BOSTON RESILIENCY CASE STUDY
Prepared by E Cubed Optimizers
E C O TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 3 SECTION 2: BACKGROUND ...... 4 SECTION 3: SCOPE AND CONTEXT OF THIS CASE STUDY ...... 6 SECTION 4: FOCUS AREA ANALYSIS ...... 7 1. Resiliency ...... 7 A. Definition ...... 7 B. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities...... 7 C. Progress Toward Goals ...... 7 D. Impediments to Progress ...... 9 2. Infrastructure and Built Environment Resiliency ...... 10 A. Building Design ...... 10 B. Water Management ...... 12 C. Energy Management...... 15 D. Waste Management ...... 17 E. Transportation Design ...... 20 F. Horizontal Infrastructure ...... 23 3. Human Side of Resiliency ...... 26 A. Social Equity ...... 26 B. Health and Wellness Considerations ...... 28 C. Education ...... 31 D. Food Management ...... 35 4. Leadership and Strategy ...... 38 A. Regulatory Environment...... 38 B. Communication Resiliency ...... 40 C. Interoperability...... 43 5. Resiliency of the Natural Habitat ...... 47 A. Climate Adaptation ...... 47 B. Environmental Resiliency ...... 50 SECTION 5: KEY INDIVIDUALS INTERVIEWED/CONTACTS...... 54
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 2
SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The U.S. Green Building Council® (USGBC) commissioned E Cubed Optimizers (ECO) to review the measures taken, lessons learned, and challenges facing the City of Boston in its work to create a truly resilient city. More importantly, the USGBC directed us to prepare a case study based on what we found during our study of Boston. This case study summarizes the most relevant findings of that resiliency study.
Often studies of resiliency start and stop with the built environment. That is appropriate when studying only the resiliency of the built infrastructure. But as important as that is, in studying the resiliency of a city, the built environment is only a part of the larger fabric that constitutes a city’s resiliency. In the public’s mind, a city is sometimes defined in terms of its buildings, streets and other infrastructure. Nevertheless, human systems, interactions and conditions in a city are crucial to a city’s resiliency. A holistic approach to resiliency is required when working with a City. We can have the most resilient infrastructure, but if the human factors are not resilient, the city is not resilient. We call a city without people a “ghost town”. A resilient city requires resilient infrastructure, resilient systems and resilient people. One of the reasons Boston was an excellent candidate for the case study is that Boston understands this fundamental principal.
In this Boston case study, we examined what has been accomplished, as well as impediments to future resiliency progress. We recognize that each city is unique and has its own set of conditions, challenges and attributes. However, there are certain central factors that do determine the level of resiliency of any city. In the case study of Boston, we examined 16 different resiliency factors. Each of these sixteen areas was separately examined and the findings are summarized in the related sections of this case study. Although these factors are separately described, they are strategically interrelated. No one factor can guarantee significant resiliency no matter how strong it may be. Each is critical to the whole. Likewise, no single factor has achieved perfection; each of the sixteen factors provides opportunities to further enhance the resiliency of Boston.
The purpose of this case study is not to provide a “resiliency score” for Boston, although its progress is admirable. Boston recognizes that resiliency is an evolving process requiring continuous improvement to overcome current obstacles, adapt to future new challenges, improve systems and develop new technics and approaches. So, the purpose of this case study is to assist Boston and cities across the globe in both measuring and furthering their own quest for resiliency. Boston has made significant process that is both noteworthy and illustrative. Many lessons can be learned from Boston’s experience in this area. This case study is a tool designed to help cities enhance their own resiliency. As more and more cities accept their responsibility for their own resiliency and work towards that goal, what may be judged today to be a very high level of resiliency may in the future be considered in serious need of improvement.
Les Lo Baugh, Jr. Katherine Hammack President, E Cubed Optimizers LLC Chair and CEO, E Cubed Optimizers LLC
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 3
SECTION 2: BACKGROUND
The recent past has seen a wide range of unprecedented assault on various cities and locals. In addition to tragedies such as 9/11, the Boston Marathon bombing, and the numerous terrorist attacks in Europe and elsewhere; natural disasters such as the Hurricane Sandy and Katrina, and more recently Harvey, Irma, and Maria force us to confront the fragile nature of our inhabited ecosystems. The consequences of climate change can be seen around the world and we are constantly reminded that we can no longer ignore the importance of resiliency. We must undertake an informed study of the level of resiliency of our cities and commit to do what must be done to enhance their resiliency. To ignore this challenge is to imperil our future and that of future generations.
In recognition of the importance in focusing on resiliency, this project was developed with the following objectives:
1. Develop comprehensive case study of Boston as a foundation for the definition and guidelines for sustainable, resilient, future cities;
2. Identify characteristics of integrated future cities and identify progress and impediments to goals; and
3. Make a presentation about the results of the case study at the annual conference of the USGBC in Boston in 2017.
In December of 2014, Boston was selected as one of the cities from around the world to be invited to join the 100 Resilient Cities (100RC) Network, a project of the Rockefeller Foundation. 100RC supplies its member cities with tools, funding, technical expertise, and other resources to build resilience to the challenges of the 21st century.1 At the time, Boston identified that a resiliency challenge it faced was prioritizing improving water management while fostering social cohesion and equality.
As an important cultural and economic center, Boston is rich with United States history. While much of the city has prospered, certain neighborhoods, especially minority communities, have been left behind. Lack of affordable housing, fewer educational opportunities, and less preparation for good jobs threaten to divide the city further along racial and economic lines. The city has launched new programs to increase access to jobs, including training and related services, in order to help disadvantaged communities to move into growing industries and promote equity throughout the city.
Boston’s response to the Marathon bombing in 2013 demonstrated a well-integrated emergency response system. To be even better prepared in the future, officials recognized the need to expand this integration across city systems. Additionally, Boston realized that it needed to develop plans to respond to flooding and the impacts of sea level rise. (Several essential civic and transportation hubs, including Logan International Airport, are located in flood-sensitive zones).2
In May of 2015, the Mayor of Boston kicked off the process of developing a comprehensive resilience strategy to enable the city to better survive, adapt and grow no matter what kinds of chronic
1 https://www.cityofboston.gov/news/Default.aspx?id=17891 2 http://www.100resilientcities.org/cities/boston/
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 4 stresses and acute shocks it experiences. The workshop brought together local officials and civic leaders, as well as engineers, architects, economists, faith leaders, academics and urban planners from around the city to participate in discussions on shared priorities and the essential elements for our preparedness plans.
In August of 2015, Dr. Atyia Martin was appointed as the City of Boston's first Chief Resilience Officer (CRO), a new position created to lead city-wide resilience building efforts to help Boston prepare for, withstand and bounce back from the 'shocks' – catastrophic events like floods, infrastructure failure and acts of terrorism – and 'stresses' – slow-moving disasters like persistent racial and economic inequality, lack of affordable housing and unemployment – which are increasingly part of 21st century life. As Chief Resilience Officer, Martin reports to Mayor Walsh and the Mayor's Chief of Policy, and oversees the development and implementation of a comprehensive Resilience Strategy for the city.3
The 100RC program provides financial support for a CRO for the first two years. They have identified four major roles of a CRO:
1. To work across government departments to help a city improve internal communications, and to address its own complexities. By facilitating communication that reaches across sometimes-significant internal divisions, the CRO promotes new collaboration; ensures that offices aren’t wasting resources doing duplicative work; and fosters synergy between the various projects and the plans that agencies draft.
2. To bring together a wide array of stakeholders to learn about the city’s challenges and help increase support for individual initiatives, and for resilience building in general. These stakeholders include government officials and city residents. It is also critical that representatives from the private sector, non-profits, and civil society be included. Boston has recognized this fact and acts accordingly.
3. To lead the resilience strategy: a six-to-nine-month process during which the CRO brings in a wide variety of stakeholders, to help identify the city’s resilience challenges, its capabilities and plans to address them, and then to identify the gaps between these two. At the end of this process, the CRO will have a series of resilience-building initiatives that he or she will then work to put into action, with assistance from 100RC and our platform partners. (Boston’s CRO has done so in coordination with other city departments.)
4. Act as the “resilience point person,” ensuring that the city applies a resilience lens so that resources are leveraged holistically and projects planned for synergy. This lets the city get the most “bang for its buck” on its projects, potentially achieving multiple resilience goals with one project. This could include, for example, a flood barrier also serves as a bike path, promoting healthy citizens and cohesive communities.4
3 https://www.cityofboston.gov/news/Default.aspx?id=20281 4 http://www.100resilientcities.org/what-is-a-chief-resilience-officer/
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 5
SECTION 3: SCOPE AND CONTEXT OF THIS CASE STUDY
The Boston Green Ribbon Commission Climate Preparedness Working Group submitted a report to the City of Boston in July 2013 titled “Building Resilience in Boston”. The intent of the report was to develop “...a better understanding of the strategies and specific measures that property owners can use to reduce their vulnerability to climate change, and the policies and programs that government and other public bodies can establish to spur such efforts.” The scope of this report includes a review of national and international programs, initiatives, and activities related to improving the resilience of existing buildings in Boston to climate change impacts.
The Rockefeller Foundation developed a City Resilience Framework (CRF) which is used by 100RC. The CRF is built on four essential dimensions of urban resilience: Health & Wellbeing; Economy & Society; Infrastructure & Environment; and Leadership & Strategy.
As previously noted in the Executive Summary, for the purposes of this study, these dimensions were divided into the sixteen focus areas. These can be loosely grouped into several categories.
The Infrastructure and built environment covers: Building Design, Water Management, Energy Management, Waste Management, Transportation Design and Horizontal Infrastructure.
The human side of resiliency covers: Social Equity, Health and Wellness Considerations, Education and Food Management.
The leadership and strategy aspect of resiliency includes: Regulatory Environment, Communication, and Interoperability.
The resiliency of the natural habitat includes: Climate Adaptation and Environmental Resiliency.
In this case study, each of the 16 focus areas begins with a definition of the dimension of urban resilience and a characterization of what resilient, integrated future cities are implementing. Every effort was made to contact and interview city officials who had responsibilities in these areas. They identified the progress that the city has made to meet their goals as well as the impediments to progress.
In performing this work, our protocol was to first review publicly available resiliency data concerning Boston, interview key Boston officials, compare our interview results with other available data, submit a draft of the case study to the USGBC for peer review purposes, then the revised draft was submitted to key interviewees, as well as the Mayor and his Chief of Staff, to provide Boston with the opportunity for further input, updates and any necessary clarifications. After this final Boston City input, the draft case study was finalized by ECO and submitted to the USGBC.
Editorial Note: The interviews of key Boston official were conducted by Les Lo Baugh, Jr. (President of E Cubed Optimizers, LLC) and by Katherine Hammack (former Chair and CEO E Cubed Optimizers, LLC). Final preparation and overall analytical review of the case study was performed by Les Lo Baugh, Jr. and Dr. Marlene Lo Baugh (Chair and CEO of E Cubed Optimizers, LLC).
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 6
SECTION 4: FOCUS AREA ANALYSIS
1. Resiliency A. Definition
100 Resilient Cities, pioneered by the Rockefeller Foundation (100RC), has defined urban resiliency as “the capacity of individuals, communities, institutions, businesses, and systems within a city to survive, adapt, and grow no matter what kinds of chronic stresses and acute shocks they experience.”
Resiliency includes not just the shocks—earthquakes, fires, floods, etc.—but also the stresses that weaken the fabric of a city on a day to day or cyclical basis.
B. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities
Resilient systems in a city withstand, respond to, and adapt more readily to shocks and stresses to emerge stronger after tough times, and live better in good times. The 100RC City Resiliency Framework is built on four dimensions of urban resilience: Health & Wellbeing; Economy & Society; Infrastructure & Environment; and Leadership & Strategy.5 Increasing resiliency requires identifying and assessing hazard risks, reducing vulnerability and exposure, and increasing resistance, adaptive capacity, and emergency preparedness.
In order to accommodate urban population growth, cities will face increasing challenges, such as congested transportation and housing and the need to reliably supply sufficient energy to meet growing demands. Resilient cities can be “smart cities”, defined as large urban areas with exceptional connectivity and technology surrounding critical infrastructure and systems. These technology advancements, such as advanced sensors to monitor traffic, smart energy grids and smart water systems, will help cities of the future meet the multitude of urban challenges.
C. Progress Toward Goals
In November of 2016, Boston issued The Blueprint - Boston's Resiliency Strategy6. This identified the principles and framework for the development of an integrated Resilience Strategy which will address a wide range of issues. The Blueprint previewed the Visions and Goals that were identified in pursuing a more resilient Boston. “VISIONS describe the conditions that result from a resilient and racially equitable Boston. These are broader, long-term conditions that will take time to realize, but will improve the lives of all Bostonians. We have identified four distinct visions that capture different aspects of the lives of Boston residents. GOALS are specific accomplishments necessary for Boston to achieve these Visions. These are long-term accomplishments that, when achieved, will work in conjunction with one another to improve the lives of Boston residents holistically.”
5 http://www.100resilientcities.org/resilience 6 https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/document-file-11-2016/kskd_100rc_boston_theblueprint_v4.pdf
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 7
The May 2017 Imagine Boston 2030 plan7, contains initiatives to support Boston's dynamic economy and improve quality of life for residents by encouraging affordability, increasing access to opportunity, promoting a healthy environment and guiding investment in the public realm. In the executive summary it states:
“Enabling our city to thrive over the coming generations and expanding access to opportunity requires innovative ideas and initiatives. By harnessing the robust growth and economic dynamism of Boston today, we can make our city a place of unparalleled economic and social opportunities for people of all races, genders, and incomes.”
In July of 2017, the Resilient Boston strategy was published, identifying four long-term Visions for Boston. Each with a corresponding set of Goals and Initiatives.
• Reflective City, Stronger People envisions the city government leading by example to proactively institutionalize racial equity within its programs and policies; strengthen connections; and partner organizations to strengthen support in the face of shocks and stresses.
• Collaborative, Proactive Governance initiatives prioritize community led processes and partnerships to deliver city services equitably.
• Equitable Economic Opportunity sets goals for wealth building for all families, starting with equal educational opportunities all the way through to housing stability.
• Connected, Adaptive City addresses resiliency in infrastructure and systems, meeting needs of all families, prepared for and adaptive to the urgent threat of climate change.
This strategy is the result of input from over 11,700 Bostonians who were engaged in participation on the street, in meetings, on a train or on a bus. This unique approach towards gaining input and data results in a strategy that relies on cross-collaboration and non-traditional partnerships. It builds on existing plans and a commitment from the top leadership to ensure that the benefits of growth reach all of Boston’s residents.
Boston uses a variety of mechanisms to measure its resiliency status and progress. Some comparative data is available annually through Boston’s own survey data, such as graduation and drop-out rates. Other data is more immediately available through the city’s transparency percentage reporting of the ethnic back ground of city employees. Street repairs, open space and other similar measure are available in the City’s periodically updated data bases.
In addition, the City of Boston frequently posts evaluations of its performance and publicizes its goals for continuous improvement. Some of this data, however, must be obtained from entities outside the control of the City, those being federal, state and private. Boston does have in place mechanisms to interface with other governmental entities and invite public input. There are several private entities and associations that provide feedback to the City and offer suggestions for improvement. It also has a full time senior city official dedicated to and responsible for the City’s resiliency measure. This official is engaged full time in the job of monitoring, measuring and improving the resiliency of Boston.
7 http://imagine.boston.gov/imagine-boston-plan/
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 8
As described in the following sections, Boston has a robust system addressing resiliency, led by its Chief Resiliency Officer with very strong support from Mayor Walsh and other officials of the city. In gauging its performance in achieving greater resiliency, it compares its results to previously set goals, as well as comparative data obtained from private entities and governmental entities. Many of the bench marks are quantitative in nature, but often reflect the level of qualitative success. Often verification of progress is obtained through the data and analysis done by the various departments of the city, for instance the annual analysis done by the education and police department.
One of the key factors in the success of the Boston efforts appears to be the city’s aggressive outreach to obtain community involvement, feedback and suggestions for improvement. In addition, the various “transparency” disclosure websites, etc. further those efforts. Depending upon the nature of the subject being monitored, data may be available only annually, or it may be available more often, even almost daily in some circumstances.
The City’s establishment of a Chief Resilience Officer, at a high level in the City Government, coupled with strong and public support from the Mayor and the authority to work with all of the city departments, appears to be another major factor in Boston’s successes.
D. Impediments to Progress
“Default culture is silos” commented Dr. Atiya Martin, the Chief Resilience Officer for Boston. “The challenge in shifting the culture, whether in unions or departments, is to focus on a more comprehensive set of outcomes.” This is a challenge in many cities and organizations, when there is a drumbeat focus on the day-to-day activities. When the tone is set at the top, by the mayor, higher levels of efficiency can be brought to effect change and work across silos can be achieved.
Cities can also be challenged when management of services are handled at a state versus a city level. In Boston, public transportation, water and sewer are state level agencies. Close coordination and collaboration is required to ensure that state actions and regulations reflect the needs and requirements of the population of the city residents.
One of the biggest challenges in Boston is overcoming systemic racism and distrust between the communities of color and city governance. “We must embed thinking of social equity around all actions,” stated Dr. Martin, “We all play a role.” There can be a mismatch between what city officials look like and city residents.
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 9
2. Infrastructure and Built Environment Resiliency A. Building Design
i. Definition
A city regulates building design through building and zoning codes (also building control or building regulations). The codes are a set of rules that specify the standards for construction or renovation. Buildings must conform to the code to obtain planning permission, usually from a local council. The main purpose of building codes is to protect public health, safety and general welfare as they relate to the construction and occupancy of buildings and structures. The building code becomes law of a particular jurisdiction when formally enacted by the appropriate governmental or private authority. Frequently these codes are updated every several years with jurisdictions having the option of updating their codes to national standards. Federal buildings often have additional building design standards. ii. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities
LEED® (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) is the most widely used green building rating system in the world. It provides a framework that project teams can apply to create healthy, highly efficient, and cost-saving green buildings. LEED certification is a globally recognized symbol of sustainability achievement. Many cities are requiring LEED certification in addition to building codes. In other areas, LEED is an option to receive expedited or discounted permitting or tax reductions. LEED certification, however, does not cover all facets of resiliency in the “built environment”, e.g., roads, bridges, tunnels, utility systems, communication networks, rail roads, etc.
Resiliency strategies go further in the design and construction (or renovation) of buildings to cover the ability to handle severe storms, flooding, wildfire, and other impacts that are expected to result from a warming climate. Buildings must be able to maintain livable conditions in the event of extended loss of power or heating fuel. Through energy load reductions and reliance on passive heating and cooling strategies (passive survivability) and similar measures, resiliency may be improved. iii. Progress Toward Goals
Boston was the first city in the nation to require a green building standard through municipal zoning requirements. By amending the municipal zoning code, the City requires that all large- scale projects meet the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED certification standards.8 In January of 2007, Boston developed specific “green credits”, which were given if the project met the
8 http://www.bostonplans.org/planning/planning-initiatives/e-green-building-program
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 10
following objectives:
• A Distributed Generation/Combined Heat and Power (DG/CHP) project that provides useful “congestion relief” in locations where the Boston Redevelopment Authority and Boston Environment and Energy Services determine that electricity distribution load constraints exist.
• The historic renovation of an existing structure and recognizes the importance of preserving Boston’s historic assets.
• Provide fifty percent (50%) greater ground water recharge than required (i.e., capturing within a suitably-designed system a volume of rainfall on the lot equivalent to no less than 1.5 inches across that portion of the surface area of the lot to be occupied by the Proposed Project).
• Transportation Demand Management (i. e: provide a subsidy for monthly T pass purchases, provide preferred parking spaces for a car-sharing service, and provide shuttle service to public transit stations).
On June 7th, 2012, the City of Boston announced that Boston Properties’ Atlantic Wharf, Boston’s first skyscraper designated LEED Platinum under the U.S. Green Building Council’s (USGBC) LEED Core & Shell program. A collaborative development between the City of Boston and Boston Properties, Atlantic Wharf, is an example of the transformative green building policies in Boston. In the 2013 “Building Resilience in Boston” study, it was noted that improving the resilience of existing buildings for climate change impacts requires a multi-hazard approach. Expected climate change will “... increase the frequency and magnitude of extreme events in Boston throughout the seasons, and prudent planning will consider all relevant hazards for each location and building type.”9
The study identified adaptation strategies for buildings to improve resilience for several hazards at once and also provide additional benefits during normal conditions. It was postulated that, for each dollar invested in mitigation, over $4 of benefits are returned.
The “best practice” strategies identified in the report were categorized by the portion of the building that is the focus of the improvement: 1) General Actions; 2) Site; 3) Building Structure; 4) Building Enclosure; 5) Building Systems; 6) Building Operations; and 7) People. Within those general categories, the strategies were further grouped under specific topics, such as “Create places of refuge” or “Identify vulnerable populations”. iv. Impediments to Progress
The Boston Building Commissioner, William “Buddy” Christopher, Jr. commented that “New buildings are a piece of cake. It is the existing and historic buildings that are challenging.” Foundations in existing buildings in Boston are interesting, many are on old wooden piers on reclaimed land.
Because the original peninsula of Boston was so small, residents from an early date began to expand it by making new build-able land. This "made land" was formed by dumping sand and
9 https://www.architects.org/sites/default/files/Building_Resilience_in_Boston_SML_0.pdf
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 11
gravel on top of the mud flats that originally existed. This new land was not strong enough to support heavy structures, including multistory brick row-houses. Therefore, pilings were driven through the made land and underlying mud to hard clay, typically 30 to 40 feet below ground surface.
Nearly all buildings constructed on made land in the early part of the twentieth century and before are supported on wood pilings. These pilings will last for centuries if they remain submerged in groundwater. However, when groundwater levels drop, the tops of the piles are attacked by microbes and eventually rot, causing severe foundation problems for the building.10
Over the years since most of the "made" land was created, much infrastructure, including sewers, subway lines, highway tunnels, and deep basements, has been built beneath its surface. When these structures leak, the water that enters the structure is often drained or pumped away. This causes surrounding groundwater levels to drop toward the level of the leak, a phenomenon called drawdown. If groundwater levels are drawn down below the tops of the pilings, they may be exposed to air, allowing the wood to rot.
With an estimated 30% of the city of Boston in the flood plain, many buildings are additionally at risk. According to Boston City Hall, in 2016, more than 1,000 city acres with more than 9,300 residential units and over 2,400 businesses have been added to at-risk zones in the city alone.11 In these zones, zoning regulations clarify steps that can be taken to mitigate impact of flooding. These range from moving residential spaces above the first floor, to prohibiting any mechanical systems at or below grade.
But zoning is not retroactive – building lots, structures and uses of pre-existing zoning may be grandfathered and not subject to new and more restrictive zoning. If zoning is changed to be more restrictive, property deemed a pre-existing nonconforming use, whether lots, buildings or special permit is grandfathered. These are often the most at risk structures. Until a permit is pulled for significant renovation or replacement, there are no requirements to upgrade the property to more resilient standards.
B. Water Management
i. Definition
Water is a critical natural resource globally for individuals, communities, agriculture, commercial operations and wildlife conservation. Proper management of this resource is an important element of resiliency. Ensuring both water availability and appropriate water quality are critical aspects of water management. Water resources include water intake (ground and surface), water discharge, water treatment, and rainwater.
10 http://www.bostongroundwater.org/the-issue.html 11 http://newbostonpost.com/2016/01/06/bostons-flood-zone-grows-adding-insurance-costs-for-thousands/
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 12 ii. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities
Understanding the balance between water consumption requirements and water discharge is critical. There are national, regional and local water resource regulatory requirements regarding water quality. Future city planning ensures long term balance between water usage and recharge into aquifers. An evaluation of internal and external factors (e.g. population growth, regulatory changes, community water issues) may impact the city’s current or future water management requirements. Rainwater is a resource, but there must be mitigation for the contamination of rainwater run-off that results from commercial and industrial activities. Appropriate regulations, based on best management practices, good engineering designs and other controls are necessary.
At the 2017 World Economic forum in Davos, Johan Rockström was quoted as stating “resilient cities and nations must become their own rainmakers”.12 He goes on to comment that to better prepare and adapt, water needs “a higher degree of redundancy, flexibility, diversity, backing off from optimization and linear thinking.” iii. Progress Toward Goals
The City of Boston does not manage its own water supply. The State of Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) is the water wholesaler for 2.5 million people and more than 5,500 large industries in Boston and 50 surrounding communities. It has an aggressive conservation program to detect and repair leaks in the aging pipes of the water distribution system. It retrofitted about 350,000 homes with efficient plumbing fixtures, such as low-flow showerheads. It conducted water audits of large industrial facilities and refurbished water meters to better track how much water the agency sells to communities. The MWRA also raised water rates and stepped up public education about the importance of water conservation. An additional boost came in 1988, when Massachusetts became the first state in the nation to require low-volume toilets in all new construction and remodeling—an important precursor to the federal efficiency standards passed four years later.13
Boston is home to New England's oldest and largest water, sewer and stormwater systems, which are owned, maintained and operated by the Boston Water and Sewer Commission (BWSC). Established in 1977, BWSC provides potable water and sewer services.14 To improve quality of water, BWSC developed a Lead Pipe Replacement Incentive Program, to encourage Boston’s property owners to replace private lead water services. While private water service connections are the responsibility of the owner, Boston Water and Sewer Commission (BWSC) has developed this voluntary grant program as an incentive to remove lead from water services. Financial assistance in the form of a credit up to $2,000 towards the cost of the replacement and the ability to pay interest-free over a 48-month period are available to eligible property owners.
Improvement in the quality of water was recognized in 2014, when Boston’s tap water was judged “Best of the Best” in a national Tap Water Taste Contest. First place in the contest was presented to Boston Water and Sewer Commission (BWSC). Second place in the competition
12 https://www.thesourcemagazine.org/understanding-resilience-key-water-management/ 13 http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/freshwater/lessons-boston-conservation/ 14 http://www.bwsc.org/home/home.asp
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 13
was given to Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA). According to the USGS15, the average water consumption per capita is 80 - 100 gallons per person. In Boston, through the conservation and leak management programs, the consumption per person has dropped to 41 gallons per person per day.16
An increase in precipitation is a concern. From 1958 to 2010, there was a 70 percent increase in the amount of precipitation that fell on the days with the heaviest precipitation. Heavy precipitation events will continue to increase in Boston. However, due to the complexity of the processes underlying precipitation as well as natural variability, the magnitude of this increase is not yet clear.17 “While extreme flooding is generally a new problem for Boston, cities such as Amsterdam, Hamburg and Seoul have had decades, even centuries, of learning how to allow flooding without damage occurring,” said Julie Wormser, Executive Director of The Boston Harbor Association. “These cities have recognized that it is financially, culturally, and ecologically beneficial to work with water, instead of fighting to keep every last drop out.”18
A report by the Boston Harbor Association and Sasaki Associates focuses on urban design solutions to sea level rise resulting from climate change. The report, “Designing with Water: Creative Examples from Around the Globe”, provides Boston-relevant case studies and recommends that city planners and developers explore innovative designs to enable urban areas to survive, and thrive, in the face of sea level rise and extreme coastal storms. iv. Impediments to Progress
The Climate Ready Boston Report recognizes some of the challenges faced by Boston’s urban density. Stormwater flooding occurs throughout Boston today, as the city’s drainage system struggles to manage intense rain events, rising sea levels, and less permeable ground surface that would slow and absorb stormwater. Common areas for stormwater flooding are along the coast, where outfalls may be unable to discharge; transportation corridors with impervious surfaces where water cannot percolate; and designed drainage areas whose capacities are exceeded.
The drainage system requires ongoing investments to catch up and keep up with climate conditions. In the near term (2030s – 2050s), rising sea levels and increasing extreme precipitation will exacerbate stormwater flooding, unless the drainage system is upgraded. Higher sea levels mean that stormwater outfalls may not be able to discharge or may even backflow, and more extreme precipitation means that drains and pipes must handle greater volumes of water in short periods of time. The area of Boston exposed to stormwater flooding is projected to grow steadily throughout the century. As soon as the 2050s, 7 percent of the total land area in the city could be exposed to frequent stormwater flooding from 10-year, 24-hour rain events.19
15 https://water.usgs.gov/edu/qa-home-percapita.html 16 http://archive.boston.com/yourtown/specials/water/massachusetts_water_usage_map/ 17 https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/02_20161206_executivesummary_digital.pdf 18 https://www.boston.gov/news/designing-water-boston-and-around-world 19 https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/02_20161206_executivesummary_digital.pdf
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 14
C. Energy Management
i. Definition
Energy management is the process of monitoring, controlling, and conserving energy in a building or city. It also includes: knowing where and how energy is produced at the sources; understanding when and how much energy is required by the city; programs to encourage diversification and efficiency. ii. Characteristics of Future Resilient Cities
In August 2011, the ISO 50001 Energy Management Systems Standard was released. This International Standard establishes a framework for industrial plants; commercial, institutional, and governmental facilities; and entire organizations to manage their energy. The Standard is based on the classic business planning cycle “Plan - Do - Check - Act” and provides guidance for organizations in establishing energy policies, programs and action plans to improve their energy use. ISO 50001 provides a framework of requirements for organizations to:20
● Develop a policy for more efficient use of energy. ● Fix targets and objectives to meet the policy. ● Use data to better understand and make decisions about energy use. ● Measure the results. ● Review how well the policy works. ● Continually improve energy management.
Power supply strategies increasingly include a diversification of energy generation from a combination of renewable energy, waste to energy, fossil fuel and energy storage. Distributed generation, producing energy closer to the point of use, decreases line losses and increases efficiencies. With the advent of electric vehicles, vehicle to grid technology will make mobile energy storage part of the emerging energy management strategy. iii. Progress Toward Goals
In June of 2012, Boston received an energy consumption assessment study. This Study was commissioned to help the City of Boston make sound decisions relating to the evaluation of an Enterprise Energy Management System (EEMS) to best fit its needs. For this report, 50 of the City’s top energy consuming buildings were reviewed. The study found that the reviewed buildings all have higher than average energy consumption and costs when compared to similar building types and sizes for the New England region. Electricity accounts for more than half of the energy used, and usually the biggest end consumer is lighting. Also, a significant amount of energy consumed is used for space heating and air conditioning.21
In 2013, Boston enacted the Building Energy Reporting and Disclosure Ordinance (BERDO), which requires large buildings in Boston to report their annual energy and water use and requires the
20 https://www.iso.org/iso-50001-energy-management.html 21 https://www.cityofboston.gov/environment/EEMS.asp
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 15
City to make this information public. “By providing better information on the energy use of buildings, the ordinance will enable owners, tenants, residents, and other stakeholders to become more aware of energy use, energy costs, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and of opportunities to reduce all three.”22
According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), Massachusetts generated 64% of its electricity from natural gas and 7% of its electricity from coal in 2015. In that year, 9.4% of net electricity generation came from renewable energy resources of which two thirds of that was solar, wind and biomass. The other one third was hydroelectricity. Unusually, 27.6% of Massachusetts residents use fuel oil as their primary heating fuel, more than five times the national average of 5.3%, but not dissimilar from some other areas in the North East.
Boston has set 2020 targets of 15% energy use from co-generation and 10 MW of commercial solar. In addition, they have targeted 60 million square feet of buildings to reduce their energy consumption by 5%, 40 million square feet of buildings will reduce by 12.5% and 20 million square feet have a 25% target reduction. If these goals are achieved, this will achieve a 7% reduction in energy consumption in Boston. A large percentage of Boston’s total building square footage and carbon emissions are concentrated in a relatively small number of buildings.
Thus, an opportunity to achieve significant reduction can be achieved by engaging a relatively focused set of businesses, as well as a select number of institutions.23 They are well on their way to achieving these goals.
The Renew Boston Whole Building Incentive, is sponsored by National Grid and NSTAR utilities through a state program called Mass Save. This addresses the challenges in a community where tenancy is high. A split incentive is divided between the landlord and renter when energy improvements are made. For insulation improvements this can be up to 90% of the cost or $3,000 per unit.
Additional incentives are available for other energy reduction measures. Up to $250 for dryer venting replacement, repair, and installation, up to $300 for combustion safety evaluation and repair, and up to $250 to evaluate for live knob and tube wiring. Renew Boston incentivizes saving energy, money, and improving home comfort. By April 2017, more than 72,000 Bostonians had home energy audits and 36,000 had implemented some form of energy improvement.
Boston has identified the expansion of distributed energy to vulnerable communities through microgrids as a goal. This strategy would involve deploying local generation and storage; developing hot and cold water loops; deploying Smart Grid and smart building technologies; creating islanding capability for critical loads; and replacing building boilers and chillers with central CHP (applied to new and old districts of the City). A substantial deployment of microgrids with adequate batteries could add a significant measure of resilience in the face of sudden disaster that interrupts electric power to the city.
Green building and renewable energy efforts are evidenced with several ultra-efficient buildings that generate surplus clean energy. “We are demonstrating that energy positive green homes and buildings can be constructed sustainably and cost-effectively, while enhancing the livability and
22 https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/document-file-05-2017/berdo_rprt_webfinal_tcm3-52025.pdf 23 https://www.cityofboston.gov/eeos/pdfs/Greenovate%20Boston%202014%20CAP%20Update_Full.pdf
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 16
vitality of Boston’s neighborhoods now and into the future.”24
The LEED Platinum Roxbury E+ townhouses are energy-positive, and were created as part of the city’s E+ Green Building program, an initiative to pilot net-zero energy housing prototypes. The energy-positive homes include many green technologies, such as solar panels, green roofs, rainwater harvesting, and triple-glazed windows. iv. Impediments to Progress
As with many cities in the northeastern United States, Boston has an old power grid. Across the US, nearly 75% of transmission lines and transformers are 25 years or older and 60% of circuit breakers are more than 30 years old, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. The US Department of Energy’s Grid 2030 Report stated: “America’s electric system, ‘the supreme engineering achievement of the 20th century,’ is aging, inefficient, and congested, and incapable of meeting the future energy needs of the Information Economy without operational changes and substantial capital investment over the next several decades.” Some parts of the energy grid are surprisingly old; in fact, some parts of the original electrical grid dating from 1880’s in the time of Thomas Edison are still in operation in New York, and probably the same is true of many other older US cities. Sole dependence on utility transmission lines for electric power creates vulnerability should a transmission line be damaged. (The recent tragic events in Puerto Rio illustrate this vulnerability.)
The urban density in Boston causes additional challenges for forms of renewable energy such as wind or solar. When buildings block wind or shade solar efficiencies and return on investment are significantly reduced. The core city of Boston is among the densest in the United States, with a 2014 density of 13,300 people per square mile.25
D. Waste Management
i. Definition
In the context of this case study, waste management resiliency means the ability of the solid and liquid waste management systems of the city to both withstand and to recover from natural and manmade disasters. This system includes the collection, treatment, recycling and disposal of solid and liquid waste. As such, it includes the infrastructure, systems and necessary personnel involved in the collection, recycling, treatment and disposal in an efficient, convenient and safe manner.
ii. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities
A waste management system that is resilient is a system with adequate redundancies and
24 http://www.epositiveboston.org/ 25 http://www.newgeography.com/content/004987-the-evolving-urban-form-sprawling-boston
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 17
systems to reduce the risk of disruption and to facilitate an expeditious restitution of services should a disruption occur. In terms of solid waste disposal, a future resilient city will maximize waste reduction, recycling and turning vegetable organic waste into compost used to nourish city vegetation.
In the future resilient city, waste disposal is managed within the city boundaries, the city does not ship waste to suburban or rural areas. A net zero waste strategy eliminates any waste going to landfill. The principle is to recover the highest and best value of resources through reuse, recycling and composting. Construction waste can easily be over 95% reduced through best management practices. Municipal solid waste should be able to achieve at least 75% recycling.
Every day more recycling strategies are developed moving beyond metals, paper and cardboard to include mattresses, glass, plastics, batteries, computer printers and motor oil. The best strategy is to consider the waste stream when purchasing items, reduce the volume of packaging, reuse as much as possible, and recycle the rest. A true cradle-to-cradle strategy considers the end state at the time the purchase decision is made. A net zero waste strategy eliminates the need for landfills, protects human health, optimizes use of limited resources and keeps the environment clean.
The small town of Capannori, Italy, has one of the highest municipal recycling rates in Europe and is an example of strong policy decisions and community participation achieving groundbreaking results. One of the most successful elements of the new collection system has been the diversion of the organic waste stream. In 2010, 82% of municipal waste was separated at source, leaving just 18% of residual waste to go to landfill. Initiatives have included: (1) a campaign to increase consumption of tap water rather than bottled (Italians are Europe’s biggest consumers of bottled mineral water); (2) doing away with disposable cutlery and flatware in public buildings including schools; and (3) distributing cloth shopping bags to all households and businesses.
Taking a proactive, holistic approach and involving residents in all stages of policy development are the key elements that have led Capannori to top the European waste prevention leagues and inspire other communities to aim higher than just fulfilling recycling targets. Its committed, visionary leaders have seen opportunities rather than problems, and through transparent engagement with the population have made this the achievement of an entire community.26 iii. Progress Toward Goals
In 2013, 20% of Boston’s solid waste was recycled and most of the solid waste was shipped to waste to energy plants located outside of the city boundaries.27 Boston’s Climate Action Plan aims to achieve the following goals by 2020: divert 50% of both commercial and residential waste; and capture 2/3 of organic waste.28
The city of Boston’s Public Works Department
26 https://www.zerowasteeurope.eu/2013/09/the-story-of-capannori-a-zero-waste-champion/ 27 http://content.mindmixer.com/Live/Projects/cityofbostonma/files/97567/2014 Trash Recycling Contracts Presentaton_101613.pdf?635176254124000000 28 https://www.cityofboston.gov/climate/bostonsplan/
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 18
manages the collection and disposal of approximately 260,000 tons of solid waste and the recycling of approximately 44,000 tons of waste. Leaf and yard waste goes to the city’s compost facility, treated as a resource to be composted, and utilized in Boston for both City Parks and community gardens. This utilization of organic waste converts a burden into an asset. The same philosophy can be applied to non-organic waste.
Boston has expanded recycling in public spaces where all new public trash bins come with recycling bins. It is exploring designs that minimize contamination in public recycling. Recycling in parks is also being expanded.
Boston’s ‘Project Oscar’ provides bins that can be used to compost personal food scraps by anyone who works or lives in Boston. All bins are unlocked and open to the public for use at any time.29 The City will explore a zero waste plan for residential waste, which could include more robust recycling policies, composting programs, and garbage disposal installation. Waste put down garbage disposals, along with all sewage, route to anaerobic digesters on Deer Island in the Boston Harbor.30 iv. Impediments to Progress
Today’s households are purchasing more processed, packaged goods, generating more waste from packaging. The explosive growth in e-retail, means that more packages are boxed and delivered. This change in consumer buying habits has resulted in an increase in the amount of cardboard in the domestic waste stream. While cardboard can be recycled, some of it ends up in landfill, or even dumped on the side of the road. Our demand for cardboard boxes is increasing at a rate our waste management systems can't keep up with. Add to this the huge amount of Styrofoam, plastic coverings, sticky tape, and other bits and pieces found inside the typical package, online shopping is creating an ever-growing problem. The craze for single use plastic water bottle further compounds the problem.
The U.S. EPA states that packaging and containers accounted for 23% of the municipal solid waste stream in the U.S. in 2015.31 Between 1960 and 2013, the average amount of trash generated by each person in the U.S. nearly doubled from 2.68 pounds per day to 4.40 pounds per day. In most parts of the developed world, packaging constitutes as much as one-third of the non-industrial solid waste stream. As the developing world races to raise living standards, these countries are also seeing more packaging waste. At least 28 countries currently have laws designed to reduce packaging and promote greater recycling of it. Many countries require manufacturers to take back packaging discards or pay for their recycling. Others have varying construction waste requirements.
There are no federal packaging mandates in the United States. However, some state and local governments have taken action. For example, many cities in California have banned single-use plastic bags. Meanwhile, new containers and packaging materials have added complications to recycling. New ways to increase the recovery of packaging materials and plastics are clearly needed.32
29 https://www.boston.gov/environment-and-energy/project-oscar 30 https://www.cityofboston.gov/eeos/pdfs/Greenovate%20Boston%202014%20CAP%20Update_Full.pdf 31 https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-09/documents/toolkt_training.pdf 32 https://www.epa.gov/trash-free-waters/preventing-trash-source-0
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 19
E. Transportation Design
i. Definition
The adequacy and preservation of transportation, including its proper design, are essential to the resiliency of a city. Through these networks of horizontal infrastructures, commerce is transacted, essential services are delivered, goods delivered, communication effectuated, health and safety services accessed, educational and recreational locales accessed, law and fire protection provided.
Transportation design accommodates all modes of transportation, whether by foot, car, rail, bike, bus or truck. Private businesses, residents, visitors and governmental entities depend upon the transportation systems to function on a day to day basis. ii. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities
Resilient Cities of the future have sustainable transport options available so that a city can indeed minimize its traffic while maximizing the movement of people and goods. For many cities, the reduction of car use is not yet on the agenda apart from seeing it as an obviously good thing to do. Unfortunately, most cities traffic growth has been continuous and appears to be unstoppable. To enhance the livability of a city it will be necessary to manage the growth of cars and trucks and their associated emissions. (Boston is a city that more than doubles in population on workdays due to the influx of non-residents, many of whom use automobiles.)
Very high-density city centers mean that most destinations can be reached with a short walk or they can have highly effective public transport opportunities due to the concentration of people near stations. If densities are reduced but are focused along corridors, it is still feasible to have a good transit system. If, however, low densities are the dominant feature of a city then most activity needs to be based around cars as they alone can enable people to reach their destinations in a reasonable time.
The variations in private transport have a lot to do with the physical planning decisions that are made in those cities. There is increasing awareness that sustainable transport will only happen if there is an emphasis on urban design and density; infrastructure priorities especially the relative commitment to public transport compared to cars; and, street planning especially the provision for pedestrians and bicyclists as part of sustainable mobility management.
The resilient city of the future will have mechanisms to assure real time monitoring of transportation systems, plan for the future to mitigate risks and consider future requirements. Adequate design of transportation systems includes designs and planning for both current needs and for future and changing needs of the city. Obviously, the results of climate change will impact both the integrity of existing systems and future designs to deal with the aftermaths of climate change. Rigid adherence to past design protocol and features may jeopardize future resilience where future conditions different significantly from current conditions.
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 20 iii. Progress Toward Goals
As the city of Boston recognized in its Boston 2014 Working Group report on transportation, “public health, delivery of basic city services, and the ability to withstand extreme weather events all depend on a first-rate transportation network.”33 Boston and the surrounding metro area are transit capacity constrained.
Boston is a city where its population more than doubles on a work week day, due to the large number of non-residents who enter Boston. Many of these arrive by car, others through trains, subways, ferries and planes. All of these depend upon and place stresses on Boston’s transportation systems once they arrive.
Boston recognizes that adding capacity to the transportation system will not come from adding more roadways. Rather, increased capacity will rely on the expansion of alternatives to the automobile. The goal is to push Boston towards the day where using public transit, biking, and walking is as convenient and easy as using a car. A target is for 10% of Bostonians to bike to work by 2020. It is currently difficult to count the number biking to work today. In 2016, the Boston Transportation Department took its first steps in creating an annual program using automated technology to count the number of people bicycling.34
Boston provides free bike service to low-income residents, is adding bike parking, and hosts a bike share program. Since 2007, Boston has installed 90 miles of on-street bike facilities and more than doubled the cycling rates of Bostonians. This increase in ridership also comes from many of Boston Bikes’ other accomplishments: launching bike share and installing over 100 Hubway stations, giving away more than 4,000 bikes through “Roll It Forward”, installing bike racks across the city, and teaching more than 23,000 students how to ride with the “Youth Cycling Program.”
If you qualify for the low-income program, your annual membership cost in the Hubway bike share system will be $5, including a free helmet. For members in the low-income program, the first 60 minutes of every bicycle trip is free, but there are usage fees for any ride longer than 60- minutes. The Hubway bike share system has more than 180 stations offering 1,600 bikes to over 15,000 members. Since launching in July 2011, users have taken 5.3 million trips.
According to Chris Osgood, Boston’s Chief of Streets, Transportation and Sanitation, “Nine of the 48 square miles of Boston are asphalt and concrete transportation networks, Streets and sidewalks alone make up 14% of Boston’s land surface.” Go Boston 2030 is a City of Boston initiative that envisions a bold transportation future for the City for the next five, 10, and 15 years. Go Boston 2030 produced a Vision and Action Plan released in March 2017.
The Vision encompasses the following objectives: Expanding Access, Improving Safety, Ensuring
33 https://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/Transportation%20and%20Infrastructure_4.26.14_tcm3-44454.pdf 34 https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/document-file-02-2017/2016_bostonbikecounts_completereport_0.pdf
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 21
Reliability, Focusing on Experiential Quality, Leveraging Innovation and Technology, Securing Affordability, Building for Resiliency, Advancing Transparent Governance, Guaranteeing Health.
Goal one in Building for Resiliency includes reduced emissions through dramatic mode shifts and adoption of clean fuel vehicles. Transportation emissions contribute significantly to pollution in Boston today. People who drive alone will shift to using vastly improved transit and bicycle networks or switch to cleaner vehicles.
Goal two is to build for resilience to adverse weather and events. Events that change normal traffic patterns—ranging from Winter Storm Nemo to Red Sox victory parades—will not restrict the flow and movement of people and goods in the city. Drainage systems and green infrastructure will efficiently handle stormwater, plows will clear bicycle and vehicle lanes, and the MBTA will flex to meet weather challenges. If the city is shut down by extreme emergencies, the transportation system will bounce back quickly.
The third goal is to take steps to protect infrastructure from rising tides and flooding. With nearly 47 miles of coastline along the harbor, Boston’s transportation infrastructure is vulnerable to sea level rise and extreme precipitation. Roadways, bridges, paths, and tunnels will be constructed and retrofitted to withstand more frequent and more extensive coastal and inland flooding. This may range from raising roadway surfaces to redesigning subway entrances. Boston will leverage the harbor and connect waterfront assets in places like East Boston and South Boston with expanded ferry service.
The fourth goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Carbon emissions have started coming down. Since 2005, on-road vehicles in Boston have reduced their greenhouse gas emissions by 8%. This is primarily due to the increased efficiency of motorized vehicles. Like households and businesses across Boston, the City is greening its fleet of cars, trucks, and buses.35
An innovation solution to transportation is the elimination of school busses for students in grades 7-12. They are provided with transit passes by the school enabling them to use public transportation throughout the school year, 24 hours a day. iv. Impediments to Progress
As with most cities, funding is always a controversial subject. Recognizing that there will not be a windfall in funding, an alternative is to maximize funds available to “address the highest impact first” according to Chris Osgood. Of course, that requires an evaluation of impact and where Boston wants to be in 2030. Boston forecasts a 10% increase in population by 2030, which means that transportation networks must flex to accommodate future requirements. Efforts are made to predict the necessary transportation modes, where and how that population will move.
A three-foot sea level rise by the end of this century will have impacts on many means of transportation. The extent of frequent stormwater flooding is expected to grow over time, further limiting access and mobility during flood events across the city. “Cascading impacts of interruption in the transportation network is a major concern.”36
A tension between preserving trees and maintaining sidewalks exists. Tree Root vs sidewalk
35 https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/document-file-03-2017/go_boston_2030_-_4_goals_and_targets_spreads.pdf 36 https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/imce-uploads/2017-01/crb_-_focus_area_va.pdf
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 22
conflicts are very common. The goal is to adapt the infrastructure to accommodate the tree to reduce the sidewalk damage and increase the interval between sidewalk repairs. Rubber sidewalks, other flexible materials and brick pavers allow for reduced repair costs to lift out a root-damaged sidewalk section and replace it. However, often the repair involves cutting the offending root that is lifting the sidewalk, which can harm the tree. These materials do not solve the problem of what to do with an existing large root that is increasing in diameter.
F. Horizontal Infrastructure
i. Definition
For the purpose of this case study, the term “horizontal Infrastructure” means infrastructure that runs horizontally with the land. As such it includes both human made infrastructure and natural infrastructure. Examples include roads, bridges, storm water systems, harbors, airports, utility lines and pipes, fiber optic cables and freshwater systems.
ii. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities
Resilient cities understand the importance of constructing and maintaining horizontal infrastructure that meets the current and anticipated needs of its residents, businesses and city operations. But in addition, resilient cities must assess future potential risks to its horizontal infrastructure, take appropriate steps to both mitigate those risks and put in place contingent plans to efficiently restore horizontal infrastructure if damaged by sudden events.
Sustained interruptions of these features jeopardize the basic functioning of a city. Such interruptions create unsafe and hygienically compromised environments. Natural disasters such as floods, fires, riots, climate change and other sudden stressor are frequently the focus of examination.
However, both natural and human-made infrastructure requires periodic measures to preserve, maintain and frequently adapt the infrastructure to preserve its useful life and to meet changing conditions. In some cases, hardening of infrastructure, such as putting powerlines underground, can increase resiliency.
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 23
In the times of the Roman Empire, infrastructure was built with the expectation of permanence. Hence, 2000 years later there are still examples of Roman roads and aqueducts. But today’s human-created infrastructure is not built with such longevity in mind and maintenance and replacement are required on a regular basis. The so called “crumbling infrastructure” in the United States is a significant challenge, with repair estimates in the trillions of dollars. But disasters can occur in any part of the horizontal infrastructure and have differing effects determined in part by the location of the disaster. It is not uncommon that the horizontal infrastructure within disadvantaged neighborhoods is less well maintained than that in affluent neighborhoods, and therefore more vulnerable to protracted disruption.
Adequate redundancies and systems that reduce the risk of disruption, provide contingent alternatives and facilitate expeditious restoration of the horizontal infrastructure are the hallmark of a resilient city. iii. Progress Toward Goals
Shortly after the Mayor assumed office, various subject matter transition teams were formed. The process resulted in identification of the general current status of infrastructure, as well as the various jurisdictional authority divisions between Boston and other entities, such as the state, federal entities, neighboring municipalities and regional planning associations. The task force report contained a number of recommendations including the need to preserve and strengthen relationships with these non-Boston City entities.
Boston is embarked upon leadership transparency. It has established an on-line portal called CityScore.37 This site tracks key performance metrics such as repairs to infrastructure, such as pot holes, parking meters and street lights. It is updated) daily and indicates how the city has performed on various matters, including maintaining infrastructure. This method not only provides unusual transparency, it also encourages city department to keep up with the need to maintain infrastructure.
In July of 2017 Boston published “Imagine Boston 2030”. It is an extensive analysis of current challenges facing Boston as well as proposals to address those issues. It states that “physical infrastructure, city policies, and existing transportation networks have reinforced divisions between neighborhoods along the Fairmount corridor.38 It also recognizes that “poor transit access and decades of under investment” have created significant challenges that need to be addressed.
The horizontal infrastructure of the city is vital to its resilience. Streets and sidewalks alone make up 14% of Boston’s landmass. But that is just the start of the horizontal infrastructure. Bridges, tunnels, powerlines and gas pipes also play a very important part. Maintaining, improving and protecting horizontal infrastructure starts with acknowledging what challenges exist and developing strategies to address those challenges.
An ordinance passed by the Boston City Council in December of 2016 is intended to promote infrastructure coordination so that repairing gas leaks and other underground infrastructure is as easy as possible. “If implemented well, this will save money, save time and eliminate nuisance for
37 https://www.boston.gov/cityscore 38 https://imagine.boston.gov/imagine-boston-plan/
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 24
residents.”39 The ordinance, while giving the City of Boston Public Works Department wide discretion, directs the city to send its road plans to utilities in advance. The utility companies would be invited to survey the area and required to ensure repairs in a reasonable area around the project are complete. This limits traffic disruption and saves the expense of multiple road openings.
Boston has committed to “partner with federal, state and private entities to invest in nature- based and hard-engineered flood protection.” In addition, it is currently in discussion with the MassDOT on means to improve subway access and service. iv. Impediments to Progress
Significant aspects of Boston’s horizontal infrastructure are state owned and managed infrastructure. This requires coordination with the state and reliance on its capacity to prioritize responses to meet the needs of the City in the event of an emergency. Other aspects of the horizontal infrastructure, such as utility facilities, are in private hands. The utilities are regulated by a state agency, not the city. This is the common situation in the United States. Therefore, the City must work with the utility, or depend upon the utility, to restore utility horizontal infrastructure and safeguard the public and infrastructure from further disruption and harm in the event of a sudden disaster.
As one of the nation’s oldest major cities, Boston’s aging natural gas pipes are prone to corrosion and leaks. In 2013, the Environmental Defense Fund mapped gas leaks in Boston using air sensors. Although this was a snapshot in time, it is estimated that nearly 45% of the pipes are made from cast iron or other corrosive and leak-prone materials while more than half of the pipes are more than 50 years old.40 Methane leakage raises energy efficiency, cost, safety, vegetation kill and climate change issues.
A further consideration is funding. Even in the strongest financial times, a city’s resources are not unlimited. Frequently that means both maintenance and improvements must be postponed. Boston is dependent on not only its own generated revenues, but revenue from both the state and federal governments. That puts those funds beyond the control of the city.
There is also a natural force that stresses the horizontal infrastructure. The preservation of trees in Boston is an important undertaking. Not only does it clean the air and beautify the city, it encourages residents to be out of doors, congregate and otherwise exercise and interact. Trees are an important environmental asset. But trees near sidewalks and streets can develop roots that raise and crack this infrastructure. On occasion, they may also damage underground infrastructure.
39 http://www.cleanwateraction.org/2016/12/14/boston-city-council-votes-yes-fixing-gas-leaks 40 https://www.edf.org/climate/methanemaps/city-snapshots/boston
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 25
3. Human Side of Resiliency A. Social Equity
i. Definition
The social equity resilience of a city includes the degree to which services are available regardless of the economic and racial characteristics of the citizen and regardless of the neighborhoods in which they live. It includes the location of private services, housing, shopping, dining and entertainment, as well as public transportation, recreational opportunities and open space facilities. It includes educational opportunities, job opportunities, relationships between different communities, the judicial system, and other social and structural issues. In addition, it includes the degree of diversity in the governmental, educational and private workforces. ii. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities
A city that understands the important role that social equity plays in a city’s resilience, will appropriately assess and identify areas of inequality and lack of social equity. It will have developed and implemented appropriate measures to remedy inequities and create greater social equity. It will understand that the diversity of its residents and workers is an attribute that should be protected and nurtured, and it will promote that diversity. Such a city will reflect the city’s population diversity within its own workforce, including educators, police, fire departments and all other departments and functions of the city. It will allocate resources to assist the most vulnerable and elevate the educational, health and employment opportunities of those in most need of such services. Public services will not be disproportionately allocated to the “right side of the river”.
Social equity cannot be overlooked when considering the resiliency of entities such as cities. A focus exclusively on the physical structures and systems within a city ignores the human component. It is the human component that occupies and manages the operations of the city and gives it life.
How people respond to a crisis is critical to the resiliency of the city. Not all segments of a city will be affected in the same manner by a disaster. Neither will all segments of a city have the capacity to recover from a crisis in the same time and with the same success. When confronted with a disaster, in many cases the least affluent citizens often suffer the greatest hardships and have the least resources to recover. In cities, they often work, go to school and live in the most vulnerable and least adaptive locations. Therefore, a resilient city will actively reach out to all segments of its diverse community and obtain their input and involvement in problem solving to improve the quality of life of its citizens.
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 26
iii. Progress Toward Goals
The Mayor’s office of Resiliency and Racial Equity leads efforts to help Boston plan for and deal with catastrophes and slow-moving disasters - like persistent racial and economic inequality - that have become part of 21st century life. Many of Boston’s citizens “…perceive that there is inequality in delivery of city services.”41 Boston is responding to this perception.
According to Boston’s Mayor, “poverty and inequality are at the root of the majority of problems in society at large, and Boston in particular.”42 These factors reduce the resiliency of cities. Statistics indicate that 20% of the population of Boston is living in poverty; while the median net worth of white families is $247,500, the median net worth of Black families is $8, according Boston officials. “Boston has the greatest inequity in household income out of 100 large cities.”43 The capacity of these groups to recovery from a disaster is therefore unequal and, in the event of crisis, the social inequities can increase further undermining the resiliency of the city.
Boston has a focus on increasing affordable housing. It permitted more affordable housing units in 2015 than any other year; additionally Mayor Marty Walsh outlined an increased affordability
requirement for new developments.44 A challenge continues to be the population growth in Boston. “More people are moving in and fewer people are moving out!” stated Sheila Dillon, Boston’s Chief of Housing. Housing Boston 2030 is the City's strategy to responsibly plan for
growth.45 By creating housing across demographics and neighborhoods, the city plans to create 53,000 new units of housing at a variety of income levels across the City:
• 44,000 units of housing for the workforce
• 5,000 units of housing for our senior citizens
• 4,000 units to stabilize the market and bring rents and housing prices under control.
Boston’s Office of the Mayor has established a Diversity office that is working to increase
diversity across the City’s workforce. Their city dashboard46 reflects that over 39% of their employees were persons of color (Blank and Hispanic) as of May of 2016, an improvement from 37% in 201547. More rapid improvement is subject to the challenges of reduced employee turnover. “You cannot expect the change to happen overnight” commented Tania Del Rio, Diversity Outreach officer. “You have to have the positions open in order to fill them.” iv. Impediments to Progress
Boston is the most unequal big city in America, a Brookings report finds.48 In 2014, households
41 https://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/Basic%20City%20Services%20reduced_tcm3-44443.pdf 42 https://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/Human%20Services%20reduced_tcm3-44449.pdf 43 https://www.cityofboston.gov/pdfs/economicequityinclusionagenda.pdf 44 https://www.cityofboston.gov/news/Default.aspx?id=20484 45 https://www.boston.gov/finance/housing-changing-city-boston-2030 46 https://www.cityofboston.gov/diversity/ 47 https://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/2015.04.14%20Final%20Draft- UPDATED_City%20of%20Boston%20Workforce%20Profile%20Report_tcm3-50873.pdf 48 http://www.wbur.org/news/2016/01/14/boston-income-inequality-brookings-2016-update
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 27
earning near the top of Boston’s income distribution made nearly 18 times the earnings of
households closer to the bottom.49 Specifically, Boston households earning more than 95 percent of other households made $266,224 in income in 2014, while households earning only 20 percent of other households earned just $14,942. According to a 2016 Brookings Institute report, the above ration in 2013 was 15, but by 2014 it was 17.8. That means that from 2013 to 2014, Boston’s ‘poor got poorer, and its rich got richer’. Boston households at low threshold saw their incomes dip 8 percent from one year to the next, according to Brookings, while households at the high threshold saw their incomes increase 9 percent over the year. Brookings noted that Boston’s “large student population partly explains its relatively low 20th percentile incomes.” About 4 percent of Boston's adult population is in graduate school, compared with a national average of about 1 percent.
Social inequity is seen on the dashboards in three of the departments that should most be mirroring the neighborhoods they serve: education, police and fire departments. With a resident population in Boston of 46.6% white, education is staffed with 52% white, while police is 66% white and fire is 72%.
Progress has been made in mirroring neighborhoods in the schools, while police and fire have room for improvement. Discussions on how to diversify their ranks, include a new emphasis on community engagement aimed at creating a pipeline of future applicants. Initiatives like adopt-a- school and cadet programs, for example, offer youths and young adults opportunities to interact with fire and police personnel in non-emergency environments and learn about the jobs of firefighters, police officers and emergency medical staff.
Boston’s large immigrant population adds language challenges to effectively involving all Boston citizens in important processes (51% of Boston children live in a household where at least one of the parents is an immigrant). In times of severe and sudden disruption within the city, contingent plans will be implemented to insure all segments of the city are treated equitably and that the diverse aspects of the city work together to mitigate and resolve the disruption.
B. Health and Wellness Considerations
i. Definition
Health and wellness considerations involve the quality of services and access to those services in the city. A comprehensive view of health and wellness takes in all the elements of a community’s life, since they affect both individual health and the health of the community itself. Air quality, access to outdoor spaces, health services, education and community activities are also important factors.
49 https://www.brookings.edu/research/city-and-metropolitan-inequality-on-the-rise-driven-by-declining-incomes/
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 28 ii. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities
A resilient health and wellness public policy is more than simply fostering individual health – it’s about public policy that fosters a healthy society. The future resilient city will not only provide adequate health and wellness services to meet current and near-term needs, but it will affirmatively plan how to mitigate and address potential future risks and disruptions. This can be loosely-defined as a strategy that asks citizens and officials to make “becoming a healthy community” a priority. But is also a matter of reorienting health services to work together toward the goal of a healthy community. These community issues must be viewed through the lenses of both the individual and the community.
It takes a village not only to raise a child, but to pull families out of poverty, to create employment, to improve mental health, to stop violence, to safeguard the natural environment, reduce the risk of epidemics, meet the health needs of the young, old & disabled and to create a just and equitable society. What citizens expect from their government is to live and work in a safe and healthy environment where educational and employment opportunities are unbiased. This includes both appropriately trained medical providers, in adequate numbers and with the right combination of skills and training, and the facilities required to provide necessary services.
The location of medical and wellness facilities can have an impact on the provision of services. But access is not limited to locational issues. It includes the degree to which populations can obtain necessary services. Poor, displaced, migrant and homeless populations experience financial & insurance access issues unique to each group. Language barriers may also pose obstacles. The future resilient city will provide necessary access and eliminate unnecessary barriers whether those barriers are language, financial, qualitative, or locational in nature. It will recognize that the health of the entire population is in the personal interest of each citizen. Health and wellness systems will work seemly together and with other governmental entities, as well as the communities served. iii. Progress Made
Boston recognizes that in the “resiliency conversation” the people factors cannot be overlooked. Health and wellness, among all communities in Boston, is a priority. Due to the complexity of people’s lives, when people have little money, communicating programs and educating the growing population is challenging. Boston has used a wide variety of communication methods, including internet, publication, community meetings, purposeful encounters on mass transit, and the distribution of pamphlets to reach out to all members of the community.
Boston’s Healthy Cities/Healthy Communities initiative states: Laws and regulations that restore and/or preserve clean air and water; preservation and creation of open space, natural beauty, and wilderness; restrictions on the use and disposal of toxic substances; conservation of natural resources, including plants and animals - all of these can enhance health and reduce stress, provide an aesthetic experience, and affect community life for the better.50
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts enacted a major health care reform law in 2006. In many
50 https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/overview/models-for-community-health-and-development/healthy-cities-healthy- communities/main
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 29
ways that law placed Massachusetts as national leader in health care. In addition, Boston enjoys a rich array of health care facilities that are governmental, non-profit, private and university based. The immigrant population of Boston is substantial and therefore multilingual service providers and translators play an important role in facilitating access to health and wellness services. In addition, adequate immunization of the entire population is essential to prevent the unnecessary spread of disease. Both juvenile and adult education about health risks and preventative measures play an important role.
In 2011, Forbes Magazine ranked Boston #3 on the list of Healthiest Cities in the US. What makes the difference between a healthy, fitness-friendly city and one that ranks poorly is: Banning smoking in public places, both indoors and outdoors; adding new parks, walking trails and bike trails; and a population that prioritizes healthy habits and ranks low in obesity, smoking, and cardiovascular disease. According to Forbes, in 2013 Boston ranked #6 and in 2014 dropped to #9.
A different report, published by the American College of Sports Medicine, measures health and fitness levels in 50 of the country’s major metropolitan areas. In 2016, it ranked Boston as #7 up from #9 in 2015. Access to city parks was added as a new indicator in 2015, measuring the percentage of city residents that live within a 10-minute walk to a public park. Easy access to parks removes barriers to physical activity by providing greater opportunities for running, walking or other healthy activities.51 It also increases opportunities for community relationship building and the exchange of information.
On most measures of birth outcomes, Boston does better than the US as a whole. It is already meeting the Healthy People 2020 goals established by the US Department of Health and Human Services.52 However, birth outcomes in Boston show persistent differences across racial and geographic lines. The death rate for African American and Latino births in Boston is disproportionately high. The Boston Public Health Commission has focused on improving birth outcomes among the residents of Boston for many years, and has undertaken a variety of innovative initiatives to address the complex causes of these disparities.
City Health, is an initiative of the de Beaumont Foundation. Its mission is to “...strengthen and transform public health in the United States”.53 It rates cities, every three years in nine policy areas. After a two-year study of 40 major US cities, in February 2017, Boston was one of only five US cities to receive an overall gold medal, with five or more gold-rated policies.
They were recognized for:
• Pre - Kindergarten: Children who attend high-quality pre-k are more likely to succeed in school, go on to stable jobs and earn more as adults—all of which are linked to better health and stronger communities.
• Best practices for comprehensive local zoning and/or licensing laws addressing alcohol sales control, both prospectively and retrospectively. Neighborhoods with high
51 http://www.americanfitnessindex.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/acsm_afireport_2015.pdf 52 https://cdn1.sph.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/122/2015/08/Birth-outcomes-in-Boston-final-case.pdf 53 http://www.cityhealth.org/about
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 30
concentrations of alcohol outlets are linked to more drinking and higher rates of violence and driving under the influence. Policies that control the number of alcohol sales outlets can reduce crime, increase safety, and reduce spending on health care and criminal justice.
• Tobacco users must be at least 21 to purchase tobacco products. Curbing tobacco use among young adults has been shown to decrease the number of people who start— and continue—smoking.
• Food Safety and Restaurant Inspection Rating: Policies requiring food establishments to publicly post safety inspection “grades” empower consumers, reduce foodborne illness rates and cut down on health care costs.
• Healthy Food Procurement: Policies that ensure healthy food options are available on public property aid city residents in making smart decisions that will help them achieve and maintain a healthy weight. iv. Impediments to Progress
“There is great guidance at a Federal level for Health Preparedness, but funding is not available to support that guidance,” stated Stacey Kokaram, Boston Public Health Commission’s Director of Public Health Preparedness. Funding is a challenge that is increasing, especially with signs that funding from Federal programs will be decreasing. “As Federal funding is cut, we will have to cut services.” commented Ms. Kokaram.
Progress in health and wellness can be difficult to track. Programs intended to prevent an adverse action are difficult to track when they are working. One area that has shown improvement is the reduction in asthma related visits to emergency rooms. This could be due to improved air quality in the city of Boston. It could be due to increased communication with landlords regarding the adverse health impacts of certain pest control practices. It could be due to smoke-free housing practices.
C. Education
i. Definition
Educational opportunities have a broad range. They include early childhood education, vocational education, adult education, English language education and job training. Educational resiliency includes not only the quality and quantity of education, but the quality, quantity and location of the facilities that host the services.
ii. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities
The quality and availability of high level educational services is a hallmark of future resilient cities. Educational opportunities in a city have a direct effect on the availability of qualified workers,
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 31
economic mobility, social equity, the ability of workers to find new employment when displaced by changes in consumer demand, technological innovations, employer relocations, economic growth and globalization. Appropriate educational options must exist not only for children, but for the adult population as well. Job training for new entrants to the work force and retraining of adults where needed are a hallmark of such cities.
The educational facilities themselves must be appropriate, equally accessible to all populations and resilient to external stressors. Public transportation will be available for transportation to facilities in all locations in the city. Educators will be appropriately trained, diverse and motivated.
Adequate, accessible and effective educational options will be available for those with English language learners and all students with proficiency or disabilities. In the event of a sudden loss of necessary facilities, the city will quickly and effectively implement its contingent plans to avoid lengthy disruptions.
To the extent that economic disparity is related to educational disparity or other factors such as race, gender or ethnicity, the cumulative effects create chronic stressors that undermine the resiliency of cities. Under educated citizens become underemployed citizens, including the devastating impact of the school to prison pipeline. This weakens the capacity of cities to adapt to the future, grow economically, and meet the basic needs of residents. It also reduces the ability of cities to effectively deal with sudden disasters. Under educated citizens, who are severely under employed, require higher levels of public services that other groups. The future resilient city recognizes that its people are its most valuable resource. Providing the educational opportunities necessary for the residents to reach their full potential enriches those vital resources and strengthens the resiliency of the city.
Higher education and vocational training must be accessible regardless of the learner’s socio- economic status, including appropriate tuition assistance programs. The educational facilities and the quality of facilities and teachers in disadvantaged neighborhoods must be equivalent to those in affluent communities. There will be abundant continuing educational opportunities available to all citizens. A culture of continuous learning will be encouraged. Libraries will be placed in all neighborhoods and receive adequate resources to be open and operational from morning into evening, including internet access, adult classes, English language classes and adequate resources including books, and electronic data. High speed internet service will be available in every part of the city. iii. Progress Made
Boston was an early provider of pre-school education, initializing pre-Kindergarten (K-1) in 2005 by Boston Mayor Thomas Menino, who directed the Boston Public Schools (BPS) to “provide all 4-year-olds in the city with full-day school within five years.” There were several reasons for this commitment, including an emerging consensus that early childhood education makes a positive difference in long-term outcomes for children.54 Currently, Boston’s preschool program, called K-1 locally, serves about 68 % of the 4-year-olds likely to enroll in public kindergarten. While it has been criticized by some for its “slow growth”, the program has won repeated recognition from
54 https://www.naeyc.org/files/academy/file/YCSept2010.pdf
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 32
experts in the field for its quality and has been validated by outside researchers for being student-centered, learning-focused, and developmentally appropriate.55
In March of 2017, Mayor Martin J. Walsh announced the release of Build BPS, a ten-year Educational and Facilities Master Plan for the Boston Public Schools. Build BPS is a dynamic and strategic document, as well as an interactive digital tool, which provides the City of Boston, Boston Public Schools, and Boston's residents with the data and guidance to bring Boston's school buildings into the 21st century.
This master plan not only encompasses the aspirations and goals of all stakeholders, but provides data and ideas needed to bring them to fruition.56 One billion dollars has been set aside to fund this 10 year program.
In 2009, BPS opened Newcomers Academy, an innovative school support immigrant high school students who arrive in the U.S. during the school year with limited English skills. Each of the 500 students at Boston International HS/Newcomers’ Academy (BINcA) is an immigrant to the US; over half have arrived in this country over the last 18 months. Students come from 40 countries and speak over 25 languages. This school’s results are exceptional: BINcA has consistently bested state averages in academic measures across the board, including post-secondary attendance and graduation rates. There are efforts to develop a growth plan for the school, which could expand its transformative program to serve up to 240 additional students.57
The city has taken aggressive steps to increase racial and ethnic diversity of school employees. Research shows that educational outcomes improve when students see themselves reflected in teachers. “It is important that students see themselves reflected in the teachers” stated Becky Shuster, the Assistant Superintendent of Equity for Boston Public Schools. Through these and other efforts, the high school graduation rate overall has increased by almost 13% since 2007 to 70.7%. For African Americans, the graduation rate increased from 54.2% in 2007 to 69.6% in 2015.
Education, however, is apparently a controversial topic in Boston. For instance, according to the task force committee formed by the City shortly after the election of Mayor Walsh, the City’s study group for education was strongly divided on the proper role for charter schools and could not make any recommendations on charter schools. With over 30 charter schools and several dozen private schools complementing the 120 public schools, there are many opportunities for primary education.
Of the 77,800 (est.) school-age children living in Boston, over 56,400 attend public schools, while about 21,390 (27%) do not attend Boston public schools. Of those that do not attend public schools racially, they are: 45% Black, 4% Asian, 30% White, 3% Other, 18% Hispanic. Of these students: 9,618 go to public charter schools, 4,558 go to parochial schools, 4,070 go to private schools, 2,539 go to suburban schools through the METCO desegregation program. 531 are placed by the BPS Special Education Dept. in non-BPS schools and programs and 74 are
55 https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/08/what-bostons-preschools-get-right/493952/ 56 https://www.bostonpublicschools.org/buildbps 57 http://www.bostonschoolsfund.org/binca/
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 33
homeschooled. 58
For higher education, there are over 35 colleges and universities with over 150,000 students in the Boston area. Boston is home to some of the most distinguished schools in the nation, thus providing ample opportunities for continuing studies.
Boston has a wide variety of adult education options, both through the public school system and otherwise. The Boston Public School operates both the Adult Learning Center and the Family Literacy Program. The Family Literacy Program provides classes in English, as well as classes on health and finances. The Learning Centers offers several types of programs:
• Adult Diploma Program – This program is an alternative route to a high school diploma and operates daily throughout the year, including summer.
• Boston Central Adult High School – This offers 16 units both for college preparation and general in nature.
• Career Path Program – This is designed for 16 to 35year-old residents. The Tuesday and Thursday classes are designed to improve skills and prepare people to pass the HiSET test. The Wednesday classes focus on college and career readiness. The Saturday classes are focused on “career exploration” introducing students to the culinary arts, automotive and building maintenance “as a Green Job”.
• Work Force – This program trains English language learners for work as maintenance workers.
There are also a number of adult education programs in addition to those offered by the Boston Public Schools system. For example, The Boston Center for Adult Education offers classroom, kitchen, lab and studio classes, among other things. The Cambridge Center for Adult Education is open to Boston residents as well. A number of free online classes from the local higher education institution are available. There are also programs in Boston through the Eliot School, North End Trade School, Stonybrook Fine Arts and others. The Brookline Adult Community School offers 800 courses, and enjoys enrollment of 5,000 people per year. iv. Impediments to progress
Despite the great work being done, the annual dropout rate for grades 9-12 in 2014-2015 was 4.4%. This represents a 0.6% increase from the previous year, and 111 more students. In many disadvantaged household, because parents may work more than one job or have limited English or academic skill, the parents’ ability to assist their children with school work is limited. The dropout rate is highest for African American and Hispanic students. There is a 21% drop out rate in high school for African Americans. It has been reported that the dropout rate for Latinos, is almost double that at 41%.
In a 2014 analysis, the city identified a projected inadequacy of “seats” by 2018. It acknowledged
58 https://www.bostonpublicschools.org/cms/lib07/MA01906464/Centricity/Domain/238/BPS%20at%20a%20Glance%202016- 17_online.pdf
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 34
that the level of students with disabilities exceeded 8% and that another 8% of the students faced English learning challenges. This prompted the city to adopt its “Policy of the Boston Public Schools to Eliminate Opportunity and Achievement Gaps, including it “zero tolerance policy” with the goal of keeping all high school students in school. The focus of the undertaking was to determine “what can Boston city government do – whether by itself or in partnership with other – to help make Boston a national leader in closing the achievement gap.”59
According to Rob Consalvo, the Chief of Staff of the Boston Public Schools Office of the Superintendent, the critical impediments to increasing educational resiliency include: decreasing poverty in order to increase economic opportunities; improving the quality of education in every school; and improving affordability in housing. The city of Boston is fighting an uphill battle in these areas. Although the mayor has increased funding for public schools, the federal government is decreasing its financial support and state aid is decreasing.
Few Boston public schools were constructed after WWII. The large immigrant population places an additional stress on the system that is working to address a growing population. These factors create a chronic stress for the educational system.
The City of Boston and the Boston Public Schools joined the Government Alliance for Race and Equity in 2016, beginning an effort to apply a racial equity lens toward all decision-making, budgeting, and program planning. According to Dr. Martin, Chief Resiliency Officer, systemic racism is present in all racial and ethnic groups and impacts every sector of the city.
D. Food Management
i. Definition
Food management, in the context of this study, refers to the ability of urban food systems to withstand and recover from a natural disaster. This includes the production, processing and distribution of food. It also covers the availability of food to all residents of the city, in an accessible and convenient manner. ii. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities
Metro food systems that are disrupted by disasters may not return to normal operations for an inordinate amount of time if they are not resilient. This could cause significant food availability and food access issues. The growth of local food manufacturing and urban agriculture offers an opportunity to increase resiliency.
A resilient food system is characterized by several key components, including flexibility, diversity, redundancy, and adaptability. Additionally, a resilient food system includes individuals and
59 http://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/Education
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 35
organizations with the capacity to monitor and manage risks and vulnerabilities to shocks. For example, government agencies should be able to monitor risks to food distribution across the city and be able to implement an action plan to mitigate the disruption.
Vertical farming could enable a city to feed its population entirely on crops grown within its own geographic limit, thus overcoming food distribution challenges. A vertical farm uses only a small amount of water compared with a regular farm. Today in the U.S., vertical farms of various designs and sizes exist in Seattle, Detroit, Houston, Brooklyn, Queens, and near Chicago, among other places. 60 Some claim that a vertical farm on one acre of land can grow as much food as an outdoor farm on four to six acres. An additional advantage to vertical farms is that the crops are grown indoors and not subjected to the vagaries of weather and pests. iii. Progress Toward Goals
In May of 2015 a report entitled Resilient Food Systems, Resilient Cities: Recommendations for the City of Boston was published.61 The Initiative for a Competitive Inner City (ICIC) and Next Street were engaged by the City of Boston to complete the study. Recommendations in this report included:
• Establish a food system resilience committee as part of the Food Policy Council to strengthen coordination between local food system initiatives and resilience planning efforts.
• Diversify milk supply to retail outlets.
• Develop a climate change risk assessment tool and process to better identify and mitigate climate change-related risks to key transportation routes
• Identify contingency delivery methods (e.g., using the port) and alternate routes for major food products.
• Invest in improving and expanding secondary streets to distributors and The Greater Boston Food Bank across the Greater Boston area.
• Mitigate flooding risks for distributors in flood hazard zones.
• Expand storage capacity for food in Boston, including cold storage.
A study is a great first step, but follow-up on the recommendations is important. The City of Boston has done a great job in understanding the risks from climate change, and then working locally to mitigate risk in each neighborhood, but there is little evidence that efforts have been made in some of the other areas. Boston community gardens are evidence of progress on this front as well as other resiliency issues.
The Boston Food Forest Coalition (BFFC)'s is a non-profit coalition of committed neighbors, volunteers and partner organizations forming a network of neighborhood-based food forest
60 http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/01/09/the-vertical-farm 61 http://icic.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/ICIC_Food_Systems_final_revised_post.pdf
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 36
gardens. Their mission is to promote food justice and sustainable urban agriculture by building nourishing relationships between neighbors, land, and food in the city. Their flagship educational site is at the Boston Nature Center (BNC), where they provide education and advocacy to promote urban permaculture, and work with neighbors to establish neighborhood food forest gardens.62
Financial assistance is available to SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) participants. The Healthy Incentive Program provides matching funds that SNAP users can use to buy fresh, local produce. This sustainable, statewide program promotes healthy eating, while also supporting the local economy. The goal of this incentive program is to help SNAP participants buy more locally grown fruits and vegetables.
The Cummings Foundation, one of the largest foundations in New England, has awarded more than $170 million in grants to nonprofits based in Greater Boston. Some of the initiatives support food resiliency, including The Urban Farming Institute of Boston and Food Link.63 iv. Impediments to Progress
There is little evidence that most of the recommendations of the Resilient Food Systems, Resilient Cities report have been acted upon. The department is reorganizing under Catalina Lopez- Ospina, Director of the Mayor’s Office of Food Initiatives. At the time of this evaluation, the department appeared to be in a period of transition and perhaps redirection. How that will evolve seemed uncertain. As in most circumstance like this, stability of sound leadership is important.
62 http://bostonfoodforest.org/our-vision/ 63 http://www.cummingsfoundation.org/oneworldboston/grant_recipients.htm
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 37
4. Leadership and Strategy A. Regulatory Environment
i. Definition
The regulatory environment is an overlaying factor that enables, restricts, delays, modifies, prohibits or requires certain actions. The system of laws and regulations, at all levels of government, can affect how and when a city can act.
Environmental assessments, public hearing, permitting processes, divisions between city and state authority, and judicial appeal processes can all delay implementation of necessary actions to preserve the resiliency of a city. ii. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities
Resilient cities understand the importance of responding immediately and effectively to major assaults on the city’s infrastructure, systems or services. Public health, peace and public confidence often depend upon quick and decisive action. A resilient city will have identified regulatory enabling tools and implemented appropriate actions and measures to avoid undue delays. Promoting a regulatory environment that embraces resiliency and adaptation to change is the responsibility of city leadership.
In the resilient city of the future, the regulatory environment will enable and facilitate a city’s work to enhance its resiliency. First a resilient future city will thoughtfully identify the existing regulatory obstacles. Having done so, it will develop methods to overcome those obstacles or develop alternative strategies.
The regulatory environment of a city is not limited to its own legal and regulatory systems. Cities do not live in isolation. Many relevant regulations and laws will be within the jurisdiction of the state, federal government, and other entities. The city must plan accordingly. Future resilient cities will identify opportunities to blend resiliency efforts with broader transformations efforts to address the social and political conditions that have created and perpetuate vulnerabilities. In addition to challenges from the existing regulatory environment, any city’s resilience projects can encounter technical, political, media, community, financial, and policy hurdles. But an effective regulatory resilience policy will help a city to overcome these other challenges. iii. Progress Toward Goals
Regulatory systems are important levers through which programs are implemented, infrastructure is built, health & safety services provided, education made available, housing constructed and businesses thrive. In fact, “…regulatory tools are crucial vehicles for promoting
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 38
public safety, accessibility, and ensuring that Boston is a vibrant, attractive and welcoming city.”64
A significant portion of the regulatory environment of Boston, and therefore affecting its resiliency, is in the hands of other jurisdictions. Boston city officials recognize this and understand the importance of improving state-city relationship, as well as regional, federal and international relationships. In addition, the City recognizes that alliances with other private and public entities can strengthen the City’s ability to affect necessary changes. Many of Boston’s various resiliency working groups and task forces include not only members of the public, but also representatives of non-City entities.
The Mayor is committed to building and deepening intergovernmental relations. In addition, the City’s Department of Intergovernmental Relations is staffed by a group of individuals who collectively have significant institutional knowledge. This department has three primary responsibilities:
1. Establish and maintain constructive relationships with other local governments, the state and the federal government.
2. Coordinate the City of Boston’s various activities with those entities.
3. Keep the Mayor informed of such matters.
When elected, the Mayor sponsored a transition analysis of Boston through various working or team groups. The reports issued by these teams were known as “Boston 2014”. The report on intergovernmental matters make a number of productive recommendations for the Mayor and his team to maintain and improve the regulatory environment.65 Enhancing the regulatory environment, including intergovernmental relations, will always be a work in progress that requires attention and improvements. Boston recognizes this reality and devotes resources to continue to preserve and improve its regulatory environment. iv. Impediments to Progress
Boston is the capital of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. As such, it must accommodate the unique needs of a state capital. In addition, the state establishes many of the regulations and laws that in other states may be up to city governments. Several critical systems and infrastructure are regulated at the state level, including the subways, trains, station locations, sewage treatment, the state building code, public utilities, etc.
An example of the state’s singular control over some critical elements of infrastructure in Boston is that the location of train stations was established by the state some time ago. Typically, these stations are not located in the most disadvantaged portions of the city. Therefore, residents who are among the most disadvantaged do not have ready access to trains and a 45 minute or more bus ride to a station is not uncommon.
Boston, like many other major cities in the country, is currently receiving significant funding from the federal government. This includes a number of necessary programs, not just Health and
64 https://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/Transportation%20and%20Infrastructure_4.26.14_tcm3-44454.pdf 65 https://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/Intergovernmental%20Relations_4.23.14_tcm3-44451.pdf
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 39
Homeland Security measures. The uncertain political environment in Washington creates concerns in Boston as to how and what programs might be negatively impacted if federal funding is reduced or withdrawn. Boston acknowledges this issue and has engaged in some evaluations of potential impacts.
Like other cities, Boston provides revenue to the state, and receives revenue in return. In 2014 Boston received approximately $207 million for education and $164 million in unrestricted funding from the state. While that may appear to be a large sum, the ratio between the contributions of Boston to the state and the state’s funding contributions to Boston are skewed. Although Boston generates 20% of the state’s tax revenues, it only receives 1% in return as state aid.
Furthermore, while Boston represents 10% of the state’s population, it only receives 5% in local aid given out by the state.66 This regulatory environment may be an impediment to Boston achieving its resiliency goals. The mismatch in revenue allocation is a limiting factor for Boston that provides some restrictions on the resiliency efforts Boston might otherwise implement.
Not only is Boston the state’s capital, it is also a major tourist attraction. The number of people in the city on any given work day can be more than double the number of Boston residents. This influx of people uses the infrastructure of the city, requires its services and impacts its environment. If we compare the number of people in Boston on a daily basis with the state allocations of revenue to Boston, the mismatch is even greater. Boston continues to seek methods to enhance the financial contributions those visitors can make to preserving infrastructure and the cost of providing them with relevant services.
B. Communication Resiliency
i. Definition
Communication resilience is the ability to provide and maintain an acceptable level of communications in the face of challenges to normal operations. Threats and challenges for services can range from simple misconfiguration, to large scale natural disasters to targeted attacks. As such, communication resilience touches a very wide range of topics. (In a broad sense, communication can also include the data and other information flow between Boston governmental departments, as well as between city departments and external governmental and private entities. In this study, however, that subject is addressed in the section on Interoperability.)
66 https://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/Intergovernmental%20Relations_4.23.14_tcm3-44451.pdf
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 40
ii. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities
A community with tens of thousands of residents cannot afford to suffer a communications blackout, certainly not a prolonged outage. Businesses and residents would be unable to send emails or make phone calls, the banking system would shut down, leaving people unable to make credit card transactions or withdraw money from an ATM. Governmental and emergency response could be hindered or interrupted. During large events, usage can increase significantly.
Without safeguards in place, capacity limits can be quickly approached or often surpassed. Events can also physically impact critical communications capacity, if they disrupt the operations of a data center or storage partner. Understanding the capacity of local infrastructure, and employing technology that can work despite infrastructure interruptions, is a crucial aspect of communication resiliency. One way to improve delivery is through call throttling which enables organizations to pre-determine the optimal call volume for their broadcasts, allowing carriers to deliver notifications while avoiding congestion at any single network element. Ultimately, this ensures the message is delivered as quickly as possible, while leaving some capacity (e.g. phone lines) open for other communications to go through.
After Hurricane Sandy in 2012, the landline and wireless communication infrastructure; including telephone, television and internet; suffered a major breakdown and created a barrier to emergency response and recovery. Sea Bright, N.J. installed a new wireless infrastructure based on a distributed system that puts antennas 25-55 feet off the ground, whether on buildings or built into lighting throughout the city. These elevated locations will help if Sandy-level flooding ever returns to the city.67 They deployed new communication infrastructure including a network architecture that includes smaller nodes, rather than the traditional large towers. These nodes bring more redundancy and should better withstand major storms. iii. Progress Toward Goals
Following the bombings at the 2013 Boston Marathon, local data infrastructure couldn’t handle the load of concerned citizens trying to make calls.68 The local Copley Square command center personnel stopped using cell phones due to congestion on commercial networks caused by thousands of residents who were simultaneously trying to reach their loved ones. Instead, public safety officials used land mobile radios to communicate with each other, but acknowledged they could have benefitted from access to graphics, maps and other data that are available to the public every day.69
In April of 2016, Mayor Martin J. Walsh announced a partnership with Verizon to replace copper- based infrastructure with a state-of-the-art fiber-optic network platform across the city. It was
67 https://gcn.com/articles/2016/12/20/sea-bright-resilient-city.aspx 68 https://www.fastcompany.com/3008458/why-your-phone-doesnt-work-during-disasters-and-how-fix-it 69 http://www.westerncity.com/Western-City/February-2017/Building-Communications-Infrastructure-for-First- Responders/
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 41
stated that the new network will offer enormous bandwidth and speeds.70
Boston has taken a hard look at its communication networks. It has leveraged the experience of the Boston Marathon as a teaching lesson. Under the leadership of Mayor Walsh, Boston has invited representatives of communication companies to participate with various city resiliency working group. Vulnerabilities have been characterized and improvement initiatives identified.
The Boston Police Department has recognized the importance of establishing communication links dedicated to first responders. The type of communication bottleneck that occurred during the tragic Boston Marathon terror attack is the type of communication bottleneck that could similarly occur during a natural disaster event.
Additionally, some communication providers have entered into mutual aid assist agreements. They recognize that their collective and individual interests are best served by such agreements and are not inconsistent with their competitive positions. It is also in the city’s best interest, as well as the best interest of the business and residential occupants of the city, that mutual assistance agreements be in place. It is important that appropriate redundancy be built.
Boston Fiber Optic Network (BoNET) provides service for city offices and public safety. There is work to make the network bigger to connect public schools and safety sites throughout the city. The network will give public school students better access to information and education. It will also improve communication between police, fire, and emergency services. The expansion will soon connect nine public safety and transit service sites. Right now, there are 26 schools and 38 libraries connected to the network. The expansion will connect the final 89 schools; giving all public schools better speeds for educational tools.71 Emergency communications should also be dramatically improved.
The City of Boston has a free wireless network. ‘Wicked Free Wi-Fi’ is Boston’s outdoor wireless network. It is not designed to work inside buildings or homes. The Walsh administration plans to extend the Wi-Fi network to all 20 commercial districts that are part of the City’s Main Streets neighborhoods program. iv. Impediments to Progress
Unfortunately, there are still relatively few redundancies in the communication network in Boston. In the event of a future natural or human made disaster, essential/critical communication facilities could be interrupted. Unnecessary loss of life and infrastructure could be the consequence. Even without the stress of a disaster, reliable telecommunication and other communication systems are essential to the ordinary functioning of cites. In the event of a disaster, emergency medical and public safety operations will need working communication systems. This is a work in progress for Boston that requires the cooperation of non-governmental entities and others besides Boston itself.
The location of some communication facilities makes them subject to flooding and sea level rise. Boston has an on-going program to identify the precise location of all utility infrastructure,
70 https://www.boston.gov/news/mayor-walsh-announces-partnership-verizon-transform-citys-technology-infrastructure 71 https://www.boston.gov/departments/broadband-and-cable/expanding-broadband-boston
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 42
including communication infrastructure — an important step in the right direction. Once locations are determined, extensive action will need to be taken that may, in some cases, require relocation of facilities or replacement. It is important to note that because this involves several non- governmental entities, the City may not be in a position to require private entities to adopt and implement the same resiliency priorities it has.
C. Interoperability
i. Definition
The term “interoperability” is frequently used in the context of computer systems and electronic communication systems. It refers to the basic ability of computerized systems to connect and communicate with one another readily, even if they were developed by widely different manufacturers in different industries. Being able to exchange information between applications, databases, and other computer systems is crucial for the modern economy, and in the context of business or governmental organizations, it can also apply to “breaking down” organizational silos. Organizations, whether governmental or private, are organized along departmental or line of authority structures. Reporting relations, the establishment of hierarchies, levels of authority, career paths and information flow are structured within barriers of control and responsibilities.
Interoperability in this context refers to communication and cooperation across-the-board, and the steps that encourage its growth, reward its behavior and celebrate it success. ii. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities
In a future resilient city that has mastered interoperability, all systems of the city will be fully understood. Its departments and their personnel will communicate with each other openly and without restriction and with the surrounding cities and counties. Information will flow freely, coordination will be automatic, access to people and information will be unrestricted and a free flow of information and ideas between systems will spark new levels of creativity. In other words, there will be no intersystem barriers to problem solving, planning and implementation.
Communication and interaction will take place at all levels of systems. Innovation will be the accepted norm. Where conducive to the city’s resiliency, there will also be a high degree of interoperability between the city and other organizations, e.g., municipal, state and federal.
It is a given that serious or prolonged interruption of governmental and other necessary systems can have tragic consequences. But those consequences can be dramatically mitigated where interoperability is present. In the face of sudden crisis, the level of cooperation, communication
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 43
and contingent planning can be determinative of the outcome. When crisis events occur, it is too late to start considering interoperability. iii. Progress Toward Goals
Annually, Boston hosts the Boston marathon. There are over 1,000 media credentials issued to approximately 200 media from over 20 countries on six (6) continents. With almost 30,000 runners, 9,400 volunteers, and an estimated one million spectators each year, the Boston Marathon claims to be New England's most widely viewed sporting event. During the 2013 marathon, double bombings near the finish line killed three people and injured at least 264.
Since that time, a multi-jurisdictional public safety committee plans well in advance to ensure that all jurisdictions and agencies are interoperable and have a well-coordinated public safety plan. Groups include: Law Enforcement Tactical Operations (SWAT and Special Emergency Response Teams), Intelligence and Investigations, Explosive Ordinance Detection and Disposal (EOD) and Chemical Biological Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) Detection, Course Disruptions, Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and Coordination of Mass Casualty Resources, Communications, and Training and Exercises. Hundreds of representatives from local, regional, state, federal, private sector and non-profit agencies and organizations participate in planning meetings, training sessions, and exercises.
These operational plans have been incorporated into the Multi-Jurisdictional Boston Marathon Public Safety Coordination Plan.72 “Every situation is different and we can't anticipate the exact nature of every emergency. Therefore, it is important to have a range of preparations - only some of which will be needed depending on the situation.” 73
It is important to be prepared and have interoperability practices already in place in order to avoid communication failures during times of surprise. Boston’s Emergency Management department coordinates the City of Boston’s emergency management, emergency preparedness, and homeland security planning. “Our mission is to enhance the City's capacity to prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from major emergencies.”74 William Gross, Boston’s Superintendent-in-Chief of Police, stated that “tabletop exercises before the Boston Marathon and regularly throughout the year are essential to our interoperability with the agencies in, and
72 http://www.mass.gov/eopss/docs/mema/mema-reports/mema-reports-2017-boston-marathon-16-3.pdf 73 https://www.boston.gov/public-safety/ready-boston 74 https://www.boston.gov/departments/emergency-management
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 44
communities surrounding, Boston.”
In the after-action report for the response to the 2013 Boston Marathon Bombings, it was observed that: “Strong relationships created and maintained by key leaders were paramount to ensuring commanders, agency heads, and political leaders came together quickly to form Unified Command and facilitate collaborative decision-making after the bombings in Boston and during the manhunt in Watertown. Key leaders had the necessary trust and rapport that allowed for Unified Command to make effective, collaborative decisions, execute mission-tasking, maintain situational awareness, and coordinate public messaging. These relationships also contributed to leadership knowing where to obtain resources, whom to task with missions, how to mobilize mutual aid, how to coordinate communications, and effectively make bold decisions such as suspending transit service and issuing a shelter-in-place request. Overall, the response to the Boston Marathon bombings must be considered a great success.75
In order to ensure interoperability, the City of Boston’s Office of Emergency Management (OEM) hosts “Urban Shield: Boston”, a 24-hour regional training exercise that simulates large-scale public safety incidents in the Metro-Boston area. The training includes approximately 2,000 personnel from departments within the City of Boston (Boston Police, Boston Fire, EMS, OEM, and the Boston Public Health Commission); the Metro-Boston Homeland Security Region (MBHSR, which includes Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Quincy, Revere, Somerville, Brookline, and Winthrop); the Commonwealth of Massachusetts; Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority; and the Conference of Boston Teaching Hospitals. The annual exercise assesses the ability of public safety personnel to successfully respond to, and manage, multiple public safety threats and emergencies occurring simultaneously throughout the metro-Boston area.76 iv. Impediments to Progress
The bombing at the Boston Marathon a few years ago demonstrated the importance of interoperability. Many of the different entities responding to the bombing worked together with extraordinary teamwork, but there were at least two incidences that highlighted a failure of interoperability. In the first, it appears that the Fire Department was not authorized to seamlessly join other first responders at the scene, although many members of the department were eager to do so. In the second, while the local FBI performed in an excellent manner with effective teamwork and open channels of communication, in at least one unfortunate episode, federal law enforcement personnel from the Nation’s capital did not share critical information in a timely manner. Since the bombing, all relevant governmental agencies that responded to the tragedy have worked diligently to safeguard against this type of failure of interoperability in the future.
Long established systems are difficult to change and when modified there is a tendency for those systems to revert to prior conditions if allowed to do so. Vigilance about the progress made is critical to protecting newly established interoperability and continuance improvement. The natural tendency to adopt a silo mentality exists not only within and between city departments, but it is also a threat in the context of the City’s relationship with other metropolitan
75 http://www.mass.gov/eopss/docs/mema/after-action-report-for-the-response-to-the-2013-boston-marathon- bombings.pdf 76 https://www.cityofboston.gov/news/default.aspx?id=8607
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 45
governments and federal agencies.
Historic perceptions can be an impediment to interoperability. This is true even long after the historic basis for those perceptions have been mitigated or eliminated. According to William Gross, Superintendent-in-Chief of the Boston Police Department, in past decades the Boston Police Department was viewed as emphasizing a “warrior” mentality, focused on maximizing arrests and with little interest in “community policing”. The police force was seen as having little desire to work with the communities it served, develop cooperative behavior, form relationships based on trust, improve communication or show reasonable transparency. In addition, Chief Gross indicated that historically the Boston Police Department was seen as a “racist department”.
During recent years, the Boston Police Department has made exemplary progress in changing its culture. It has emphasized community policing across Boston, imbedded social workers at police stations, has a police ice cream truck, works with clergy and other community leaders and has affirmative outreach to all communities. Its current leadership is dedicated to continuous improvement. Older historic perceptions are an unfortunate legacy of the past that some citizens still hold. This is an impediment to greater interoperability. It impedes communication and cooperation between affected communities and the police department, even at times of crisis.
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 46
5. Resiliency of the Natural Habitat A. Climate Adaptation
i. Definition
Climate Adaptation can be defined in different ways. The UN Framework convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) defines it as actions taken to help communities and ecosystems cope with changing climate condition. The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) defines adaptation as: “adjustment in natural or human systems to a new or changing environment. Adaptation to climate change refers to adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities. Various types of adaptation can be distinguished, including anticipatory and reactive adaptation, private and public adaptation, and autonomous and planned adaptation.” ii. Characteristics of Future Integrated Cities
Adaptation is crucial to reducing vulnerability to climate change. While mitigation tackles the causes of climate change, adaptation tackles the effects of the phenomenon. The potential to adjust in order to minimize negative impact and maximize any benefits from changes in climate is known as adaptive capacity. A successful adaptation can reduce vulnerability by building on and strengthening existing coping strategies. Many regions are losing coastline, suffering dramatic changes in precipitation patterns, losing glaciers, suffering floods or droughts, and experiencing more extreme weather events.
Rotterdam, the largest European port, has an integrated climate change adaptation approach, marked by adoption of the Rotterdam Climate Proof (2008) and the Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy (2013).
The strategy aims to achieve the following:
• Strengthen a robust system of flood, storm water surge and sea-level rise defenses.77
77 The Maeslant storm surge barrier near Rotterdam during a test closure (source: www.BeeldbankVenW.nl)
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 47
• Adapt the urban space to combine its three functions: ‘sponge’ (water squares, infiltration zones and green spaces), protection (dykes and coastal protection) and damage control (evacuation routes, water- resistant buildings and floating structures).
• Increase city resilience through integrated planning.
• Foster the opportunities that climate change brings, such as strengthening the economy, improving the quality of life, and increasing biodiversity.78 iii. Progress Toward Goals
In 2007, responding to more detailed projections of how climate change will impact Boston, Mayor Thomas M. Menino issued an executive order that directed City offices to incorporate climate change into all municipal and community planning, projects, permitting, and review processes. Since then, evidence on the causes, mechanisms, and consequences of climate change has continued to build. As a coastal city with many neighborhoods built on filled tidelands, Boston has always been vulnerable to storms. The effects of climate change, including sea-level rise and more intense precipitation, are increasing this vulnerability as well as increasing the city’s risks from extreme heat and other phenomena related to climate change.
The 2016 Climate Ready Boston report identified many of the municipal vulnerabilities to climate change. As the Mayor stated, “This Report identifies many actions my administration, and the next, can take to ensure that we continue to provide our constituents with the infrastructure and services they require and deserve.”79
The same report noted that, “Through Imagine Boston 2030, the City has identified areas that have capacity to accommodate Boston’s growing population and dynamic economy. Many of the areas where Boston will grow will be exposed to increasing flood risk as sea levels rise. As it grows in these areas, Boston is committing to protecting them. While we do not know all the mechanisms for protection yet, Boston is investing in developing local climate resilience plans for vulnerable areas. These plans will identify multilayered investments needed to enable climate- ready growth.”
A February 2015 report titled Enhancing Resilience in Boston a Guide for Large Buildings and Institutions80 by A Better City (ABC), delved into “Climate Risks for Boston Buildings”. The report included regulatory and policy recommendations. Climate Ready Boston’s climate projections use three emissions scenarios to evaluate the risk scenarios. Future temperatures in Boston will
78 http://www.c40.org/case_studies/c40-good-practice-guides-rotterdam-climate-change-adaptation-strategy 79 https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/20161207_climate_ready_boston_digital2.pdf 80 http://www.abettercity.org/docs/resiliency%20report%20web%20FINAL.pdf
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 48
depend on how much we are able to cut our greenhouse gas emissions. The rise in temperatures between now and 2030 is largely consistent between all emission scenarios. The same scenarios, however, show that cutting emissions now can greatly slow the rise in temperatures in the second half of the century.81
During his recent State of the City address, Mayor Walsh announced the target of a carbon- neutral Boston by 2050. Boston has committed to a 25% reduction in Green House Gases by 2030 and a 50% reduction by 2050 with an 80% reduction in municipal emissions. The climate change adaptation initiatives of Boston involve a variety of different city departments, community organizations, residents, businesses and the State.
The 2017 Resilient Boston strategy recognizes that vulnerable populations often bear the disproportionate burden of climate change impacts, such as extreme heat and stormwater flooding, yet lack the resources and information needed to prepare for these impacts. Heat adaptation projects being implemented include deploying home cooling equipment, incentivizing cool roofs, expanding tree canopy and installing cool pavements. Neighborhood water management plans prioritize green infrastructure such as bioswales, rain gardens, permeable pavement, tree plantings and green roofs.
Meetings with local residents have allowed residents to participate in the formulation of a local neighborhood climate resiliency policy. The key takeaways from the meetings are:
• While residents like the proactive approach of the City to addressing climate change, they want more information on when and how solutions are implemented.
• Residents are concerned about floods and want an increase in water front access and public spaces.
• Residents prefer flood protection options that also provide other environmental and social benefits, such as raised seating walls (not flood walls), more wetlands and amphitheaters (which can serve as water catch or holding basins). iv. Impediments to progress
The first impediment to progress in any area is not having a plan. Strategic planning is a disciplined effort to produce fundamental decisions and actions that shape and guide what an organization is, what it does, and why it does it, with a focus on the future.
Boston has spent the last several years, analyzing the problems and challenges, then gathering public input to form a strategic plan. With buy in from a wide range of constituents, ranging from low income residents to non-profit agencies, the strategy has a better chance of success. The strong leadership from the Mayor guides climate adaptation and resiliency strategies to build consensus and motivate resource support. This is particularly useful in defining priorities for funding.
Another impediment to progress is communication to those most likely to be impacted: the low income and disadvantaged populations. The City’s Greenovate Boston project is designed to
81 https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/02_20161206_executivesummary_digital.pdf
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 49
create opportunities for all Boston residents to participate in Boston’s Climate Action Plan. Although the city has held meetings between City officials, professionals and local residents, the participation has been limited to those who have the time available. As many individuals work several jobs, it can be challenging to also become involved in community meetings.
B. Environmental Resiliency
i. Definition
The EPA has defined environmental resilience as, “minimizing environmental risks associated with disasters, quickly returning critical environmental and ecological services to functionality after a disaster while applying this learning process to reduce vulnerabilities and risks to future incidents.”82 This concept can be further refined to include an understanding of the flora and fauna, or green infrastructure that affects stormwater runoff, floodplains and air quality. ii. Characteristics of Integrated Future Cities
Many cities are finding that the restoration of estuaries and wetlands, proactively managing debris and waste, and addressing biodiversity in ecosystems are all steps communities can take to strengthen their environmental resilience. Chronic stresses (air pollution, climate change, soil degradation, and loss of biodiversity) can push environmental systems to tipping points.
Environmental resiliency must embrace the dynamic nature of the environment. The health and welfare of a city’s population and communities are dependent upon an environmental balance. In particular, certain species and groups of species perform key functions. For example, dynamic bird populations can maintain low abundances of insects, reducing the possibility of catastrophic levels of insect herbivory of trees, and thus increasing tree productivity. Pollinators, including some insects, bats and birds, are also excellent examples of highly functional species in ecosystems, and without them, many plants could not reproduce.
Environmental resilience depends, in large part, on these key species and the functions that they perform redeveloping as an area recovers following disturbances. At a genetic level, the capacity for resilience comes from the ability of a species to persist over a range of environmental variability, such as by tolerating a range of temperatures or a certain level of drought. At the species level, there are various behavioral and functional responses that can assist a species to repopulate a disturbed area or respond to environmental changes.83
82 https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/documents/strap_2016_hs_508.pdf 83 https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/08/what-bostons-preschools-get-right/493952/
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 50
iii. Progress Toward Goals
In recent years, Boston has started to expand its use of green infrastructure. This encompasses a range of interventions, including porous pavement; bioswales; rain gardens; tree planters; neighborhood gardens, green streets, alleys, and parking lots; green roofs; and constructed wetlands. Relative to gray infrastructure traditionally used to manage stormwater, green infrastructure has the potential to provide numerous environmental, economic, and social co- benefits. The Boston Transportation Department incorporated green street strategies into Boston’s Complete Streets Design Guidelines. In addition, the Boston Parks and Recreation Department has installed rain gardens in multiple city parks, and is evaluating opportunities for additional locations with current design projects. 84
A new trend in Boston is supported by a number of major downtown hotels who are getting into the “bee game”. Both the InterContinental Boston and the Seaport Hotel now maintain apiaries with hundreds of thousands of bees on their roof decks. A practice they started initially to produce their own honey has now become celebrated as a way to help pollinate the Greenway, Boston Common, and the Public Garden. It turns out that “Boston’s parks and gardens, with their ecological diversity, have all of the elements necessary to support a healthy bee population.”85
The Boston Parks Department is responsible for 217 city parks, playgrounds and athletic fields, two golf courses, 65 squares, urban wilds, and approximately 125,000 trees; all covering 2,346 acres of which 1,000 acres comprise the historic Emerald Necklace. They are also responsible for more than 35,000 street trees.86
The large parks in Boston host a distinct and rich bird community. Most sites with greening projects had higher species richness than the random urban site in their vicinity. The main factor associated with this is thought to be the patch size of green space and to a lesser extent, tree cavities. Even small increases of a few hundred square meters were associated with an increase in bird richness. Having more trees with cavities was also beneficial for species richness. Small greening projects that target preserving, increasing and connecting existing green space appear to be most valuable for urban biodiversity.
Vast salt marshes once covered most of Boston shoreline. Although significant portions of these habitats have been lost due to human-induced manipulation of land and water, remnants of these original ecosystems — urban wilds — remain. These urban wilds harbor native plants and animals and perform a wealth of ecological services, such as storing floodwater, producing oxygen, and filtering stormwater run-off. 87
The Boston Harbor Ecosystem Network, is made up of representatives from government (municipal, state, federal), academic, non-profit, and private sector interests. The current priority focus areas for the Metro Boston region relate to coastal habitat health and protection, estuarine
84 https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/20161207_climate_ready_boston_digital2.pdf 85 http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/article/2013/04/30/honeybees-boston/ 86 https://www.boston.gov/departments/parks-and-recreation 87 https:/www.boston.gov/environment-and-energy/urban-wilds-initiative
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 51
impacts from urbanization (stormwater and wastewater management), and the current and projected impacts of climate change – particularly sea level rise.
Before 1988, untreated discharges occurred approximately 100 times a year, or almost every time it rained. Now, with improvements that have worked to separate storm drains from sewage pipes, the discharges have been cut to roughly a half-dozen occurrences each year and about 93% of wastewater is treated before it reaches the water. “It is an extraordinary success story,” said Bruce Berman, a spokesman for Save the Harbor/Save the Bay in Boston, “The project has transformed the waterfront. The beaches went from a national disgrace in the 1980s to some of the cleanest in the country.” The improvement so far has been dramatic, with the return of plants like eelgrass, an important habitat for spawning sea life, and aquatic creatures like seals.88 iv. Impediments to Progress
In the 2010 issuance of BioMap2, the State of Massachusetts recognized “Development, particularly residential development, continues to eliminate and fragment important habitats. Traffic volume has increased in Massachusetts, causing a rise in mortality for amphibians and reptiles. New and established invasive species continue to displace native plants and animals. Meanwhile, the emerging repercussions of climate change threaten complete disruption of the ecological conditions and processes our ecosystems and species depend on. In light of these threats, there is a critical need to protect the state’s biodiversity and ensure that ecosystems across Massachusetts remain viable.”89
Despite supervision by the Parks and Recreation Department since 1989, many protected natural areas remain neglected due to limited resources and/or a lack of grass-roots support. Furthermore, with the exception of properties under Boston Conservation Commission and Parks Department jurisdiction, urban wilds under city and private ownership are continuously threatened by potential development.90
Increased temperatures, mild winters, and dramatic temperature fluctuations may disrupt the seasonal cycles of many tree species. This can potentially lead to damage or death. These stressors can also leave urban forests particularly vulnerable to pest and pathogens that more freely proliferate with reduced frost depth and increased frost-free days. Heat-related vulnerabilities to the urban tree canopy and natural systems are a compounding issue. As rising temperatures lead to a potential increase in tree mortality, any loss of canopy coverage or green space will only contribute to the urban heat island effect, reduced air quality, increased stormwater runoff, and decreased quality of life. Currently, the lack of a sustainable funding and operating model for green infrastructure on public land is a major barrier that has limited its large-scale deployment of green space and trees. Green infrastructure assets require different maintenance procedures than gray infrastructure assets and must be properly maintained to preserve their functionality.
The Climate Ready Boston report recognizes that, “As rising temperatures lead to a potential
88 http://newbostonpost.com/2016/04/19/boston-harbor-once-dirtiest-now-clean-agency-tells-judge/ 89 http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/dfg/nhesp/land-protection-and-management/biomap2-summary-report.pdf 90 https://www.boston.gov/environment-and-energy/urban-wilds-initiative
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 52
increase in tree mortality, any loss of canopy coverage or green space will only contribute to the urban heat island effect, reduced air quality, increased stormwater runoff, and decreased quality of life.”
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 53
SECTION 5: KEY INDIVIDUALS INTERVIEWED/CONTACTS
The following individuals were key contributors to this case study and principal interviewees:
Austin Blackmon – Chief of Environment, Energy and Open Space
William “Buddy” Christopher Jr. – Building Commissioner
Rob Consalvo – Chief of Staff of Boston Public School, Office of the Superintendent
Sheila Dillon – Chief of Housing, Dept. of Neighborhood Development
Rene Fielding – Office of Emergency Management
William Gross – Superintendent-in-Chief, Boston Police
Stacey Kokaram – Director of Public Health Preparedness, Boston Public Health Commission
Dr. Atyia Martin – Chief Resilience Officer
Margaret Reid – Director of Health Equity, Boston Public Health Commission
Becky Shuster – Assistant Superintendent of Equity, Boston Public Schools
Daniel Tavares – Chief Diversity Officer
Chris Osgood – Chief of Streets, Transportation and Sanitation
Special thanks are due to Mayor Walsh, Olivia Nelson and the other Boston City employees who assisted in this project.
Boston Resiliency Case Study | 54