in urban landscapes had not received much scientific attention and warranted increased ecological investigation. More than a decade later in Shanghai, the International Meeting on Urban Forestry and Eco-Cities conference explored the role of urban forestry in creating more environmentally sound cities that enhance people's quality of life. During the interval between these two symposia, urban ecology has rapidly developed as an ecological discipline exploring the myriad elements that comprise an urban landscape. No longer are urban ecologists trying to convince the ecological community that urban land­ scapes are important and productive subjects for research, trying to convince planners that ecological concepts need to be incorporated into urban design, or try­ ing to convince environmental managers that a multiple scale approach is needed to manage ecological goods and services and to restore habitats. However, this symposium also revealed that implementation of these principles can be 'difficult for a variety of reasons, not the least of. which is that we still do not understand the nuances of the political and socioecological interactions that affect the structure and function of urban landscapes and how they can be influenced to improve environ­ mental conditions citywide (e.g., Perkins et aI., 2004).
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Urban Forest Restoration 2 Guidelines for Urban Forest Restoration
    GUIDELINES FOR URBAN FOREST RESTORATION 2 GUIDELINES FOR URBAN FOREST RESTORATION NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS & RECREATION http://www.nyc.gov/parks Acknowledgements: These guidelines were written over several years, based on decades of work by NYC Parks Natural Resources Group. Many people contributed who have not been listed below, and we acknowledge and appreciate everyone who took time to make this document more complete, accurate, and helpful to future restoration practitioners. The primary authors of this document at Parks were: Katerli Bounds, Michael J. Feller, Jennifer Greenfeld, Minona Heaviland, Clara Pregitzer and Tim Wenskus. Signifi cant written sections, review, and comments were also received from: Bram Gunther, Lea Johnson, Kristen King, Jacqueline Lu, Marjorie Naidich, Ellen Pehek, Brady Simmons, Susan Stanley and Ed Toth. External reviewers also contributed comments and notes that help to improve the fi nal document: Dennis Burton, Sarah Charlop-Powers, Richard Hallett, John Jordan, David Maddox and Josephine Scalia. We thank Commissioners Veronica M. White, Adrian Benepe, Liam Kavanagh, Joshua Laird, Fiona Watt, and Director Bill Tai for their vision and support. Consulting Team: Design + Planning Andrew Lavallee, Managing Principal, NYC Studio Gonzalo Cruz, Creative Design Director, NYC Studio Grace Miller, Designer, NYC Studio The consulting team would like to thank the following individuals whose participation was key to the develpment of this document: Hannah Beall, Jeremiah Bergstrom, Ellen Fyock, Caitrin Higgins, John Hunter, Lea Johnson, Renee Kaufman, Emily Neye, Shaun O’Rourke, Matt Palmer, Richard Pouyat, Thomas Salaki, Timothy Terway, Donna Walcavage, Adrianne Weremchuk and Evelyn Zornoza. Printed in the United States by Vanguard Direct.
    [Show full text]