Appendices
Should We Stay or Should We Go? Managing Justice and Retreat in the Resilient City
by Collyn Chan
Bachelor of Science in Global Resource Systems University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada (2015)
Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master in City Planning at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 2019
© 2019 Collyn Chan. All Rights Reserved
The author hereby grants to MIT the permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of the thesis document in whole or in part in any medium now known or hereafter created.
Author______Department of Urban Studies and Planning May 22, 2019
Certified by ______Ford Professor of Urban Design and Planning, Lawrence Vale Department of Urban Studies and Planning Thesis Supervisor
Accepted by______Professor of the Practice, Ceasar McDowell Department of Urban Studies and Planning Co-Chair, MCP Committee Appendices
2 Appendices
Should We Stay or Should We Go? Managing Justice and Retreat in the Resilient City By Collyn Chan
Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning on May 22, 2019 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in City Planning
Abstract: In recent years, scholars and planning practitioners have turned to managed retreat as an adaptation response to climate change. This provokes questions about how equity and justice are addressed in the relocation of people because historic planning practice has led to the marginalization of already vulnerable populations to environmentally risky areas. Through a review of the existing definitions of managed retreat and its purported benefits, this thesis asserts that the language of “managed retreat” is inherently at odds with the language of justice as understood through movement building and advocacy. Managed retreat focuses on outcomes and strategies for the removal of assets from risk rather than developing processes of transformational change for the relocation of people. Managed retreat does not focus on power building and creating recognitional, procedural and distributional justice in the face of climate impacts. Using this review and case study analysis, this thesis outlines the critical components of retreat that current planning practice fails to meet in regards to both the benefits of retreat and outcomes of a just process. Through a speculative spatial analysis, this thesis also outlines a sample method for planners and policy makers to apply the process of managing retreat, a reconceptualization of managed retreat with the focus on a just and deeply democratic process. The result a proposed relocation suitability index that identifies the potential areas communities may move to, in order to understand the opportunities, challenges and constraints of relocation. The analysis reaffirms that a community’s collective ownership over place is central to the role of planning practice in conveying and creating a life-enhancing, equitable and legitimate future that meets the needs of all people.
Thesis Advisor: Lawrence Vale, Ford Professor of Urban Design and Planning, MIT Readers: A.R. Siders, Environmental Fellow, Harvard University Center for the Environment Garnette Cadogan, Martin Luther King Jr. Visiting Scholar, MIT
3 Appendices
Acknowledgements
To all my friends, family and mentors who have taught me so much with your presence, your thoughts, your listening and your generosity in my times of need and my times of joy. I wouldn’t be me without you.
4 Appendices
Table of Contents
Introduction ...... 6 Methodology ...... 9 Chapter I: Why Managed Retreat? ...... 10 Chapter 2: What is Justice? ...... 18 Chapter III: Case Study Analysis: Comparing the success of current managed retreat programs ...... 24 Chapter IV: Reconceptualizing managed retreat: toward a new definition within a justice framework ...... 25 Chapter V: Spatial Analysis – the justice framework applied in practice ...... 29 V. Limitations and Further Research ...... 59 VI. Further Research ...... 60 VII. Conclusion ...... 61 Appendix ...... 62 Works Cited...... 81
5 Appendices
Introduction
Image 1 Home on 36th Street in Mexico Beach, Florida that survived Hurricane Michael with minimal damage. Photo credit: Johnny Milano for The New York Times
On October 7, 2018, Russell King and Lebron destroyed or severely damaged, the power grid Lackey watched remotely as their home swayed was wiped out and roads were closed due to and rippled against winds and waves. Hurricane sustained damage (Mazzei, 2018). With the Michael, a Category 4 hurricane with winds of majority of its buildings destroyed leaving the up to 155mph and waves up to 14ft that made majority of its 1200 residents displaced, Mexico landfall in Mexico Beach, Florida. Today, King Beach faced a choice: should they stay and and Lackey’s house is well known – their home rebuild or should they retreat from the shores? a lonely survivor amongst the devasted neighborhood (pictured above). They had spent And herein lies a catch – this house is a vacation an extra 20-30% to sustain the home for home for King and Lackey, a family that can generations, building hurricane protections and afford to design and install the protective elevate above building codes to withstand “the measures that saved their home. Mexico Beach, big one,” a storm that hit less than a year after while by no means impoverished, is a decidedly construction was completed (Byrne, 2019; working-class city with a median age of 60 and a Mazzei, 2018). median income of $60,000 (U. S. Census Bureau, 2018). Rebuilding would mean money Mexico Beach as a whole, however, was not so to rebuild what was there and additional dollars lucky. Two-thirds of buildings in the town were
6 Appendices
Image 2 Of the 440 buildings in Mexico Beach, FL, 239 were destroyed and an additional 99 were severely damaged. Credit: Singvi et al. 2018.
for protective measures required by new Cities worldwide face an imminent future of standards. Even with forms of monetary increasingly frequent and intense climate- assistance (national flood insurance program, induced impacts. These impacts in the United increased cost of compliance funds, temporary States include sea-level rise, coastal erosion, housing assistance), disaster recovery is taking flooding, drought, wildfires, extreme heat and months, and could take years, leaving many storms. Cities across the US look to implement temporarily or permanently displaced. These climate mitigation and adaptation strategies to funds may take months to arrive, and may not protect their communities. One such adaptation fully meet every person’s needs, which leaves a strategy is managed retreat. gap in funding for interim housing, renovating homes to meet future climate risks, or facing This idea of moving from risk can seem increasing insurance premiums for those who impossible, both emotionally and politically. As can afford it. Cornelia Dean puts it in Against the Tide, “It would almost be un-American to concede ... The other option may be to retreat and leave the that it is we who must adapt to the ocean, not land behind. Following disasters, communities the other way around.” However, managed may also be offered a government buyout – a retreat is not uncommon practice. The US has mechanism that funds the relocation of people employed the strategy for decades for places out of flood zones. When faced with the idea of affected by riverine flooding such as along the leaving, communities are faced with a second Mississippi, Missouri and Red Rivers emotional and traumatic decision. After increasingly throughout the 20th century. In the experiencing the loss of their homes and 1990s following the Great Flood of 1993, the neighborhood, buyouts (a mechanism of Federal Emergency Management Agency managed retreat) are an active decision to (FEMA) began to promote the use of buyouts as “admit defeat” and let go of the community and a post-disaster recovery strategy in earnest. Yet, place that you call home (Schwartz, 2018). the idea of managed retreat did not gain as much notice and attention until the hurricanes
7 Appendices and disasters of the last twenty years. Today, that constitute retreat is necessary to define how more densely packed coastal cities are this adaptation strategy should ensure justice increasingly faced with the debate over adopting and achieve equity. “managed” retreat as an adaptation strategy. Cities are highly populated, facing an This thesis looks to contribute to understanding amalgamation of complex challenges including justice implications in managed retreat policy. expensive and developing waterfront properties, Through a review of justice literature and expansive public infrastructure and the social analysis of previously adopted managed retreat challenges in the history and development of programs, this thesis will propose a refined communities. This coalescing of forces makes definition for managed retreat in planning managed retreat a difficult subject to broach, practice, suggest a normative justice framework with an increasing call for planners to place at for managing retreat and design spatial the forefront of the discussion, the social justice planning tools that could be incorporated into implications for vulnerable populations who planning practice. already bear a disproportionately high burden of environmental hazards. As a government-led effort to relocate people, houses and structures – planning for retreat must be cognizant of historically oppressive planning practices that have relegated low-income communities and communities of color into geographic areas that are typically at higher risk to hazards and that continue to be less protected to hazards due to earlier rounds of government decisions (Arnold, 1998; A. R. Siders, 2019). Planning practice and discourse around retreat should also take into account the disproportionate abilities of marginalized and low-income populations to adapt within the current systems of disaster recovery.
In the emerging literature about retreat, discussed in the next chapter, research has already identified the potential for unjust and inequitable outcomes from buyout and land acquisition programs in the United States. However, both research and practice have not established what a just process for managed retreat entails. Defining the critical components
8 Appendices
Methodology This thesis employs a mixed-methods research a speculative spatial analysis in Jamaica Bay to approach focused on literature reviews and explore how a managed retreat process in that spatial analysis to accomplish three objectives. location could be more equitable for at-risk communities through the development of a just First, it proposes a new definition of managed process that caters to their needs. retreat that centers on justice. This is Recommendations for planning practice are accomplished by analyzing the various provided to show that managed retreat definitions and categories of managed retreat programs must be defined by and respond to that exist in the literature through the lens of local context and the needs of residents. justice as defined in the environmental and climate justice literature and practice. Using mostly secondary sources, I first provide a background on justice as it relates to environmental justice and climate adaptation planning. Second, I provide an overview of climate adaptation policy today and how managed retreat is understood in the context of other responses in planning practice. This review includes different ways of categorizing managed retreat, including definitions, tools, forces, and benefits. The conclusions of my review result in the proposal of a new definition of managed retreat for justice and equity – one that focuses on the process of ‘managing retreat’ at the community scale.
Second, it analyzes existing case studies of managed retreat through the new definition set out in chapter one. Drawing from these case studies, this thesis suggests new typologies of retreat which focus on end use of land and scale of intervention to reveal important insights as to why existing managed retreat programs both fail to achieve the adaptation benefits of retreat as well as fail to meet justice outcomes.
Third, this thesis provides recommendations for managing retreat in the form of a use case. I use
9 Appendices
Chapter I: Why Managed Retreat?
Types of climate change adaptation planning While these are important considerations As climate impact become more frequent and especially for short- and medium-term common, multiple adaptation responses are protection, these methods have limitations. possible. Adaptation responses to climate risks Physical defenses are more easily justified as an are general categorized as 1) Protection or investment in areas of high property value Fortification, the building of defenses to climate through cost-benefit analysis (Alexander, Ryan, risks, 2) Accommodation, the continued & Measham, 2012; Callahan, DeShazo, & occupancy and use of vulnerable areas with Kenyon, 2012; A. R. Siders, 2019) and they can adaptive measures and 3) Retreat. also require high maintenance costs that cities must continue to fund over time. In 2017, the Defense or fortifying against hazards is the most US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) frequent reaction to environmental risk. In projected that Norfolk, Virginia would need coastal management, protection refers to $1.8 Billion for flood protection, upgrades and physical, engineered defenses built to create a maintenance of existing barrier between hazards and the public. This infrastructures(Alexander et al., 2012; Pete can include “hard” infrastructural measures Plastrik, 2018). In 2018, following Hurricane such as sea walls, groynes, breakwaters and Harvey, USACE proposed flood protections for levees or “soft” infrastructural measures such as the Texas coastline that would cost $31 Billion. installing wetlands or marshes, beach And in March 2019, New York City announced nourishment, oyster barriers and other a plan costing $10 Billion that would protect ecological approaches (Aldrich & Kyota, 2017; Lower Manhattan from flooding and climate Harman, Heyenga, Taylor, & Fletcher, 2015). change. These are just three of many examples Accommodation measures refer to the of how protection and accommodation come intentional design and building of structures with a hefty price tag. There is also evidence and coastlines that withstand flooding and that hard infrastructure reduces the urgency for inundation (Harman et al., 2015; Nicholls & adaptive capacity by encouraging sustained or Cazenave, 2010; Tompkins, Few, & Brown, increased development behind defenses, which 2008). This includes the elevation of buildings, increases the population affected that would be designing areas of flooding and areas of safety affected if these physical infrastructure were to (i.e., blue-green infrastructure), increasing fail; and, over time, physical infrastructure are pervious surfaces and adopting building codes not guaranteed to withstand the increasing that require infrastructural systems to be moved effects of climate change (Adger, Arnell, & out of harm’s way (Neal, Bush, & Pilkey, 2017; Tompkins, 2005; Alexander et al., 2012; Hino, Ryan, Vega-Barachowitz, & Perkins-High, Field, & Mach, 2017; Kousky, 2014). In 2016). addition, these structures may also cause the degradation of ecological functions adjacent to the structure, such as intensified beach erosion
10 Appendices
beyond a seawall (Clément, Rey-Valette, & do not feel that managed retreat should be a Rulleau, 2015; Kousky, 2014; Rulleau & Rey- strategy that is prioritized due to uncertainty in Valette, 2017) when and how intense impacts will be (Atreya, Ferreira, & Kriesel, 2013; Rulleau & Rey- While facing barriers and challenges, protection Valette, 2017). Retreat is difficult to justify and and accommodation are still the more this community perception and disconnection commonly implemented methods of climate between time and magnitude of risk (“temporal adaptation. It is easy to understand why: people discounting”) are a fundamental barrier to love their homes and neighborhoods deeply. implementation (Atreya et al., 2013; Dasgupta, Protecting and accommodating for risk is a type 2008; Weber, 2010). Despite these barriers, the of community resilience that is more acceptable financial projections of protection, combined than a community resilience that moves away with the financial consequences of rebuilding from repeated development in vulnerable areas. after disasters, exposure to chronic flooding, This makes retreat very difficult to implement. and rapid erosion have allowed the discussion in climate adaptation planning to consider Although retreat has been implemented for managed retreat more seriously in cities. many decades in the US, it is still considered as a radical strategy and least utilized to address What is managed retreat? climate adaptation, especially in coastal areas While retreat is difficult to implement it is also where property values have historically been extremely difficult to define. To begin, this higher (First Street Foundation, 2019; Guidi, thesis draws a distinction between ‘retreat’ and 2018; Tibbetts & Mooney, 2018). Retreat ‘managed retreat.’ Retreat has been understood involves the abandonment of land, removal of as a “philosophy of moving away from the coast structures or relocation of people away from rather than fortifying in place,” (Hino et al., risk. Traditionally, retreat is typically not 2017) whereas “managed retreat” is derived considered a politically viable strategy, first and from coastal engineering and coastal zone foremost due to the financial implications to management and generally understood to be municipalities, secondly, due to concerns the relocation of planned and future around economic development and thirdly, due development out of the way of risk (Harman et to social, emotional and psychological concerns. al., 2015; Neal et al., 2017). In 2017, Hino, Field On one hand, buyout programs, rolling and Mach identify that the distinction in easements and land acquisition require large managed retreat and other types of retreat, is a pools of money to incentivize or support negotiation between a participant and an residents in leaving their property and assets enabling party. Among all the definitions along the coast. On the other, the removal of examined, this relationship between two parties property and people from within city is a defining feature of managed retreat. boundaries reduces property tax revenue that is needed from residential property. Further, even The following literature review will look at four when there is financial backing, often residents different ways of categorizing managed retreat:
11 Appendices
how it is ‘defined’; the tools used to accomplish refer only to the removal of assets. The it; the forces by which it will happen; and the distinction between removal and relocation as it benefits that it accrues. relates to the tools of implementation and the implications on people will be discussed in later Definitions of managed retreat sections of this thesis. Second, of the eight Managed retreat is commonly referred to as definitions provided above, only two reference “the strategic relocation of structures or ‘people’ in their description. The fact that abandonment of land” as a response to hazards people are not universally centered in and risks (Dronkers et al., 1990; Hino et al., definitions of managed retreat reveals why it is 2017; Neal, Pilkey, & Bush, 2005)1. However, a so difficult to analyze, let alone implement, review of the literature shows that there are also retreat through the lens of equity and justice. key differences among definitions for managed Without a people-centered definition of retreat, retreat. There are many terms that have been such outcomes are impossible to achieve. used, often interchangeably, to define the same suite of tools that is generally considered The tools of managed retreat managed retreat. This includes ‘retreat’, Although definitions are revealing of intent, a ‘relocation’, ‘planned relocation’, ‘planned definition is not sufficient for understanding resettlement’, ‘planned migration’, ‘managed what managed retreat entails. Thus, another realignment’ and ‘managed retreat’. For the way of conceptualizing the process is through purposes of this thesis, literature that have used the tools that are used to implement it. To any of the above terms will be included. A implement a managed retreat program, a suite review of existing definitions is summarized in of tools is available. Methods of managed retreat Table 1 which can be found in Appendix A. are enacted by an enabling party – the force, actor or entity (market, community or Table 1 shows a cross-section of literature that government) that initiates the process towards defines managed retreat. The fact that a retreat – and as Neal et al. (2017) posits, can be universally agreed upon definition of managed an intentional action or an intentional passive retreat does not exist across the academic inaction. Most often, an implementing party is a literature and practitioner-based governmental agency which has the agency and documentation may be one of the reasons why authorization to develop and implement the it is difficult to implement and measure the tools described below. Retreat tools include success of managed retreat programs. However, policies and requirements that reduce or restrict there are some obvious patterns. First, four of new development in high risk areas, allow the eight definitions above use the word provisions for abandoning property such as ‘relocation’ in their description – the other half buyout programs and land acquisition, or even
1 It is important to note that managed retreat is more well majority of the literature capture in this thesis will focus researched through the lens of coastal adaptation as on coastal retreat. opposed to wildfire management and that is also why the
12 Appendices an intentional utilization of the transitional excludes the possibility of community-driven periods post-disaster to shift cultural mindsets retreat, which is an essential element of and use recovery funding to enable managed ensuring a justice process. retreat (Kousky, 2014; Baptiste, 2017). Table 2 – which can be found in Appendix A – provides The benefits of managed retreat an overview of the range of policy tools that are The previous section described the forces by considered as a part of managed retreat, and the which managed retreat may happen, most of active, passive, planned or unplanned nature of which are a response to negative environmental those methods. hazards and risks or price volatility. It often seems like managed retreat is an option of last As seen through assessment of the current tools, resort. However, there are a number of positive government has traditionally enabled managed reasons why should cities and residents should retreat through planning action. While this consider managed retreat as a viable adaptation makes sense, as governments hold power over strategy. decisions that involve the safety and well-being of society, it is also a potential barrier to just Managed retreat is considered the adaptation process. Government dominant tools invariably strategy that “most effectively eliminates risk” place the management of process in the hands with the primary benefit of removing people out of an enabling party that has also enabled the of harm’s way. The forces of disaster-driven marginalization of communities through and market-driven retreat are the most readily discriminatory practices. The tools of managed implemented but focus primarily on the retreat towards a more just process must individual household scale. However, the therefore address history and past actions. majority of benefits of managed retreat are realized at the collective level. The forces of managed retreat The 2019 report “Can It Happen Here? An anticipatory unbuilding and relocation of Improving the Prospect for Managed Retreat by assets and people at the neighborhood or US Cities” (Plastrik & Cleveland, 2019) district scale has the following potential provides a well-defined case for the forces that benefits: guide retreat. The authors argue that retreat is bound to happen, and it will happen in three • Reduces burden on tax payer dollars to different ways: disaster driven, market driven, fund disaster response and or planned. A full summary can be found in reconstruction of infrastructure and Appendix A. homes • Reduces burden on tax payer dollars to While this is an important text in making the fund and maintain flood barriers or case for action on managed retreat policy, it also other physical infrastructures in the affirms that the best understood form of area managed retreat is disaster driven. The text also
13 Appendices
• Avoids the damage of public utilities collectively-driven process seeking to and physical infrastructure located in accomplish the benefits outlined above. floodplains • Allows for the creation of natural Key takeaways from these ways of understanding buffers, such as wetlands, to reduce managed retreat severity from future floods
• Allows for the creation of floodable 1) The definitions of managed retreat are public amentities, such as beaches and split between the relocation of people parks and the movement of assets and properties. • Avoids hurried relocation and
permanent displacement that may 2) The lack of focus on people ensures that result from post-disaster retreat managed retreat falls short on drawing • Prevents the disruption of businesses the connection toward justice and economic livelihood from affected considerations in planning practice. areas, likely vulnerable populations that While the benefits outline positive depend on those businesses adaptation outcomes, they do not full • Allows for the restoration of ecological encompass how managing retreat as a systems and habitats community-driven process can also accomplish goals of justice and benefit (Adapted from Alexander et al., 2012; people, especially vulnerable Niven & Bardsley, 2013; Peter Plastrik & populations at the margins. This will be Cleveland, 2019; Siders, 2013) discussed more in depth in the next
chapter. The benefits focus mostly on the reduction of tax payer dollars through the reduction in 3) The majority of tools used for managed provision or maintenance of services as well as retreat are enabled by government the creation of space for community and actions. Governments therefore are in ecological benefits. These benefits can only be positions of power in how we currently achieved through anticipatory retreat or understand managed retreat, and accrued through aggregation of parcels or control the choices and decisions that collective participation at larger scales. While are framed in a managed retreat these benefits are conceptually identified in the strategy. literature, there is no research on measuring managed retreat programs via their success in 4) The benefits of retreat are better achieving the benefits outlined above in part achieved through larger, collective because few anticipatory retreat programs have scales. been implemented and partly because managed retreat is usually approached as a last-resort response to a negative event, rather than a
14 Appendices
The missing critical components of managed benefits of reduction in taxpayer burden would retreat not be achieved.
The above review of different ways of The definitions of managed retreat identify the conceptualizing managed retreat provide avoidance of harm, but do not necessarily important insights into a new way of dictate the scale at which retreat has occurred. approaching managed retreat programs. When Plastrik (2018) identifies six conceptual scales of combined with the existing literature on justice how managed retreat could happen: “… in climate adaptation planning, several Individual properties/parcels, sites; Public conclusions can be drawn. Based on this infrastructure (roads, wastewater treatment analysis, the following summary argues that in plants, etc.); Sub-districts/neighborhoods of order for a city to engage in managed retreat, it cities; Entire cities; Urban metropolitan regions; must take into consideration these critical Regions of a country (rural and urban areas…)” components to achieve a just retreat: actors and enabling party, the end of use of land, the Time scale of achievement receiving location of people, scale, and the time required for implementation. Very few definitions of managed retreat recognize the time scale in which managed Scale retreat should occur. Only one directly differentiates tools for both short term and “The one thing you absolutely have to avoid is long-term impacts (Adger et al., 2005; Neal et the jigsaw or jack-o’-lantern effect, where you al., 2017) and one additional definition have lot, home, lot, home, home, lot, home” - acknowledges the “associated efforts to plan James Rubin, Director of New York Rising and manage that movement” (Koslov, 2016). These definitions recognize that efforts that are In assessing the current typologies of managed understood to be managed retreat have a time retreat through the filters of scale and end use, component, with some methods addressing we find a defining mismatch between the scale short term or transition periods to fully of intervention and the benefits of retreat. The retreating. For example, downzoning is majority of managed retreat policies are considered a tool of managed retreat. However, implemented at the household scale. While this downzoning does not actively abandon land or is effective for removing individual homes away relocate structures as identified in the from risk, the other benefits of retreat may definitions for managed retreat. It is, however, a never be achieved as not enough homes are tool in the short term that better assists moved to create a park or wetland (for relocation or deconstruction. In other words, example). Without a larger scale of retreat, understanding time as an essential component public infrastructure that is costly to repair and better helps us understand the outcomes of maintain post-disaster would also stay to service managed retreat. It is therefore important for populations who remain behind. As a result, the governments to employ retreat strategies to
15 Appendices identify what the short-, medium- and long- locations in which populations would be term strategies would be for retreat. received. For example, in 2017, a study showed that 30% to 50% of participants in Ocean Breeze End Use of Land and Oakwood Beach buyouts relocated to other flood-prone zip codes which were also eligible Among most definitions, managed retreat leads for buyout programs (McGhee, 2017). In part, to abandonment of land or removal of this may have been due to a 5% incentive bonus buildings. However, only some definitions to stay in New York State, however it draws a identify in explicit terms that the land should stark line that without clarity on a receiving then be prevented from future development, be location – buyout programs may not be truly returned to nature in perpetuity, among other moving residents out of harm’s way. Instead, designations. It is important for governments to they may be relocating to similarly vulnerable be explicit regarding what end uses follow areas or moving to places that displace other retreat. For example, some buyout programs socially vulnerable populations (McGhee, allow for the redevelopment of land following 2017). the buyout. While all buyout programs are often conflated as managed retreat, under a stricter Actors and Enabling Party definition of retreat in regard to the end use of the land, these programs that allow As noted from the literature, managed retreat development would not be considered a more commonly identifies the removal of managed retreat program. The identification of structures away from harm and the relocation end uses by governments also provide an of assets. This definition, while useful, leaves an opportunity to co-create future uses in the obvious absence and disconnect from the neighborhood. Inherently, the end use of land is movement of people. Secondly, there is an also connected to the timing of the intervention inherent understanding among many and scale. It is also important to note the short, definitions that there is an enabling party for medium- and long-term end uses or, in other retreat, most likely a government entity. words, the immediate, transitional and future However, literature has included both designated uses of the land. government, market actors and (rarely) communities as the enabling parties of retreat. Receiving location of people Governments should also make explicit who is being enacted on. In most cases, these are As noted from the literature, managed retreat individual homeowners. But there are also cases programs do not universally define whether where governments look to enact retreat on a retreat is only the process of removal or if it also collective: for example, some buyout programs includes relocation. Few programs to date have enable higher increases if a certain number of explicitly specified a place for individuals or neighbors also retreat such as originally communities to go. Governments should be proposed from New York State after Hurricane clearer and more transparent about the realistic Sandy.
16 Appendices
Critical Components for Managed Retreat
Component How it contributes to measuring managed retreat Scale Understands at what point retreat is achieved (individual, household, neighborhood) and therefore what benefits that scale would result in. Timescale of Achievement Identify what the short-, medium- and long-term strategies would be for retreat to assess what benefits of retreat would result from the strategy. End Use of Land What happens to the land afects what benefits it will achieve. Connected to time, defintions should identify the immediate, transitional and future designated uses of the land. Receiving location of people To assess if we move people out of harm’s way, there should be consideration into where people should go. Actors and Enabling Party Who enables retreat: government, market or community? Identifying actors helps identify which benefits of retreat can be achieved without other parties.
Figure 1 A summary of the critical missing components of managed retreat as identified by the author.
17 Appendices
Chapter 2: What is Justice?
Equity, justice and legitimacy are essential terms Climate justice and environmental justice often in planning practice. It is essential for planners both refer to the distribution of climate change and policy makers to embed normative impacts, where those who already face frameworks for equity, legitimacy and justice in marginalization are at greater risk. Injustice their practice because institutions have from climate impacts is recognized as a result of traditionally excluded vulnerable and “spatial separation of disadvantaged marginalized populations. While these concepts populations,” (Garrison & Huxman, 2019) are applicable across a wide range of fields, driven by historically oppressive planning there has been less discussion on the role of practice. This includes segregation, forced equity, legitimacy, and justice in climate removal and exclusionary zoning practices that adaptation planning. For clarity, this thesis uses have financially relegated marginalized the following definitions, which are then populations to the most vulnerable and polluted applied to the discussion of managed retreat areas in a city. Exposure to flooding and storms policy: is further exacerbated by government decisions to invest in public amenities (such as open • Equity is the state in which all people space) and flood infrastructure in wealthier get full access to the opportunities, areas of the city (Fainstein, 2015; Pete Plastrik, power and resources they need in order 2018; A. R. Siders, 2019). Environmental justice to thrive and live a healthy, enjoyable communities are often low-income and/or life. communities of color, populations that often • Legitimacy the extent to which have a lower capacity to adapt to shocks and outcomes are felt to be acceptable to stressors due to systemic racism and oppression participants and non-participants that has hindered the inter-generation ability to involved. accumulate wealth, achieve financial security • Justice as transformational change and access social resources (Adger et al., 2005; leading to the systematic fair treatment Arnold, 1998; King County, Office of Equity of people of all races that results in and Social Justice, 2016). equitable opportunities and outcomes for everyone. Literature on environmental justice is limited in exploring the effects of adaptation policies on (Adapted from Annie E. Casey Foundation, vulnerable populations (A. R. Siders, 2019). In 2015; Keleher, 2009; King County, Office of the emerging literature for managed retreat, Equity and Social Justice, 2016; Nelson & research has identified the potential for unjust Brooks, 2016) process and inequitable outcomes from buyout and land acquisition programs in the United This thesis will focus on a normative framework States. Following disaster, buyout programs are for justice as it relates to managed retreat. established and neighborhoods that should be
18 Appendices
Image 3 Community messages on makeshift barriers in Far Rockaway, New York. Credit: NYsceneonthestreets, 2013
bought out are identified through cost-benefit including the right to place, loss of community analysis, a controversial tool subject to wide and culture and sense of belonging (Hino et al., discretion and subjectivity on values (Callahan 2017; Simms, 2017). et al., 2012; Siders, 2019). In the use of cost- benefit analysis, discretion has been shown to Despite these insights, neither research nor assess homes in low-income neighborhoods to practice have established a normative be substantially damaged more often than in framework toward justice in managed retreat. wealthier neighborhoods. The location of buyout programs could then be more biased A study by Schlosberg and Collins (2014) notes toward low-income neighborhoods. Secondly, if a deep disconnect between academic homeowners look to rebuild, FEMA regulations conceptions of environmental justice and may require higher standards, thereby approaches used by movement and grassroots increasing the cost of reconstruction. The organizations. As outlined in Figure 1. inability to afford these modifications or the inability to live with increased flood insurance premiums may result in feelings of coercion and injustice when accepting relocation assistance (Siders, 2019). Further, when it comes to managed retreat and justice, the right to decide when to leave one’s home is highest priority, and tied deeply with intangible social costs
19 Appendices
Figure 2 Language of justice in climate planning is different than the language of justice in advocacy, grassroots and movement organizations.
As noted in their “Advancing Resistance and own communities’ needs. For example, if Resilience in Climate Change Adaptation they live near the coast where sea level Action Toolkit,” the National Association for rise is a concern, they decide as a the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) community how to support people who identifies the need for climate adaptation can’t or don’t want to relocate, and what planning to move beyond “practical actions” infrastructure like a sea wall or homes and use a “more transformative approach to on stilts, etc. that they would need to live climate adaptation that accounts for the in their area. (NAACP, 2019) inequities already in our communities.” In the context of climate adaptation, movement In the literature of climate adaptation, this organizations, such as the NAACP, advocate for might be considered the building up of social or the use of just processes that recognize systemic adaptive capacity of a community which challenges, promote self-determination, deep includes actions such as building awareness of democracy, power building and life-affirmation. climate change impacts or maintaining well- being or economic health of a community This language of equity and just process in (Adger et al., 2005). climate adaptation planning is made explicit: Adger et al. (2005) also identifies four facets of Equity in resilience building for climate climate adaptation: effectiveness, efficiency, adaptation means that a community equity in outcomes and legitimacy in decision leads the planning process based on their making. The study identifies equity as
20 Appendices understood through outcomes (who wins, who The understanding for justice as process is loses) and legitimacy as “the extent to which echoed in the Climate Justice Alliance’s Just outcomes are acceptable to participants and Transition principles, “the transition itself must non-participants affected.” In this case, be just and equitable; redressing past harms and legitimacy is describing how well a process creating new relationships of power for the allowed affected parties to feel outcomes are future through reparations. If the process of acceptable or not, a process that goes beyond transition is not just, the outcome will never be. merely placating participants. Adger et al. Just Transition describes both where we are (2005) also note that procedures to achieve going and how we get there” (Climate Justice legitimacy are not universal and must support Alliance, 2019). The National Association of cultural context and varying interpretations. Climate Resilience Planners (NACRP) also supports the importance of achieving social Other organizations have also developed their justice through community driven planning own conceptions of justice. In 2016, the framework, noting that we should “use Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) planning processes as an opportunity to reflect published a roadmap to environmental justice on habits and patterns that perpetuate inequities that outlined four key actions to achieve justice: and limit resiliency, and to replace them with conscious practices that support shifts needed 1. Engage with disadvantaged for viable climate solutions” (Gonzalez, 2017) communities and create more democratic decision-making processes In this context, I argue that justice goes beyond to create meaningful involvement and legitimacy. Justice espouses the need for procedural justice transformational action and recognition and 2. Reduce concentrations of adopts cultural meaning from US movement environmental exposures and impacts groups. Therefore, drawing from this in overly disadvantaged communities to intersection between the understanding of achieve distributional justice justice through adaptation literature as well as 3. Increase access to resources by creating through that of environmental justice, this the tools (skills, knowledge) and thesis establishes that justice is achieved locating assets (e.g., natural amenities) through a process that, at its close, feels to support healthy communities and legitimate to the communities involved. achieve justice of capabilities 4. Acknowledge historic neglect, active Critical considerations in managed retreat for disinvestment in neighborhoods and equity and justice lived experiences and knowledge of place to address recognitional justice Drawing from this summary analysis, I argue that managed retreat is currently approached as (Geller et al., 2016) an outcome-oriented initiative. Unfortunately, managed retreat programs often fail to meet
21 Appendices
their objectives because their desired outcomes communities to co-design and co-create a are ill-defined by implementers. While some managed retreat strategy for the future and outcomes, such as the benefits of managed therefore ownership over their own future. retreat outlined previous, may be useful indicators for success, they not sufficient for Vision and metric creation with affected ensuring justice and equity. members of the community
To ensure greater equity in managed retreat As noted in NAACP’s toolkit (2019), outcomes, governments should emphasize residents should have agency over what, transformational change through a just process. when and how adaptation occurs. A Transformational change builds power creates deeply democratic process creates a space agency and produces a generative future for all for self-determination and emergent ideas, people. Based on the justice and equity where just and equitable outcomes are literature, particularly drawing from the EPA’s emergent from collective problem setting. roadmap document, I propose additional A vision for the future and how to critical components to consider. This proposal measure a justice and equity retreat should as part of a justice framework requires and therefore be determined by the ordered unfolding to create the created buy-in community. and in order to achieve the most legitimate process. Use of an unhurried, deeply democratic engagement process Explicit in the recognition of historic neglect or systemic disadvantages When engaging in anticipatory retreat, governments should consider a long Recognitional justice is created through explicit engagement process that begins with the acknowledgement of how spatial segregation is values of deep democracy. Community a result of historic government decisions and engagement that begins with deep systemic discriminatory practice. An explicit democracy recognizes the role of all recognition of this history in the planning of people as individuals and as part of a managed retreat contributes to a just process. collective, and that one affects the other. Deep democracy also recognizes that Creating tools for co-creation and shared processes should be designed not for ownership majority votes, but by recognition and acknowledgement of all voices in the Government led efforts for retreat should create community. the tools and assets needed for community members to understand the individual and collective trade-offs of climate change. Tools and dialogues should also be used to enable
22 Appendices
Critical Components for Justice in Managed Retreat
Component How it contributes to just process Explicit in the recognition of historic Recognitional justice is created through explicit neglect or systemic disadvantages acknowledgement of how spatial segregation is a result of historic government decisions and systemic discriminatory practice. Creating tools for co-creation and Tools and dialogues should also be used to enable shared ownership communities to co-design and co-create a managed retreat strategy for the future and therefore ownership over their own future. Vision and metric creation with A deeply democratic process creates a space for self- afected members of the community determination and emergent ideas, where just and equitable outcomes are emergent from collective problem setting. Use of an unhurried, deeply Deep democracy also recognizes that processes should democratic engagement process be designed not for majority votes, but by recognition and acknowledgement of all voices in the community. Image 4 The critical components for justice in managed retreat.
The proposition of a just process in managed retreat also asks who should be involved in such a process and where should people move to. In Chapter 5, this thesis will utilize spatial analysis to demonstrate how answering these questions can be operationalized by planners through a justice framework.
23 Appendices
Chapter III: Case Study Analysis: Comparing the success of current managed retreat programs
Well-defined indicators for the success of enact justice components. The benefits of managed retreat programs are non-existent, retreat that are measured include: people making it difficult to develop standards or best removed from risk in perpetuity, removal of practices for comparison. For this thesis, a case non-floodable public infrastructure, the study analysis was conducted on existing creation of ‘soft’ infrastructure, the creation of managed retreat programs. The analysis asks floodable public amenities, and the relocation of whether or not the programs accrue the benefits all businesses from the area. The justice of managed retreat as identified by the outcomes measured are the critical literature. components: the explicit recognition of past history, the use of tools for co-creation and Part I overviewed the case studies of coastal and ownership, the creation of metrics decided by riverine managed retreat referenced within the community members, and the use of an literature and that have begun or completed unhurried engagement process. These implementation. Secondly, each case study is thresholds and associated charts are explored in assessed against the critical components depth in Appendix B. identified in Chapters I and II (refer to Image 3 and 4). The vignettes and charts associated with The key findings through the case study analysis this analysis can be found in Appendix B. show that:
Part II outlined the case studies into typologies 1) The majority of current managed based on two categories: end use of land and retreat strategies are implemented at the scale of intervention. The categorization is household scale and are geared toward based on the following assumptions: first, that removing individual people and assets the end use of land is an essential indicator of within individual parcels away from a managed retreat as it is the only way to risky are. determine whether or not benefits of retreat are being accrued through the shift in location of 2) The majority of current managed property or people; second, scale of intervention retreat strategies do not identify a is most useful for determining equity and justice receiving location for residents to outcomes because it speaks to collective agency relocate to. and decision making. Scale also reveals if the broader beneficial outcomes of managed retreat, accrued in the collective removal of assets and people, is achieved.
Each typology is then assessed by their ability to achieve the benefits of retreat and their ability to
24 Appendices
Chapter IV: Reconceptualizing managed retreat: toward a new definition within a justice framework
Stemming from this analysis, this thesis asserts in direct conflict with the language of social that there are two reasons to reconceptualize justice. Managed retreat is first and foremost, a managed retreat in planning practice. noun, something that is done as a part of planning and pre-determined. Managed retreat First, the current conceptualization of managed is also often framed as a future oriented retreat’s makes it hard to both measure and discussion, potentially removed from the achieve success. Methods that are considered concerns of the present. retreat do not actually achieve the adaptation outcomes that managed retreat is supposed to Current practice: language at odds set out to do. As managed retreat increasingly enters into the mainstream, concern around In current practice, the anticipatory or disaster agency and relocation, the inability of some driven managed retreat process is implemented methods to achieve adaptation benefits may add as follows: the risks and vulnerabilities are to the arguments against the use of managed assessed, desired outcomes are established, and retreat as a widespread strategy. tools are developed to best bring retreat to fruition. This understanding is outlined in Secondly, a major failure of managed retreat as Image 5. it is conceptualized today is that it places itself
Image 5 A diagram outlining the conceptualization of managed retreat in current planning practice.
25 Appendices
This conceptualization focuses on how to and ownership over decisions. Managed retreat achieve an outcome only by assessing the as it is currently understood is focused on current state and desired future state. The tool outcomes; it is future oriented; it asks to move used to implement retreat is most often defined from the present to a future state because of a by government, as shown in Table 2 in future problem; it is implemented at individual Appendix A. and household scales; and of course, at its core, managed retreat is managed. As previously defined, equitable outcomes are decided with and the jurisdiction of populations Our current practice ignores the opportunity to being relocated by the managed retreat process. create process that is in line with the language of The legitimacy of that process is therefore justice and practice of designing for the dictated by the perception of that population. margins.
Therefore, current practice of managed retreat Aspirational Practice: Reconceptualization is at odds with justice. This is outlined in Image toward ‘managing retreat ‘ 6. Justice is about just process; it is grounded in the present; it demands that we understand that In order to move forward toward justice, changing the present is about historic decisions; managed retreat needs to be reconceptualized it is about collective and systemic liberation; within a justice framework. and its core it is about power building, agency
Image 6 Diagram illustrating how the language of justice and managed retreat are divergent.
26 Appendices
Achieving a just process requires an community, the most recent of which is understanding of three ideas 1) recognitional displacement due to climate impacts. justice of history, systems and relationships of It is critical that in planning for managed power from the past, 2) the importance of retreat, affected communities are seen as an procedural justice to understand the present asset and a resource, rather than as subjects of and 3) the creation of power, agency and governmental programs. Drawing from analysis ownership that can dictate the collective future. in Chapters I and II, incorporating the critical In this way, justice demands that we move away components of justice can help to inform the from the definition of managed retreat as an most important considerations for managed implementation of tools and towards a retreat: the receiving location of people, scale, definition that views itself as the managing of a actors, end use of land, and time scale of process. This is outlined in Image 7. achievement. This is illustrated in the diagram shown in Image 8. In order to produce more equitable outcomes, retreat should be understood as a process that is Planning practice should conceptualize this as about past and present pressures placed on a the managing of retreat, an opportunity to create justice in the face of current and future
Image 7 Diagram showing the aspirational practice of managing retreat within a justice framework.
27 Appendices
Image 8 Diagram showing that aspirational practice of managing retreat aligns the languages of justice and managed retreat. climate risks. Managing retreat focuses on changing the role of the planner from designing practice for tool selection toward managing a just process that creates a managed retreat strategy that is legitimate for the context it was created in.
28 Appendices
Chapter V: Spatial Analysis – the justice framework applied in practice
Managing retreat asks that planners consider In this Chapter, the justice framework will be recognitional justice to understand the past, demonstrated through the use case of New York procedural justice to understand the present City. Speculative spatial tools are developed to and the creation of power, agency and address the justice framework that can be used ownership that can dictate the future. for managing a retreat process. Correspondingly, these understandings of justice translate to three important questions for Use Case: New York City justice: New York City is a famously resilient city in the 1) How did we get here? context of managed retreat, some parts perhaps 2) Why are we here? more than others. Following Hurricane Sandy, 3) Where are we going? then Mayor Michael Bloomberg implored “As New Yorkers, we cannot and will not abandon This justice framework can be utilized to our waterfront. It’s one of our greatest assets. identify guiding questions for planning practice We must protect it, not retreat from it.” This and the tools that may be used by planners in call for reinvestment to the waterfront and order to achieve a more just process. These are resistance to climate impacts is a stark shown in Figure 3. difference to comments made by New York State Governor, Andrew Cuomo, who noted
How to apply the aspirational practice
Recognitional Justice Procedural Justice Distributional Justice Justice and Equity Considerations Managed Retreat Considerations (How did we get here) (Why are we here) (Where are we going)
Explicit in the recognition of What could be done diferently What receiving locations/relocation Receiving location of in the past? sites can minimize disruptions to historic neglect or systemic peoples live and livelihoods? people disadvantages How can we prevent negative impacts to receiving communities?
Creating tools for co- When have community How can we build community Actors and Enabling Party, members felt powerless? cohesion/agreement to achieve creation and shared Powerful? buyouts across the entire Scale ownership What do residents feel like they neighborhood? have control over? Who initiates/guides the process?
Vision and metric creation What data empowers What asset would the community What asset would the community End Use of Land populations about the present? like to see in place of their homes? like to see in place of their homes? with afected members of the community
Use of an unhurried, deeply What is important and valued to What is the time frame of risk/ What should not happen? Time scale of achievement the community? vulnerability? democratic engagement What past events have been If people would like to move, when process significant to the community? would they like to move?
PLANNING TOOLS: Identifying Utilizing Engagement Establishing a Communities of Methods and Tools Relocation Suitability Concern Analysis
Figure 3 Table showing the guiding questions and planning tools that joins the critical components of justice and managed retreat in practice.
29 Appendices
that “there are some parcels that Mother Nature state buyout program to be announced, and by owns,” as he announced a state buyout program then many had applied for emergency in 2013. It was the state buyout program that management assistance and other aid funding enabled the Oakwood Beach retreat, which is that would make them ineligible for a buyout. widely considered a success in the rate of As time moves residents further from the threat adoption, process of community buy-in and of Sandy, residents also find it less urgent and end uses of its land. New York City eventually necessary to move. incorporated a form of relocation in its Build it Back better program – a land acquisition Jamaica Bay program that allows for redevelopment of the land after it is bought out. New York City is still at risk, and climate impacts are being felt more frequently as the Despite these programs, complex and long New York City Panel on Climate Change processes have hindered the rate of uptake and (NPCC) report in March 2019 noted. City-wide, buyouts in the city. It took four months for the almost half a million people live in a flood plain
Image 9 Jamaica Bay is the site of 6 out of 11 of New York City’s Resilient Neighborhoods – “a place-based planning initiative to identify neighborhood-specific strategies, including zoning and land use changes, to support the vitality and resiliency of communities in the floodplain and prepare them for future storms” . Credit: Emily Thenhaus, Regional Plan Association, 2016
30 Appendices
in New York City and by 2050, that number will Understanding that there is evidence for a double. Jamaica Bay is the lowest lying area of market driven retreat, are there communities of New York City and in the next decade, parts of concern within Jamaica Bay that would benefit this area will experience daily tidal flooding. from an assessment of risk and implementation of just process toward anticipatory retreat. With six feet of sea rise, 12,000 people living in public housing in the city will be Spatial Analysis Model #1: Recognitional Justice displaced, 20 percent of the entire through understanding who should be involved region’s power generated capacity will be diminished, and 203,000 New Yorkers The purpose of this analysis is to demonstrate a will be impacted overall. (Warerkar, tool that could be used by planners to identify 2016) communities of people who have been marginalized by spatial planning and New York City is not engaging in anticipatory socioeconomic biases in society. In particular, retreat and has explicitly noted in its resiliency for those communities in flood zones, planners plans that even in those areas where daily tidal have a responsibility to engage in a process – flooding is expected – measures will be taken to not to say what should be done to relocate limit exposure of future development. homes, but to understand and create systems that empower residents to make decisions over However, several studies have been conducted their individual and collective futures in on the potential for a market driven retreat in response to climate change impacts. So, this first the city. In 2015, Chun found uneven recovery analysis is meant to identify who planners in the housing market post Hurricane Sandy, should think about engaging in recognitional with greater densification in locations with justice. greater accessibility and proximity to the urban This spatial analysis begins with identifying core (Manhattan) within Brooklyn and Queens. Communities of Concern (CoC) within New Similarly, in 2018, Ortega and Taspinar (Ortega York City. Communities of Concern is an & Taṣpınar, 2018) identified a persistent penalty equity assessment framework developed associated with the risk of purchasing property through a community engagement process and in flood zones, with housing prices never utilized in California by the Association of Bay recovering fully to pre-Hurricane Sandy values. Area Governments. The purpose of the CoC Conversely, properties in non-flood zones saw a framework is to identify regions of social rise in property values in the same time span marginalization by aggregating multiple factors according to the same study. This would that may for account for different axes of correspond with Chun’s study, as disadvantages. CoCs are identify census tracts neighborhoods near Jamaica Bay are further with a concentration of either 1) 70% minority and at greater risk than other properties within population AND 30% low-income households these boroughs (Chun, 2015). OR as 2) census tracts that have a concentration of 4 or more of the disadvantage factors listed
31 Appendices
below. This method is used in order to identify be controversial and seen as the repetition of marginalized communities above single factor historic injustices such as forced removal or thresholds of poverty. The concentration other forms of spatial segregation. threshold for each disadvantage factor was based on its current share of the region’s However, it is important to note that an population plus half a standard deviation above aggregate of factors does not tell the complete the regional mean. story of any community and that the use of a framework such as Communities of Concern The disadvantage factors are listed in Figure 4. should be a starting point, supplemented by additional understanding of history and These factors overlaps with many common community in any given area. For example, factors of social vulnerability studied to assess while aggregation across factors can identify distributive justice and are identified as factors relative disadvantage, it hides the disaggregated that should be taken account by the NPCC’s data for any given community. most recent report in March 2019 (Foster et al., 2019). In addition to this commonality in factors, the statistical rigor, its acceptance as a best practice standard for several decades within the Bay Area and resolution of data makes it an ideal framework to use. While there are many frameworks for assessing states of equity, CoC’s focus in particular on multi-factor analysis and usage of standard deviation makes it a more robust measure than most frameworks in terms of relating disadvantage to other tracts within the same area.
While strongly emphasizing minority and poverty status, the use of CoCs does not solely focus on race or class.
There are also potential drawbacks of identifying CoCs in terms of engaging in a long process toward retreat. While it does not preclude the engagement of other at-risk communities, the targeting of CoCs may send a message that they are to be relocated first. In addition, in general, the relocation of marginalized communities such as CoCs may
32 Appendices
Disadvantage Disadvantage Factor Definition Concentration Factor Threshold
Minority Minority populations include persons who identify as any 70% of the following groups as defined by the Census Bureau in accordance with guidelines provided by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget: American Indian or Pacific Islander Alone (Non-Hispanic/non-Latino); Asian Alone (non-Hispanic/non-Latino); Black or African-American Alone (non-Hispanic/non-Latino); and Other (Some Other Race, Two or More Races).
Low Income (< Person living in a household with incomes less than 200% 30% 200% Federal of the federal poverty level established by the Census Poverty Level -FPL) Bureau.
Limited English Person above the age of 5 years, who do not speak English 20% Proficiency at least "well" as their primary language or had a limited ability to read, speak, write, or understand English at least "well", as defined by the U.S. Census.
Zero-Vehicle Households that do not own a personal vehicle. 10% Household
Seniors 75 Years Self-explanatory. 10% and Over
People with The U.S. Census Bureau defines disability as: Hearing 25% Disability difficulty- deaf or having serious difficulty hearing (DEAR); Vision difficulty- blind or having serious difficulty remembering, concentrating, or making decisions (DREM); Ambulatory difficulty- having serious difficulty walking or climbing stars (DPHY; Self-care difficulty- having difficulty bathing or dressing (DDRS); Independent living difficulty- because of a physical, mental, or emotional problem, having difficulty doing errands alone such as visiting a doctor's office or shopping (DOUT).
33 Appendices
Single-Parent Families with at least one child. To determine whether or 20% Family not single-parent families exceed tract concentration thresholds, the share of single parent families is calculated as a share of all families regardless of whether or not they have any children.
Severely Rent- Renters paying > 50% of income in rent. To determine 15% Burdened whether or not severely rent-burdened households exceed Household tract concentration thresholds, the share of severely rent- burdened households is calculated as a share of all households regardless of occupancy status (renter or owner).
Figure 4: Disadvantage factors and thresholds used in the Communities of Concern framework. Source: Bay Area Metro, 2019 documentation and resources on Communities This thesis will demonstrate tools to spatialize of Concern. The repository provided an R injustices through the use case. markdown file that provided base code to analyze census tracts. I adapted the code for This analysis uses data drawn from the counties and tracts within the City of New York American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year and joined the data with spatial references to estimates 2012-2017. Files were also drawn create a spatial database. from the Bay Area's Metropolitan Planning Organization and Council of Governments The regional outputs for New York City are as GitHub open source repository which includes follows:
Disadvantage % Regional Standard Concentration 1 Standard 1.5 Factor Population Deviation Threshold 0.5 Deviation Standard Standard (Higher Deviation Deviation (High COC) (Highest COC) COC) Seniors 6.06% 4.44% 8.28% 10.50% 12.72% Minority 66.08% 30.86% 81.51% 96.93% 112.36% Limited English 11.64% 10.57% 16.92% 22.20% 27.49% Proficiency Single Parent 19.46% 14.28% 26.60% 33.74% 40.88% Families Share of Population 36.22% 19.31% 45.87% 55.52% 65.17% Below 200% FPL Share of Disabled 10.52% 5.66% 13.35% 16.18% 19.01% Population
34 Appendices
Zero Vehicle 47.12% 24.44% 59.34% 71.56% 83.78% Households HUS Rent 50 17.85% 10.53% 23.11% 28.38% 33.64%
These are the CoCs within New York City:
Image 10 Communities of Concern identified within the City of New York by author.
County High Higher Highest Total number of % of census census tracts tracts that are that are CoC CoC
Bronx 137 59 20 216 63.72% Kings (Brooklyn) 152 20 9 181 23.78% New York (Manhattan) 63 3 3 69 23.96% Queens 79 14 0 93 13.90% Richmond (Staten 8 1 0 9 8.18% Island)
35 Appendices
Of the five boroughs, the Bronx has the highest from the late 1930s. Overlaid with the EPA’s concentration of CoCs with 64% of census Toxic Release Inventory data, we can see that tracts considered a community of concern. the location of CoCs may be a result of historic Following that, 24% of both Brooklyn’s and factors of discrimination, barring access to land Manhattan’s census tracts are CoC, but and relegating racial minorities to “Hazardous” Brooklyn has considerably more census tracts in areas that are close to toxic release sites as well. total that are CoC (181 to Manhattan’s 69). Results are shown on Image 11.
Notably, many CoCs are located inland. In part, These are just two methods that begin to this could be due to coastal real estate value. A spatially assess historical injustice and planning closer look at New York’s redlining maps practice in order to draw the connection shows, perhaps, a different story. Shapefiles between property and justice through time. If were sourced from the University of there were more time, this thesis would also Richmond’s Mapping Inequality project on disaggregate parcel data to understand Redlining in New Deal America, where Home demographics of specific sites throughout time, Owners’ Loan Corporation (HOLC) “security and explore the changes of CoCs throughout maps” show the spatial discrimination of time to understand patterns of change. mortgage lenders, developers and appraisers
Image 11 Redlining maps from 1935 - 1940 overlayed with toxic release sites and parcels that are CoCs.
36 Appendices
Next, the analysis looks to identify tracts that flood zones and 90th Percentile Projections for are within flood zones. Drawing from datasets sea level rise from the New York City Panel on made available through NYC Open Data and Climate Change. Union is used to combine the New York State GIS Data portals, this analysis Sandy Inundation Zone with 100-year sea level uses ArcGIS to complete identify census tracts rise projections for both 2020 and 2050 to create within flood zones. a combined flood hazard zone.
To capture risks that will likely be felt in the Using a spatial join, census tracts that are within next 30 years, this analysis uses the Sea Level this combined flood hazard are identified to Rise projections developed by New York City’s create a new layer identifying only the CoC Office of Long-Term Planning and census tracts within flood zones Sustainability based on Preliminary FEMA
\
37 Appendices
County High Higher Highest Total # of CoC % of CoCs number of tracts in in flood census tracts flood zone zone that are CoC Bronx 137 59 20 216 51 23.61% Kings (Brooklyn) 152 20 9 181 37 20.44% New York 63 3 3 69 42 60.87% (Manhattan) Queens 79 14 0 93 19 20.43% Richmond (Staten 8 1 0 9 5 55.56% Island)
Here it is interesting to note that although However, these conclusions are best suited for Manhattan and Staten Island have a lower further research and analysis that is not within overall amount of CoCs compared to the other the scope of this thesis. boroughs, the majority of those CoCs are within the combined flood hazard zone. That is not the 3) Identify the CoCs which have the highest case in the Bronx, Brooklyn or Queens, thresholds of people and property at risk meaning that CoCs are not concentrated in areas of flood risk in these boroughs. This could In this step, I utilize PLUTO (Property Land point to the spatial segregation that historically Use Tax Lot Output) dataset provided by the marginalized groups to risky areas along the City of New York to identify buildings located coast in Manhattan as well as to historically in the combined flood hazard zone and within poorer neighborhoods in the other boroughs as the communities of concern. In order to shown in the redlining maps. This could also prioritize, I then established the CoCs which suggest that Manhattan has fewer CoCs because had between 80-100% of their total buildings overall, Manhattan has experienced greater within the combined flood hazard. investment in its neighborhoods and the CoCs left remain in the most hazardous areas.
38 Appendices
Image 12 CoCs shown with the percentage of buildings located within the flood zone within the parcel.
As seen in the analysis, the communities of A key insight is that many of the waterfront concern that may need more planning effort areas that face the greatest climate impacts, and and attention are further inland. As we zoom identified as New York City’s Resilient into Jamaica Bay, we also find a couple key Neighborhoods initiative, are not classified as insights. Edgemere (highlighted on the right) is CoCs. Whilst this is likely because these census a CoC with a large percentage of buildings tracts are wealthier and whiter, they are also within the flood hazard zone and NYC has more at risk for flooding and climate impacts. established a Resilient Edgemere plan that looks Naturally, this raises an argument that this to implement retreat strategies. Coney Island spatial tool is ignoring the real need for (highlighted on the left), on the other hand, is consideration from these coastal communities. also home to several communities of concern However, the argument that this thesis poses is but is undergoing a development boom that is that that a just process should prioritize CoCs, bringing more residents to the neighborhood. without precluding climate vulnerable communities from participating under the same guiding principles. This framework for justice is
39 Appendices designed for communities on the margins, but the process is applicable to all communities.
This spatial analysis proposes a method of assessing the communities of concern exposed to risk, relate historic zoning and segregation to the present, and identify environmental hazards and their relationship to communities of concern. These methods can assist planners, residents, advocacy organizations and other government agencies in identifying communities that should be engaged in conversations around retreat and centering the conversation through recognitional justice.
40 Appendices
Spatial Analysis #2: Engagement Tools that (pictured in Appendix C). In a guided activity, guide conversation to understand why we are residents are asked to make trade-offs in three here today rounds, corresponding to the short-, medium- and long-term water levels. Participants are In the first part, we identified the CoCs that asked where they would move their home should be engaged in conversations around relative to other homes, where they would retreat in the present, if retreat were adopted as relocate people, homes and community a strategy for the long term. The purpose of the buildings. Through this activity, participants are second part is to address potential methods introduced to the concepts of long-term where spatial tools can be used to understand planning for climate impacts and are asked to and guide procedural justice. This section will make decisions regarding a collective and be short, as it is not the main focus of this paper neighborhood scaled retreat. and focuses on work completed outside of this thesis. This section outlines two methods of These engagement tools are essential in spatial analysis that can address co-creation and managing retreat as they inform the guiding justice of capabilities. principles for the critical components of managed retreat (end state, scale, receiving According to Eastie for Eastie (2019), their location, time). As demonstrated from these community toolkit for managed retreat utilizes examples, tools can assist in mapping the values analog and digital asset mapping in order to of the past, such as community assets to better gather and understand the values of places, address recognitional justice as well as map services and amenities in the community of East values for the future, such as priorities for Boston. By participating in asset mapping, housing relocation to identify the metrics for planners in the project were able to gather and success. These tools and resources are understand the places that were most valued. referenced in Appendix C. The web and analog version of the map were also included within an activity that asked participants “did you know whether or not you lived in a flood zone?” and “where is your favorite place in East Boston?” These questions are easily accessible for the community and served the dual functions of building knowledge of lived experiences for use for policy and building knowledge of understanding climate impacts for residents.
Another method that was used in the Eastie for Eastie toolkit is the use of a 3D model. This model is simplified into 3 tiers on a hill
41 Appendices
Spatial Analysis #3: Determining a relocation similar as the current census tract or better suitability index to explore the current realities according to methodologies in similar indexes. for different communities to retreat In the limited literature, relocation suitability indexes have focused on assessing where areas The purpose of the third part of the spatial are vacant or aspirational (Bukvic, 2015; analysis is answer the spatial question, “If Hurricane Matthew Disaster Recovery and residents in this tract were to move, where Resilience Initiative, 2018; Ryan et al., 2016), would they be able to find similar neighborhood this RSI is intended to assess where else within characteristics elsewhere in New York City?” the boundaries of New York City would it be For this analysis, GIS is used to establish a suitable. The factors were chosen based on relocation suitability index (RSI) to identify common variables found within the literature potential areas in the city that two different and would best compare a breadth of factors census tracts may relocate to, one CoC in the that might influence housing choice. combined flood hazard zone and one non-CoC in the combined flood hazard zone. The analysis will look at the following factors at the census tract level, as this matches with the It is important to note that the index will be CoC analysis completed in part 1. looking for other census tracts that may be the
Suitability Factor Definition Threshold Index Effect
Median Income Self-explanatory as Equal to the same +1 / 0 taken from the ACS quintile of the sending 2012-2017 5 Year census tract (with 5 Estimates. being the bottom 20% and 1 being the top 20%)
% Open Space Percentage of total area Equal or greater than +1 / 0 within the census tract the sending census tract designated as Open / Less Space and Recreation by land use.
Proximity to Number of rapid transit Equal or less than the +1 / 0 Transit stops within 800m of the quintile of the sending census tract. census tract (with 5 being the bottom 20%
42 Appendices
and 1 being the top 20%) / More
Vacancy rates Percentage of total 10% or greater / Less +1 / 0 housing units which are vacant. Calculated from the ACS 2012-2017 5 Year Estimates.
Concentration of Percentage land use Greater than 30% / Less -1 / 0 Industrial land designated as industrial and manufacturing. This would be to avoid a relocation that would send communities to areas with high concentrations of industrial uses.
Presence of publicly Percentage of land 15% or greater / Less +1 / 0 owned land which is completed under City or Public ownership (classified in MapPLUTO as C or O).
Presence of Vacant Percentage land use 15% or greater / Less +1 / 0 Land designated as vacant land within the census tract (with the assumption that it would be suitable for development)
With the following Map Algebra:
43 Appendices
The composite score would be a max score of 7, can imagine that there are a number of as the concentration of industrial land has neighborhood characteristics inaccessible negative cardinality. In total, this study will look through the American Community Survey or at areas which meet a score of 4 to identify Decennial Census that could tell us more about potential suitable census tracts. the suitability, including the presence of well- performing schools, the proximity to others While this list is by no means exhaustive, it is a with the same level of English proficiency, first take on what relocation suitability index access to childcare, cultural similarity or may incorporate. The neighborhood characters perhaps cultural mix. This suitability analysis that are identified amongst other index factors. could also propose an aspirational index that However, they by no means encompass identifies an opportunity to relocate suitability for everyone. The point of matching communities to areas which contain relatively suitability to the sending census tract is to “better” factors that are better suited for examine the effects of a relocation suitability economic mobility or other values that may that is highly contextual and provide emerge from an engagement process. appropriate options for a given community. We
44 Appendices
Site 1: Census Tract 982 in Canarsie neighborhood, Brooklyn NYC
Image 13 CoC located within Canarsie neighborhood in Brooklyn, NYC with 100% of its buildings within the flood hazard zone.
This census tract was identified through first inaccurate, with redrawn maps showing an analysis as High CoC with 100% of its buildings increase from 26 buildings to 5000 buildings within the combined flood hazard zone. within the flood zone. Following Sandy, there Located in the Canarsie neighborhood, this has been rising concern in the neighborhood census tract has a population of 4500, with a regarding affordability of living and ability to majority minority population (95%) that is pay $500- $3000 in annual flood insurance predominantly Black (85%) as a result of white premiums (Chen, 2018). flight in the 1980s and 1990s. Approximately 44% of the population currently lives below the If Canarsie residents in this tract were to move, poverty line. Canarsie was also one of the most where would they be able to find similar affected neighborhoods in the city by the neighborhood characteristics elsewhere in New subprime mortgage crisis in the late 2000s, York City? making the disaster of Hurricane Sandy even worse. Here are the following thresholds for the selected census tract: Following Hurricane Sandy, it was discovered that FEMA flood maps at the time were hugely
45 Appendices
Suitability Factor Neighborhood Statistic Threshold for model
Housing tenure Four or less – < 2% Equal or greater than 30% of Five to Nine Unit – 12.8% 20 to 49 unit (+1) / Less (0) Ten to Nineteen Unit – 33.8% 20 to 49 Unit – 34.2% 50+ Unit – 15.7%
Median Income 2017 – $20,256 Equal to 5 (+1) / Else (0) In the 5th quintile.
% Open Space 18.77% Open Space Equal or greater than 15% (+1) / Less (0)
Proximity to Transit 6 stops, 4th quintile. Equal or less than 4th quintile (+1) / More (0)
Vacancy rates Percentage of total housing units 10% or greater (+1) / Less (0) which are vacant that is 10% or greater. Calculated from the ACS 2012-2017 5 Year Estimates.
Concentration of Industrial Percentage land use designated as Greater than 30% (-1) / Less land industrial and manufacturing that (0) is 30% or greater. This would be to avoid a relocation that would send communities to areas with high concentrations of industrial uses.
Presence of publicly owned Percentage of land which is 15% or greater (+1) / Less (0) land completed under City or Public ownership (classified in MapPLUTO as C or O) that is 15% or greater.
Presence of Vacant Land Percentage land use designated as 15% or greater (+1) / Less (0) vacant land within the census tract that is 15% or greater.
46 Appendices
The spatial analysis returned 129 number of suitable census tracts.
However, a 67 of these parcels are located within the flood hazard layer, making them less suitable for relocation of people out of harm’s way. 5 of these parcels are located in western Staten Island, which might have less appeal for those who would need proximity to jobs closer to the inner city.
47 Appendices
In addition, 97 of the 129 parcels identified for suitable relocation are other CoCs. This may lead the displacement of other vulnerable populations if relocation to these sites are acted upon.
Only 28 parcels are suitable that do not overlap with either a CoC or the combined flood hazard layer.
48 Appendices
Site 2: Census Tract 1072.01, Broad Channel, Queens NYC
Image 14 Census tract located within Broad Channel neighborhood in Queens, NYC with 100% of its buildings within the flood hazard zone
This census tract is not a CoC, but 100% of its refused to offer titles to private individuals for buildings are within the combined flood hazard over 40 years in hopes to change the land use of zone. The entire census tract represents the the city but were met with resistance. Following neighborhood of Broad Channel, which has a Hurricane Sandy in 2012, Broad Channel was population of around 2000 and is majority evacuated and properties, power grids and white (96%). Using the Opportunity Atlas, a water lines were substantially recent news article showcased that Broad affected(Kensinger, 2017; Ortiz & Crugnale, Channel is an area where almost 50% of 34-40 2017). year olds have stay within the neighborhood since childhood, a reminder of the strong If Broad Channel residents in this tract were to history of fighting for the right to move, where would they be able to find similar remain(Trangle, 2018). Broad Channel was neighborhood characteristics elsewhere in New previously privately-owned land that was leased York City? to individuals for housing and vacation homes. However, the City re-acquired it after the Here are the following thresholds for the private corporation went bankrupt in 1939 selected census tract: (NYC Parks, 2004). The City subsequently
49 Appendices
Suitability Factor Neighborhood Statistic Threshold for model
Housing tenure Single Detached – 71.7% Equal or greater than 70% of Single-attached – 3.5% Single Detached unit (+1)/ Less Two Unit – 6.7% (0)/ Three to Four Unit – <1.4%
% Open Space 27.1% Open Space Equal or greater than 25% (+1) / Less
Proximity to Transit 6 stops, 4th quintile. Equal or less than 4th quintile (+1)/ / More
Median Income 2017 – $82,727 Equal to 2 (+1)/ / Else (0) In the 2nd quintile.
Vacancy rates Percentage of total housing units Equal or greater than 15% (+1)/ which are vacant that is 10% or / Less (0) greater. Calculated from the ACS 2012-2017 5 Year Estimates.
Concentration of Industrial Percentage land use designated as Greater than 30% (+1)/ / Less land industrial and manufacturing that (0) is 30% or greater. This would be to avoid a relocation that would send communities to areas with high concentrations of industrial uses.
Presence of publicly owned Percentage of land which is 15% or greater (+1)/ / Less (0) land completed under City or Public ownership (classified in MapPLUTO as C or O) that is 15% or greater.
Presence of Vacant Land Percentage land use designated as 15% or greater (+1)/ / Less (0) vacant land within the census tract that is 15% or greater.
50 Appendices
The spatial analysis returned 23 suitable census tracts, significantly fewer parcels than the previous. This may be due to a variety of reasons, such as a 70% threshold for single family detached homes. This threshold is also more easily accomplished on Staten island, locating a number of parcels in vulnerable areas. 16 of these parcels are located within the flood hazard layer, making them less suitable for relocation of people out of harm’s way.
51 Appendices
In addition, a 11 CoCs are identified as areas for suitable relocation which may lead the displacement of vulnerable populations if relocation to these areas are acted upon.
52 Appendices
Ultimately, there are only 3 parcels for Broad Channel that do not overlap with either a flood zone or a CoC.
53 Appendices
IV. Findings and Recommendations clear definition of retreat in order to evaluate its success. In order to compare across multiple This study assessed the literature, case studies managed retreat programs, this thesis proposed and conducted spatial analysis to better new critical considerations for measuring understand how managed retreat as it is managed retreat programs. These components currently evaluated and how managing retreat include: identification of scale; timing of can create more just outcomes. The following implementation; end uses of land; receiving are a summary of findings and location of people; and the enabling parties and recommendations. actors. intended benefits of managed retreat benefits Finding 2) Relocation is missing an answer to are not being achieved because managed “where to?” retreat is ill-defined. Managed retreat is commonly understood as Managed retreat is meant to achieve a number the removal of assets and people from harm. of benefits, including first and foremost, the However, in the above assessment of coastal removal of people from harm. Other benefits managed retreat cases, the receiving location of from this adaptation strategy also includes the people is rarely identified in practice. With the reduction of burden on taxpayer dollars to exception of Isle de Jean Charles, cases at best maintain hard structures, the opportunity to give a vague description that preferences the provide floodable buffers and amenities and relocation of people to other areas of the restoring ecosystem habitats. However, through neighborhood. The dearth of attention given on literature and case study analysis, this thesis has where people who participate in managed shown that the benefits of managed retreat are retreat programs speaks volumes to the not accruing in the ways we would like them to negligence of existing programs in regards to be as managed retreat is implemented at the their ability to address justice outcomes. Future household or parcel by parcel scale (Appendix managed retreat programs should take B) relocation into consideration when discussing managed retreat possibilities with local Finding 1 Clearer definitions of managed vulnerable communities. retreat are necessary to compare program success Only by knowing ‘where to’ can we avoid re- exposing vulnerable communities or making Since there is disagreement on what managed other people more vulnerable. retreat is, it is nearly impossible to compare outcomes, whether they be successes or failures. Finding 3) Future uses of land is usually open Cities, if engaging in a managed retreat strategy space – even if that strategy does not explicitly mention the word “retreat” – should establish a
54 Appendices
Through the case study and typology analysis, determination for marginalized populations. even household scale retreat generally dictates a The practitioners and researchers who support policy that returns residential land to park, managed retreat, though recognizing injustice beach or open space. While this is generally and inequity in retreat, have focused on considered beneficial for communities, outcome-oriented approaches rather than just especially in marginalized communities where process. Equity and justice focus on immediate open space is lower in quantity and quality, forces placed on a community and are about there may be challenges. For one, individual present-oriented actions, whereas the risks of scaled interventions that make up the majority and proposals for managed retreat have been of retreat strategies do not guarantee the right identified as long-term inevitabilities, future- configuration of land to construct optimal open oriented goals, and set states. Managed retreat is spaces. Secondly, this emphasis on the understood through individual and household construction of open spaces such as parks and scaled mechanisms, where justice and equity other public amenities may have unintended focus on collective and systemic liberation. consequences. While there is a value transfer to the properties that now benefit from these new Finding 4) A just process is at the core of forms of amenities, the investment into green managing retreat space may raise property values and either become another source of displacement for Justice is about a process of transformational residents or incentivize more residents to move change that gives agency, power, and self- into the area. determination to marginalized populations. The research and city discussions around managed Managed retreat is not popular amongst retreat, though recognizing injustice and municipalities because of property tax revenue inequity in general, have been focused on the decreases, often leading to redevelopment of challenges and barriers to reaching outcomes flood-damaged areas, especially where property rather than a process that is just and legitimate values are high. Community-driven processes in order to achieve equity. Managed retreat, may help to mitigate the likelihood of therefore, should not be a management of redevelopment in vulnerable areas. policy tools, but the management of a just process to achieve equitable outcomes. This can Achieving equity requires a conceptual shift in be done by planners through facilitating an planning practice from ‘managed retreat’ to anticipatory engagement process centered on ‘managing’ retreat designing from the margins and utilizing deep democracy principles. Managed retreat in As urban practitioners, we should recognize planning practice should focus on processes that the language of “managed retreat” is with four critical components that unfold to inherently at odds with justice and equity. create the greatest buy in. Justice is about a process of transformational change that gives agency, power, and self-
55 Appendices
1) How did we get here? Planners, at the center. Community members validate the planning documents and the ethos rules of engagement to achieve justice. create at public meetings or group discussions are explicit in recognizing The future-oriented outcomes of managed the historic neglect and/or systemic retreat are aligned with distributional justice. pressures that exist for vulnerable Future oriented processes offer an opportunity populations that are affected. for communities to derive a life-enhancing 2) Where are we? Planners pursuing a just future that they are a part of. process utilize tools that educate, engage and drive decision making from Finding 6) Managing retreat should be a community members. present-oriented opportunity 3) Where are we going? Planners pursuing a just process work with community Managed retreat is considered a long-term members to design the vision and solution and generally not something that needs metrics of success. to be addressed currently. However, justice 4) How long will it take to get there? These addresses the forces placed on a community and questions take time to answer. All are about present-oriented actions. Managed processes must allow ample time for the retreat, currently, is something that is done onto creation of legitimate outcomes. residents as opposed to something they have influence over. Engaging in managing retreat is Finding 5) Managing retreat should be situated about creating agency in the present, before in three time scales: past, present and future disaster strikes and choices are limited. Anticipatory managed retreat prior to disaster is In order to achieve greater capacity for also an opportunity to avoid rushed recovery adaptation and create a more just process, processes that may allow people at the margins managing retreat requires engagement with to fall through the cracks without a thoughtful three time scales. To achieve recognitional engagement process. Likewise, planners and justice, managing retreat must acknowledge policy makers should see the managing retreat consistently the historic marginalization of process as an opportunity to address the communities of concern and systemic issues historical legacy of past unjust planning that have influenced decision making around a practices, provide information and increase given community. With an investment of time community awareness around climate risk, and and intention, communities may share their build trust with community groups. This is also understanding of the systems of power that an opportunity for planners to engage in have led a community to where it is today. building power among vulnerable groups, creating a collective ownership through Secondly, managing retreat should understand decision making over place and allowing a how to manage procedural justice with people community to manage themselves.
56 Appendices
Finding 7) Managing retreat must be about community scale, additional research is collective decision making, because the benefits necessary to draw significant conclusions. of managed retreat and justice are achieved in the collective The success of managing retreat is contingent on how well planning practice takes into There is synergy between the need for collective account differences in communities relocation in our understanding of managed retreat, and the need for collective liberation in Finding 8) Communities of Concern in New our understanding of justice. An emphasis on York City are located inland, but not collective visioning and power building may necessarily free from impacts result in greater buy-in, as witnessed in the Oakwood Beach case. Planning practice should In identifying the communities of concern build and create mechanisms to explore how to within New York City, an overall trend showed better manage collective capacity building and that the majority of CoCs were located inland collective decision making around property and and outside of the flood hazard zone. However, place. it is important to note the discrepancy between Manhattan and Staten Island with the other As mentioned in the literature review, scale is boroughs, where Manhattan and Staten Island’s important because it has a direct tie to the lower number of total CoCs also corresponded benefits accrued. It is important for with a higher concentration of CoCs in the governments to consider the scale of retreat, as flood hazard zone. Overall, however, this simple it will also dictate the scale of engagement and spatial analysis highlights some key findings: a) the mechanisms needed achieve success. For not all CoCs are located in the flood hazard example, at the individual scale, a buyout zone, b) some CoCs are located in the flood program could result in a piecemeal retreat hazard zone, and c) some communities that are where only some parcels are removed, while not CoCs are located in flood zones. As a result, others remain in place. Public infrastructure managing retreat processes may not necessarily such as roads, sewage, and electricity lines engage with only marginalized communities, would also continue to be serviced as residents but it does not take away that managing retreat who chose to remain in the area would continue must engage with unique characteristics of the to require access. Therefore, without dictating a population that is intended to be relocated. scale, the benefits of a larger scale managed retreat may not manifest. Scale is important Finding 9) The relocation of communities left because it transfers responsibility from the unplanned may have adverse effects individual homeowner to the collective, creating opportunities for shared power and In the relocation suitability analysis, the preservation of community ties. However, since findings showed a couple of results. For one, the few managed retreat programs have relocation of the CoC in Canarsie was more implemented managed retreat programs at the likely to find a suitable relocation in another
57 Appendices tract that was also identified as a CoC. The findings also showed a number of suitable parcels for both studied tracts were located either in the flood hazard layer or within another CoC.
One goal of the RSI to establish similarity across census tracts. One benefit of this type of analysis is to assess where might people relocate to individually based on similar characteristics of the neighborhood. Similar to the case of Oakwood Beach or Miami, the relocation of people might be to other flood zones or other communities of concern as shown through this analysis.
58 Appendices
V. Limitations and Further Research A focus on interviewing residents in the two locations identified in the RSI may also have This study of managed retreat has been difficult, provided useful insight into issues, challenges as managed retreat is a relatively nascent field and hopes that people may have regarding flood that lacks strong academic research. However, vulnerability and the prospect of relocation. managed retreat is increasingly becoming a strategic tool for coastal cities that are adapting Challenge in case studies to the impacts of climate change and sea level As noted in this thesis, the challenge of justice rise, and the field shows promise for future in climate adaptation planning, planning in research on the topic. Some of the challenges of general and especially in the case of managed his research are outlined below. retreat, must be hyper-localized. The case studies were chosen to provide a breadth of Timing of managed retreat cases understanding of managed retreat strategies and The first limitation was the understanding of how they were performing in terms of justice. timing and implementation of managed retreat This geographically dispersed analysis, while mechanisms due to a short time frame (i.e. it providing sufficient information for framing, was too soon to tell in most cases). This did not provide the specificity that is needed to research was not able to assess effectively the gain implementable insights about justice in a intended timing of each tool within the case specified place. study research. For many case studies, tools had been implemented very recently it is unclear if Relocation Suitability Index as first drafts there would be an expansion of the program or The proposed spatial analysis for relocation information regarding how the tool was suitability does not come without limitations. effective. Therefore, some of the cases relied on Originally, the index was to be based solely on language indicated in the plans to establish property value. However, the task was daunting which time frame it is meant to be as the literature regarding factors that affect accomplished in. Therefore, future research housing values identified a multitude of could address this gap – longitudinal studies variables to control for that was too complex that build an understanding of how managed while failing to address my main question. retreat tools may evolve, expand, fail or change as results are revealed to government agencies. The model was also limited because of the lack of other examples around relocation suitability. Ground truthing through interviews The factors that were identified were based off No interviews were conducted for this thesis, other RSI examples, as well as drawn from other which may have provided an opportunity to sources of literature regarding housing choice. ground truth the ideas around justice and the These factors should be better attuned to take tools that were proposed to implement just into account New York characteristics. process.
59 Appendices
The index used binary due as opposed to a Relocation to where? gradient of values, meaning that the model loses There are few studies that examine where nuances for values that may be similar to the vulnerable populations go following a buyout or threshold for comparison, but below. other managed retreat strategy in comparison to their less vulnerable counterparts. Without an The RSI also considers the similarity of census understanding of where populations are going, tracts as opposed to tracts that have potential we are unable to understand if current policies factors that provide an opportunity for residents are working to remove people from harm and to move to. In short, this index is not we are unable to care for those who have little aspirational and does not take advantage of the choice. opportunity that relocation proposes. Geographically specific and adaptable Further, the agglomeration of data into census engagement practice tracts provides artificial boundaries for A core idea in this thesis is process. While this “community,” which is perhaps something that thesis mentions the use of engagement tools, should be defined by the community. there is a wealth of opportunity to expand on how to ask these difficult questions that truly More generally, relocation suitability must be translate values into future visions. These highly attuned to the community it is working questions are difficult to create, especially in a for. A fuller assessment of community values way that can be adapted into different contexts. about their current neighborhood, perhaps An exploration and development of these tools through engagement tools and other facets of a is necessary to engage in managing retreat. just process, would be extremely valuable in developing the RSI further. Further iteration for the Relocation Suitability Index VI. Further Research The RSI proposed is a first step in Measuring and evaluating managed retreat understanding what challenges, limitations and In the initial phases of writing this thesis, the opportunities communities may have in the inability to establish a lack of consensus in the appropriate relocation of people. As outlined in literature for how to measure and evaluate the the previous section, the proposed RSI is a first success of managed retreat really stood out to draft that can and should be built upon in order me. While this thesis attempts to propose a to understand the best model that can capture methodology, further research and longitudinal ideas of suitability that change from community research on the benefits and successes of to community. This can include cultural assets, managed retreat would be beneficial in the presence of racial diversity, access to good comparing cases and creating best practices. schools or proximity to child care.
60 Appendices
VII. Conclusion
The questions “should we stay or should we go” and “which is more just?” is not truly the question that we, as planners, need to answer for managed retreat. Through this exercise, this thesis states that the re-conceptualization of managed retreat is an opportunity to align the languages of justice and the language of retreat. A process that utilizes builds power, create agency and focuses on deep democracy to create justice is the focus of managing retreat.
The idea of managing retreat identifies the critical components that aligns the goals of managed retreat and the goals of justice:
Managing retreat is not about “should we stay or should we go,” it is about asking “how did we get here,” “what is our aspirational future,” and “what is the best way to get there.” As for the answers? That is for planners and their communities to create together.
61 Appendices
Appendix A: Chapter I Supplementary Appendix Table 1: Varying definitions of managed retreat Definition Author Distinctions “Retreat, which involves no attempt to protect the IPCC, 2014 (ref • Protection of land, ecosystems land from the sea; in an extreme case, the coastal Dronkers et al., 1990) • Avoidance of risk/hazard area is abandoned…. Managed retreat generally is • Absence of people designed to avoid hazards and prevent ecosystems from being squeezed between development and the advancing sea.”
“…relocation of people and assets at risk” (Esteves, 2014) • Involves relocation • Involves people • Difference between retreat and realignment • Avoidance of risk/hazard
“…the relocation of homes and infrastructure (Alexander et al., 2012) • Involves relocation under threat from coastal flooding…” • Public (infrastructure) and private (homes) assets • Absence of people • Avoidance of risk/hazard “…the strategic relocation of structures or (Hino et al., 2017) • Involves relocation abandonment of land to manage natural hazard • A “deliberate intervention” risk.” requiring an implementing party • Involves the abandonment of land or relocation of assets • Absence of people • Avoidance of risk/hazard “…managed retreat is the application of coastal (Neal et al., 2017) • Removal of current development zone management and mitigation tools designed • Prevention of future development to move existing and planned development out of • Avoidance of risk/hazard the path of both short- and long-term coastal • Recognition of other tools needed hazards.” to assist relocation or deconstruction “Retreat removes human activity from the hazard (Kirshen, Knee, & Ruth, • Centering of people area which generally is accomplished by 2008) • Focuses on abandonment of land abandoning land as the sea rises.” “…increasingly refers to the relocation of people (Koslov, 2016) • Involves relocation to higher ground and associated efforts to plan • Centering of people and manage that movement… unbuilding land • Removal of current development and returning it to nature in perpetuity.”
62 Appendices
• Returning land to nature in perpetuity • Recognition of other tools needed to assist relocation or deconstruction “This approach uses public policies, including (Peter Plastrik & • Specifically references both public regulations, investments, and incentives to Cleveland, 2019) (government) and private (market) remove existing development—buildings, approaches infrastructure, entire neighborhoods—over time • Removal of current development and prevent future development in parts of the • Prevention of future development city that cannot, should not, or will not be • Condition that it should be in areas armored or accommodated for potentially with an absence of protection and devastating climate hazards.” accommodation • Avoidance of risk/hazard
The tools of managed retreat Table 2: Non-exhaustive list of policy tools commonly accepted as methods for managed retreat Method Management Enabling Party Description Abandonment Passive Unplanned Community / Allow the loss of land to erosion and Market / flooding. Government Downzoning Active Planned Government Limiting the development potential by reducing uses or density.
Transferable Development Active Planned Government Create a market for development Credits / Transferable rights that allows landowners in more Development Rights vulnerable areas to sell development rights to those in low risk areas. Setbacks (fixed and Active Planned Government Requires that parts of the parcel are rolling) undeveloped, with development located a certain distance from risk dictated by a line of reference (ex. from high tide line). Fixed setbacks are non- adjustable whereas rolling setbacks are adjusted from time to time. Conservation Easements Active Planned Government Permanent limitations or conditions on development on a property which will be binding in perpetuity for all future landowners. Property owners may receive tax deductions or other benefits. Rolling easements are adjusted as shores or risks move closer to assets and people.
63 Appendices
Acquisitions / Buyouts Active Planned Government The obtainment of land which is then placed in the public trust in vulnerable areas that is converted to protect remaining infrastructure and buildings. Usually voluntary selling of land. Conditional Development Active Planned Government Allow development with conditions / Exactions that promote retreat or future retreat (ex. new development could occur if there is no hard protection built and a setback). These conditions are known as “exactions.” Building and Rebuilding Active Planned Government Strict design and construction Restrictions guidelines for development in high risk areas. When homes are damaged or destroyed in disasters, limit or prohibit what can be rebuilt, when it can be rebuilt and how many times it can be rebuilt. This can include setting a time period following disasters where there is a moratorium on development in order to assess and plan. Comdemnation / Eminent Active Planned Government Acquisition method where Domain governments enact policy that declare properties that are too close to the shore and unsafe for habitation to obtain land. Usually results in a larger cost to obtain the land. (Dronkers et al., 1990)
The forces that guide managed retreat
The 2019 report “Can It Happen Here? Improving the Prospect for Managed Retreat by US Cities” provides a well-defined case for the forces that guide retreat. The authors argue that retreat is bound to happen, and it will happen in three different ways: disaster driven, market driven, or planned. While this is an important text in making the case for action on managed retreat policy, it also excludes the possibility of community-driven retreat, which is an essential element of ensuring a justice process. These forces also intersect and interact, with some forces enabling others or hindering others. For example, a market retreat could lead to the potential action of anticipatory / planned retreat or, more commonly, disaster-driven retreat in the short-term leads to anticipatory /planned retreat for the long term.
64 Appendices
The differences in forces are outlined below.
1) Disaster Driven / Reactionary Retreat
Buyout programs and land acquisition through FEMA and HUD-CDBG funds are well-studied and well-known tools for managed retreat in the US. In cities, a disaster driven retreat would occur following an intense hurricane, wildfire, tsunami or other climate induced natural event. In this scenario, buildings and infrastructure are damaged and destroyed. As a result, residents are displaced temporarily or permanently to other parts of their city or country. As a response, governments at the city, state and federal level may enact recovery programs that assess damage and future risk and employ a buyout or acquisition program to mitigate future hazards.
Disaster driven retreat through buyouts is the most commonly understood form of retreat in the US, but there are a number of pitfalls associated with this type of retreat. For one, this is a financially and emotionally exhausting planning process that is rushed and hurried to best accommodate impacted citizens. Secondly, even when the funding is guaranteed there is a temporal disconnect between the time of disaster and receiving the funds for the program. Not only is the process of applying for funds hard to navigate for residents, the in-between waiting time can often be a large burden on those displaced and leave many stranded in unsafe homes or relying on personal relationships to access housing options.
2) Community Managed Retreat
Community managed retreat represents a grassroots approach to retreat, usually post disaster. In this scenario, community members organizing and advocating for managed retreat methods to be enacted in their neighborhood such as relocation assistance, buyouts or incentives. This type of retreat might be considered more successful and equitable, as residents are in greater consensus about the retreat. This means the retreat may be more successful and perceived as more just. In the case of Oakwood Beach, Staten Island – New York State didn’t offer to buy out the neighborhood until the organizing group lobbied both the City and the Governor for support. The majority of the original 165 homes in the neighbourhood accepted the buyout and now, less than a dozen remains, indicating that the process was legitimate and fulfilled the needs as set out by the original lobby. The success of the Foxbeach managed retreat strategy has been attributed to the social make-up of the community and the community leadership in the process (Rush, 2015; CBI 2017).
3) Market Driven Retreat
Another type of retreat more recently observed is market-driven retreat. In 2018, Keenan et al’s study showed that property values in Miami-Dade County are diverging based on home elevation, with lower elevation homes appreciating at a lower rate than those at higher elevation. This was an unprecedented
65 Appendices
study that documented the first signs of climate change impacts in the real estate market. It is representative of a market driven retreat, where the fear regarding financial losses accelerates disinvestment and drives the abandonment of property, in risky areas and increased investment in less risky areas. In the past year, numerous articles have been written about coastal real estate markets in high risk areas across the country facing similar risks. In Revere, MA an article outlines the slow turnover rates of floodplain properties in a booming real estate market. In February 2019, First Street Foundation released a report detailing the loss of property value due to sea level rise in Ocean City, New Jersey to be at an upwards of $530 million and $16 billion for the Eastern seaboard.
Market driven retreat is emerging as potentially one of the fastest drivers of climate change adaptation, with private actors making financially sound investments in safer areas. A concern that has emerged out of this literature is the question of where people will relocate to, if they are moving out of risky areas. The term “climate gentrification” has become a larger topic of discussion, which acknowledges the potential for areas with lower vulnerability to face pressures of investment, driving up housing costs and displacing people (Keenan, Hill, & Gumber, 2018).In addition, low-income and minority populations are also vulnerable to financial disaster. The rapid disinvestment in at- risk areas will exacerbate existing financial stressors if it becomes necessary to relocate due to climate risk, the burden of increased flood premium on their housing security or the need to find another job due to the loss of businesses in an area.
4) Anticipatory / Planned Retreat
Anticipatory retreat is the enactment of managed retreat policies “outside of the context of disaster” (Peter Plastrik & Cleveland, 2019). This is the intentional planning and relocation of assets and people in anticipation of climate impacts. To date, there are no clear examples of anticipatory retreat without a prior disaster acting as a driving force. However, there are potential benefits and challenges for this type of approach. Most importantly, an anticipatory retreat program would prevent future damages and loss of life in the event of a disaster. This type of retreat also “allows for more flexible and creative ways of
66 Appendices funding and operationalizing buyouts” (Peter Plastrik & Cleveland, 2019) decreasing the need for cities to rely on federal funding. However, an important social challenge of this type of retreat is overcoming uncertainty of risk. Regardless of resources, people generally are not motivated by risk enough to abandon the neighborhoods and homes they live in (Atreya et al., 2013; Hino et al., 2017; Niven & Bardsley, 2013). Further, it is also challenging to counteract the temporal discounting of risk and trade their homes for a disaster that may never occur. Lastly, this type of retreat requires adequate time to implement a large and coordinated plan for retreat in the region, as well as for managing community engagement processes that are necessary to increase trust and adoption. This type of process could take years or longer.
67 Appendices
Appendix B: Case Studies and Typologies
Isle de Jean Charles, Louisiana Population affected: 80 Population of area: 80 Number of properties: 27 Enabling Party: HUD Funded, State managed project
Image 15 Source: Sailors for the Sea.org
Since 1955, Isle de Jean Charles, Louisiana has lost all but 2% of its land and is now a strip that measures a mere 320 acres due to extensive land loss from subsidence, sea level rise, and erosion. Home to 27 households from the Biloxi-Chitimacha-Choctaw tribe, the island community has been working since the 2000s to engage in a managed retreat strategy – a deliberate and planned migration to higher ground, with an intent to continue the community’s history, practices and culture. In 2014, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced the Natural Disaster Resilience Competition, which enabled any state that experienced a natural disaster to apply for a portion of a $1 billion-dollar pool of funding. However, long before the grant, land erosion, coastal storms and housing costs at Isle de Jean Charles forced displacement of over 50 families from the island. The Isle de Jean Charles tribe had already been engaged in a planning process with the help of local non-profits to establish a resettlement strategy which identified a site 40 miles north in Shreiver, Louisiana(Peterson, 2015). There was a large focus of the project to enable the economic development, sustained cultural practices of the community for future generations, reunification of the tribe and access to the ancestral land at Isle de Jean Charles. This was a plan the State of Louisiana adopted in 2014 to apply for the competition and in 2016, the State
68 Appendices
received $48.3 million dollars to relocate the Biloxi-Chitimacha-Choctaw tribe of Isle de Jean Charles. As of January 2018, the State announced that it would continue the resettlement strategy even as the Isle de Jean Charles tribe officially turned down the funds to relocate as the State’s change in the goals and objectives of the plan did not fit with the original application.
Miami, Florida Population affected: Unclear Population of area: 463,347 (Miami) Number of properties: Unclear Enabling Party: Coastal Real Estate Market
Recent studies have shown that property values on the coast are being affected by climate change impacts. In 2018, Keenan et al. identified that in Miami-Dade County, elevation significantly impacted the rate of appreciation of property values since 2000. First Street Foundation found a cumulative loss in property values in Miami Beach, Florida between 2005 – 2017 to be over 300 million dollars. This has spurred conversation around where populations on the coasts are moving to, if property value incentives and risk to climate change are driving homeowners away. Activists in Little Haiti, a community in high elevation areas, have coined the term “climate gentrification” to identify the compounding real estate and housing pressures experienced in their neighborhoods as a result of sea level rise in Miami Beach. Climate gentrification is known as a phenomenon that predicts that a rise in property values, rents and other indicators of housing costs in low risk, high elevation areas are a result of a decrease in property values on nearby coastal, high risk areas. Despite these forces, Miami’s coastal real estate market is still booming, and an anticipatory retreat strategy is not yet a part of the City and County’s plan.
Revere, MA Population affected: Unclear Population of area: 80 Number of properties: Unclear Enabling Party: Coastal Real Estate Market
In 2018, a Boston Globe article covered the impact of coastal storms on the real estate market in Quincy and Revere. Real estate brokers noted the sale of homes closer the coast, with higher flood insurance premiums and greater exposure to storms, sold for almost 10% below the asking price and took over two months in an otherwise hot market that would normally see sales turnover in a matter of days. This phenomenon points to a shift in where residents are choosing to live and another indicator of ‘climate gentrification.’
Staten Island, New York (Oakwood Beach) Population affected: Unclear
69 Appendices
Population of area: 3100 Number of properties affected: 321 Enabling Party: State Government
Following Hurricanes Irene and Sandy in 2012, the community of Foxbeach on Staten Island was one of the hardest hit neighborhoods in the Northeast (CBI, 2017). In the weeks post-Sandy, members of an already existing group of organizers worked hard to gather attendance to discuss recovery options at a neighborhood meeting. It was at this initial meeting that the idea of a buyout process was proposed, and most of the 200 attendees expressed support for relocation. Out of this action was formed the Oakwood Beach Buyout Committee which met monthly, focused on lobbying political actors in realizing buyouts for the 27 blocks that is Foxbeach within the town of Oakwood Beach. The committee lobbied the State of New York for the creation of a buyout program for their community. Through the New York Rising Buyout and Acquisition program, the area was designated an Enhanced Buyout Zone which included a 10% bonus on their pre-storm property value if they relocated and also an additional 5% if they stayed in New York City. They also negotiated that following the buyout program, that the properties would be strictly open space as an incentive for homeowners to accept a buyout. As of today, 300 of the 321 properties in the buyout zone have been acquired. However, in 2017, McGhee shows that in an analysis of where residents had relocated to, the majority (68%) moved to areas that were in floodplains. This case study is an example of retreat that was managed first by residents and not by governments, a success in terms of achieving legitimacy in outcomes, and also an example of how the ill-defined nature of managed retreat policies fail to achieve the benefits of retreat.
70 Appendices
Queens, New York (Broad Channel) Population affected: 2500 Population of area: 2500 Number of properties affected: 1000 Enabling Party: City Government
Image 12: New York Department of City Planning
In 2017, the Department of City Planning created a Special Coastal Risk District to address coastal areas in the city that were facing extreme and increasing flood risk. The purpose of the special district is to modify the zoning code in order to reduce future development from current allowances to low-density, one- or two-family detached homes. Broad Channel was identified a site, with the entirety of the neighborhood included in the district. Despite the entirety of the neighborhood within the current floodplain and projections of daily flooding as soon as 2028, this method allows continued development and inhabitation of at-risk areas.
Queens, New York (Edgemere)
71 Appendices
Population affected: Undetermined yet Population of area: 6600 Number of properties affected: Undetermined yet Enabling Party: City Government (Housing Recovery Office, Office of Housing Preservation and Development)
Image 13: NYC HPD
Edgemere located in the Rockaways, a barrier island, susceptible to frequent flooding and storm events. After extensive damage from Hurricane Sandy, the city worked to produce a new community plan – Resilient Edgemere. In the plan, one of the resiliency measures is to create a Hazard Mitigation Zone where Build it Back funds would be limited to buyout programs. The relocation of homes is intended to be to less vulnerable areas of Edgemere, outside of the Hazard Mitigation Zone and further inland if possible.
72 Appendices
East Hampton, NY Population affected: N/A Population of area: 22,000 Number of properties affected: N/A Enabling Party: Town Government
East Hampton is a coastal town in Long Island and has long accepted the prevailing forces of the ocean on its shores and developed a Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan in the 1990s with a focus on coastal erosion and monitoring. In 2006, the Town adopted a Local Erosion Law and established a Coastal Erosion Overlay District to protect the town from extensive beach loss through setbacks and a ban on hard protective structures. The district designated four zones, three among which ban the construction of erosion control structures (e.g., berms, seawalls) unless for emergencies. Reconfiguration is allowed for existing structures, but only if the result is decrease in size or removal and only by permit. East Hampton’s strict code enables removes structures and pushes for assets to be relocated further from the shore
Kauai, HI Population affected: N/A Population of area: 75,000 Number of properties affected: N/A Enabling Party: County Government
Kauai is an island in the State of Hawaii that is largely dependent on the economic vitality on its shorefronts and at risk of coastal erosion and sea level rise. In 2014, the County of Kauai adopted a zoning ordinance to create one of the country’s most progressive coastal setback requirements that went above and beyond state requirements. Using studies conducted on Kauai, the County adopted a rate- based setback system that was matched to the rate of erosion for specific areas of the county. These setbacks would adapt over time as the mean tide line would rise by taking into account the rate of erosion.
Pacifica, California Population affected: N/A Population of area: 40,000 Number of properties affected: 20 Enabling Party: City Government
Pacifica is located on cliffs, south of San Francisco facing the Pacific Ocean. In recent years, the community has faced the consequences of king tides, sea level rise and extreme storms. Property on the coasts faced rapid erosion, and in 2016, El Niño storms and powerful waves eroded the cliff rapidly,
73 Appendices
forcing the City of Pacifica to declare an emergency and condemn 20 properties along the cliff’s edge. Condemnation has been used many times in Pacifica’s history, and is one method to remove people and assets from harm’s way. After owners and residents leave their homes, homes are demolished before the cliff erodes, taking the home with it.
Ocean City, Maryland Population affected: N/A Population of area: 7000 Number of properties affected: N/A Enabling Party: Town Government
Ocean City is a coastal community at high risk for inundation, storm damage and flooding from climate change impacts. Since the early 70’s, the Town has enforced a strict “build to” line for existing and future development. To control for properties past the build-to line, city officials contemplated condemnation but didn’t have the resources to fund such an initiative. Thus, the Town created a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program, designating some areas as “send” zones where development rights could be moved from past and “receive” zones where development rights could be sent to. Property owners were incentivized to us TDR, as they were given density bonuses in the designated receive zones.
74 Appendices
Case Study Analysis: Comparing the success of current managed retreat programs In this section, a case study analysis is conducted on existing managed retreat programs. The analysis asks whether or not the programs accrue the benefits of managed retreat. Part I will overview the case studies of coastal and riverine managed retreat referenced within the literature and that have begun or completed implementation. Secondly, each case study is assessed against the critical components identified through the literature review.
1. Tool a. Which policy tools of managed retreat were used in this case study? Is it active (planned) or passive (unplanned)? 2. Driving Force a. Which force is understood to be the driver of implementing the tool? i. Disaster Driven / Reactionary, Community, Market, Anticipatory / Planned 3. Definition of Retreat a. What is the underlying understanding of managed retreat? 4. Enabling Party a. Who was the primary decision maker that enabled the tool to be implemented? 5. Scale a. At which scale is the tool affecting change? i. Individual / Household, Neighborhood / Community, District 6. Timing a. What time frame is the tool meant to be implemented for? i. Short term (1-5 years), Medium term (5-20 years), Long term (20+ years) 7. End Use of Land a. What is the plan for the land after the tool is implemented? 8. Receiving Location of people a. Where does the tool specify a location for people or assets to be moved to? 9. Actors a. Who is involved in the tool’s implementation?
Following this analysis, the case studies are then categorized as typologies and assessed against measures of retreat benefits and justice outcomes. The thresholds for this criterion include:
Retreat Benefits
• People are removed from risk in perpetuity o Does the typology’s end use of land result in the immediate, transitional and long-term removal of people from inhabiting that land? • Removes non-floodable public infrastructure
75 Appendices
o Does the typology explicitly indicate the removal of non-floodable and publicly owned infrastructure that would be costly to maintain and repair? This includes utilities (e.g. gas, water, electric) and built protection (e.g. seawalls, floodgates) • Natural buffers or ‘soft’ protection created o Was an explicit conversion to ‘soft’ infrastructure –approaches to protection such as wetlands, marshes or other ecological interventions – designated as the end use of the land? Is the intervention at a large enough scale to create that protection? • Floodable public amenities created o Was an explicit conversion into a park, beach or open space designated as the end use of the land? Is the intervention at a large enough scale to create that protection? Return to nature would also fit into this category. • All businesses relocated o Does the typology enable all businesses to relocate as dictated through the end uses of the land or scale of intervention?
Justice Outcomes • Explicit recognition o Are there documents or processes that provided an explicit recognition of the history in the area? • Use of tools for co-creation and shared ownership o Are there documents that indicate the tools and processes that enabled residents to learn and make decisions? • Vision and metrics decided by community o Are there documents that indicate how engagement processes led to a community driven vision and community driven definitions for success? • Unhurried Engagement Process o Are there documents that indicate that the length of time for intervention was greater than 18 months?
76 Case Study analysis against the critical components of managed retreat:
-
Actors
Department of City Planning
Tribes in Terrebonne Parish, local local non Parish, Terrebonne in Tribes profits, state offices renters realtors, homebuyers, Homeowners, renters realtors, homebuyers, Homeowners, City, York New Foxbeach neighborhood, York NewState York New neighborhood, Channel Broad City Edgemere neighborhood, YorkNew City Recovery) Housing Preservation, (Housing districts coastal Hampton, Town of East parcels coastal government, County Individual City, governments, state homeowners receiving and transfer Government, City zones
studied
People Receiving Receiving Location of Location of Schreiver, LA; built new development High elevation areas To be To be studied To be studied Inland to City other owned properties. No relocation. No relocation. To be studied. Designated receive zones.
End Use of Land For use of existing owners until until owners existing of use For accretion(abandonment). and assets inhabitation, Continued people remain in place and assets inhabitation, Continued people remain in place in trust public Land the in held perpetuity as natural space and assets inhabitation, Continued people remain in place protection, build City to by Acquired access waterfront or spaces open built while can be No protection further existing of maintenance repair and structures is permitted. built. can be No protection further protection natural or Abandonment perpetuity. in easement Conservation
term term term term term Timing term term term term term ------Long Short Short Short Long Short Long Long Short Long
Scale Neighborhood Individual / Household Individual / Household Individual / and Household Neighborhood Individual / and Household District Individual / and Household District Individual / and Household District Individual / and Household County Individual / Household Individual / and Household District
Government Enabling Party Federally (HUD) (HUD) Federally funded, State sponsored Estate Real Coastal Market Estate Real Coastal Market StateGovernment Government City Government City Town Government County Government, City StateGovernment Government City - -
to damage and and damage to
Definition of Retreat
Relocation of whole community community Relocation of whole of reconstruction and together assets Declineof property values in low in increase the and areas elevation property values in nearbyhigh areas elevation Decline turnover in rates in flood prone areas Relocation of whole neighborhood with a ban on future development exposure Limiting development future limiting time over Relocation of people high risk Removal of assets from areas. high risk Removal of assets from areas. Remove people from assets and areas exposed high risk Removal of assets from areas.
Driving Force Community Driven Market Driven Market Driven Community Driven Anticipatory / Planned Anticipatory / Planned Anticipatory / Planned Anticipatory / Planned Anticipatory / Planned Anticipatory / Planned
- with
Tool
ed. ed. based setback. based - Planned. HUD Planned. sponsored acquisition and relocation process Unplanned Unplanned Buyout. Planned. Zoning Planned. requiring district conditional development. Planned. and Acquisition relocation program. Zoning Planned. requiring district conditional development. Planned. Conditional development rate Plann / Condemnation Eminent domain Transfer Planned. of Development Rights
NY NY Case
Isle Jean Charles, de LA FL Miami, Revere, MA Staten Island, NY Beach) (Oakwood (Broad NY Queens, Channel) Queens, (Edgemere) East Hampton, NY HIKauai, CA Pacifica, MD City, Ocean
77 Case Study analysis against retreat benefits and justice outcomes:
profit)
- ocess
Unhurried Engagement Pr x X (non
profit) -
Vision and decided metrics community by x x x x X (non
JusticeOutcomes -
-
Use of tools Useoftools co for creationand shared ownership x x X (non profit)
profit) - Explicit Recognition X (non
All businesses relocated x X (intended) X (intended) x x
Floodable public are amenities created x x x x X (intended) X (intended)
Natural buffers buffers Natural soft or protection created x x Retreat Benefits Retreat
-
Removes non Removes floodable public infrastructure x x x X (intended) X (intended) x
People are removed from riskperpetuity in x x x x X x x x x x
CaseStudy CA Pacifica, East Hampton, NY NY Island, Staten (OakwoodBeach) Kauai, HI Ocean City, MD Queens, NY (Edgemere) Queens, NY Channel) (Broad Queens, NY (Edgemere) East Hampton, NY Miami, FL MA Revere, Jean de Isle LA Charles, Ocean City, MD
risk areas risk
Armoring
f. infrastructure Abandonment Abandonment
Redevelopment
a. a. Natural protection Natural c.
Continuedhabitation Continuedhabitation d. Softprotective natural /
Limited Redevelopment Limited Typology e. e.
d. c. OpenSpace Amenity Public / OpenSpace Amenity Public / Increasinginlow development
b. b. g. 1)Individual Household / 2)Neighborhood Community /
78 Appendices
Appendix C: Engagement Tools
Sample engagement tools courtesy of Eastie for Eastie.
1) Analog mapping of assets
2) Digital mapping of assets Online web map that identifies infrastructure and assets at risk:
Online web mapping that asks residents and participants to identify assets that are important to them. The platform is called CoMap, a product of Sasaki.
79 Appendices
3) Physical 3D modelling and decision making.
80 Appendices
Works Cited
Adger, W. N., Arnell, N. W., & Tompkins, E. L. (2005). Successful adaptation to climate change across
scales. Global Environmental Change, 15(2), 77–86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2004.12.005
Aldrich, D. P., & Kyota, E. (2017). Creating Community Resilience Through Elder-Led Physical and
Social Infrastructure. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, 11(01), 120–126.
https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2016.206
Alexander, K. S., Ryan, A., & Measham, T. G. (2012). Managed retreat of coastal communities:
understanding responses to projected sea level rise. Journal of Environmental Planning and
Management, 55(4), 409–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2011.604193
Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2015). Race Equity and Inclusion Action Guide: Embracing Equity: 7 Steps
to Advance and Embed Race Equity and Inclusion Within Your Organization. Retrieved May
22, 2019, from https://www.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/AECF_EmbracingEquity7Steps-2014.pdf
Arnold, C. A. (1998). Planning Milagros: Environmental justice and land use regulation. Denv. UL Rev.,
76, 1.
Atreya, A., Ferreira, S., & Kriesel, W. (2013). Forgetting the Flood? An Analysis of the Flood Risk
Discount over Time. Land Economics, 89(4), 577–596. https://doi.org/10.3368/le.89.4.577
Bukvic, A. (2015). Identifying gaps and inconsistencies in the use of relocation rhetoric: a prerequisite
for sound relocation policy and planning. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global
Change, 20(7), 1203–1209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-013-9532-5
81 Appendices
Byrne, K. (2019). Mexico Beach’s recovery from Hurricane Michael is “moving forward every day,” but
it will take years to prepare for tourism. Retrieved May 15, 2019, from
https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/as-michael-ravaged-communities-in-the-
florida-panhandle-face-lengthy-recovery-others-are-ready-for-spring-break-visitors/70007600
Callahan, C., DeShazo, J. R., & Kenyon, C. (2012). Pathways to Environmental Justice: Advancing a
Framework for Evaluation. 48.
CBI. (2017). Foxbeach Case Study.
Chen, D. W. (2018, January 7). In New York, Drawing Flood Maps Is a ‘Game of Inches.’ The New York
Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/07/nyregion/new-york-city-flood-
maps-fema.html
Chun, Y. (2015). Gentrification of Neighborhoods in New York City after Hurricane Sandy.
Clément, V., Rey-Valette, H., & Rulleau, B. (2015). Perceptions on equity and responsibility in coastal
zone policies. Ecological Economics, 119, 284–291.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.09.005
Climate Justice Alliance. (2019). Just Transition. Retrieved May 16, 2019, from
https://climatejusticealliance.org/just-transition/
Dasgupta, P. (2008). Discounting climate change. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 37(2–3), 141–169.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-008-9049-6
Dronkers, J., Gilbert, J. T. E., Butler, L. W., Carey, J. J., Campbell, J., James, E., … IPCC. (1990). Coastal
Zone Management.
82 Appendices
Eastie for Eastie. (2019). A Community Toolkit for Managed Retreat. Retrieved May 23, 2019, from
Eastie For Eastie website: https://eastieforeastie.com/
Esteves, L. S. (2014). Managed Realignment: A Viable Long-Term Coastal Management Strategy?
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9029-1
Fainstein, S. (2015). Resilience and Justice: Debates and Developments. International Journal of Urban
and Regional Research, 39(1), 157–167. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12186
First Street Foundation. (2019). Rising Seas Erode $15.8 Billion in Home Value from Maine to
Mississippi. Retrieved May 16, 2019, from https://firststreet.org/press/rising-seas-erode-15-8-
billion-in-home-value-from-maine-to-mississippi/
Foster, S., Leichenko, R., Nguyen, K. H., Blake, R., Kunreuther, H., Madajewicz, M., … Ravenborg, D.
(2019). New York City Panel on Climate Change 2019 Report Chapter 6: Community-Based
Assessments of Adaptation and Equity. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1439(1),
126–173. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.14009
Garrison, J., & Huxman, T. (in review). A tale of two suburbias:turning up the heat in Southern
California’s flammable wildland-urban interface.
Geller, A. M., Breville, M., Eisenhauer, E., Sykes, K., Fulk, F., Quackenboss, J., … Williams, K. (2016).
Environmental Justice Research Roadmap. 70.
Gonzalez, R. (2017). COMMUNITY-DRIVEN CLIMATE RESILIENCE PLANNING: A FRAMEWORK,
VERSION 2.0. 64.
83 Appendices
Guidi, R. (2018, October 15). Can a California town move back from the sea? Retrieved May 23, 2019,
from https://www.hcn.org/issues/50.17/climate-change-can-a-california-town-move-back-
from-the-sea-imperial-beach
Harman, B. P., Heyenga, S., Taylor, B. M., & Fletcher, C. S. (2015). Global Lessons for Adapting Coastal
Communities to Protect against Storm Surge Inundation. Journal of Coastal Research, 314, 790–
801. https://doi.org/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-13-00095.1
Hino, M., Field, C. B., & Mach, K. J. (2017). Managed retreat as a response to natural hazard risk. Nature
Climate Change, 7(5), 364–370. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3252
Hurricane Matthew Disaster Recovery and Resilience Initiative. (2018). Technical Memo: Land
Suitability Analysis for Post-Disaster Housing Relocation.
Keenan, J. M., Hill, T., & Gumber, A. (2018). Climate gentrification: from theory to empiricism in
Miami-Dade County, Florida. Environmental Research Letters, 13(5), 054001.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aabb32
Keleher, T. (2009). Racial Equity Impact ASsessment. 2.
Kensinger, N. (2017, October 26). Five years after Hurricane Sandy, NYC’s coastal communities remain
vulnerable. Retrieved May 23, 2019, from Curbed NY website:
https://ny.curbed.com/2017/10/26/16551182/hurricane-sandy-nyc-brooklyn-queens-storm-
barriers
84 Appendices
King County, Office of Equity and Social Justice. (2016). Equity and Social Justice Strategic Plan.
Retrieved May 16, 2019, from https://aqua.kingcounty.gov/dnrp/library/dnrp-directors-
office/equity-social-justice/201609-ESJ-SP-FULL.pdf
Kirshen, P., Knee, K., & Ruth, M. (2008). Climate change and coastal flooding in Metro Boston: impacts
and adaptation strategies. Climatic Change, 90(4), 453–473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-008-
9398-9
Koslov, L. (2016). The Case for Retreat. Public Culture, 28(2 79), 359–387.
https://doi.org/10.1215/08992363-3427487
Kousky, C. (2014). Managing shoreline retreat: a US perspective. Climatic Change, 124(1–2), 9–20.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1106-3
Mazzei, P. (2018, November 28). Among the Ruins of Mexico Beach Stands One House, Built ‘for the
Big One.’ The New York Times. Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/14/us/hurricane-michael-florida-mexico-beach-house.html
McGhee, D. (2017). WERE THE POST-SANDY STATEN ISLAND BUYOUTS EFFECTIVE IN
REDUCING VULNERABILITY? Retrieved May 16, 2019, from
https://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/project/documents/SIBuyout_McGhee.pdf
NAACP, Elizabeth Kennedy, Jacqueline Patterson, Katherine Taylor, Loah Steichen, Marcela
Mulhoiiand, … Swetha Saseedhar. (2019). Our Communities Our Power: Advancing Resistance
and Resilience in Climate Change Adaptation.
85 Appendices
Neal, W. J., Bush, D. M., & Pilkey, O. H. (2017). Managed Retreat. In P. Bobrowsky & B. Marker (Eds.),
Encyclopedia of Engineering Geology (pp. 1–7). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48657-4_201-
2
Neal, W. J., Pilkey, O. H., & Bush, D. M. (2005). US Managed Retreat.
Nelson, J., & Brooks, L. (2016). Racial Equity Toolkit: An Opportunity to Operationalize Equity. 28.
Nicholls, R., & Cazenave, A. (2010). Sea-level rise and its impact on coastal zones.
Niven, R. J., & Bardsley, D. K. (2013). Planned retreat as a management response to coastal risk: a case
study from the Fleurieu Peninsula, South Australia. Regional Environmental Change, 13(1), 193–
209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-012-0315-4
NYC Parks. (2004). Broad Channel American Park Highlights. Retrieved May 23, 2019, from
https://www.nycgovparks.org/parks/broad-channel-american-park/history
Ortega, F., & Taṣpınar, S. (2018). Rising sea levels and sinking property values: Hurricane Sandy and
New York’s housing market. Journal of Urban Economics, 106, 81–100.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2018.06.005
Ortiz, E., & Crugnale, J. (2017). Five years after Sandy, is New York prepared for the next storm?
Retrieved May 23, 2019, from NBC News website: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/5-
years-after-sandy-are-nyc-s-preparations-amid-climate-n812221
Peterson, K. (2015). Resettlement as a Resiliency Strategy.
86 Appendices
Plastrik, Pete. (2018, August 1). Can It Happen Here? Managed Retreat for US Cities. Retrieved May 16,
2019, from Life After Carbon website: http://lifeaftercarbon.net/2018/08/can-it-happen-here-
managed-retreat-for-us-cities/
Plastrik, Peter, & Cleveland, J. (2019). Can it Happen Here? Improving the Prospect for Managed Retreat
by US Cities. 47.
Rulleau, B., & Rey-Valette, H. (2017). Forward planning to maintain the attractiveness of coastal areas:
Choosing between seawalls and managed retreat. Environmental Science & Policy, 72, 12–19.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.01.009
Ryan, B. D., Vega-Barachowitz, D., & Perkins-High, L. (2016). Rising Tides: Relocation and Sea Level
Rise in Metropolitan Boston. 21.
Schlosberg, D., & Collins, L. B. (2014). From environmental to climate justice: climate change and the
discourse of environmental justice: Climate change and the discourse of environmental justice.
Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 5(3), 359–374. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.275
Schwartz, J. (2018). Surrendering to Rising Seas. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0818-44
Siders, A. R. (2019). Social justice implications of US managed retreat buyout programs. Climatic
Change, 152(2), 239–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2272-5
Siders, Anne R. (2013). ANATOMY OF A BUYOUT — NEW YORK POST-SUPERSTORM. 14.
Simms, J. R. Z. (2017). “Why Would I Live Anyplace Else?”: Resilience, Sense of Place, and Possibilities
of Migration in Coastal Louisiana. Journal of Coastal Research, 332, 408–420.
https://doi.org/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-15-00193.1
87 Appendices
Tibbetts, J., & Mooney, C. (2018, August 20). Sea level rise is eroding home value, and owners might not
even know it. Washington Post. Retrieved from
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/sea-level-rise-is-eroding-home-
value-and-owners-might-not-even-know-it/2018/08/20/ff63fa8c-a0d5-11e8-93e3-
24d1703d2a7a_story.html
Tompkins, E. L., Few, R., & Brown, K. (2008). Scenario-based stakeholder engagement: incorporating
stakeholders preferences into coastal planning for climate change. Journal of Environmental
Management, 88(4), 1580–1592.
Trangle, S. (2018). This Queens neighborhood has the most native residents. Retrieved May 15, 2019,
from am newyork website: https://www.amny.com/real-estate/nyc-neighborhood-census-
broad-channel-1.21941956
U. S. Census Bureau. (2018). American FactFinder - Community Facts. Retrieved May 21, 2019, from
https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/community_facts.xhtml?src=bkmk
Warerkar, T. (2016, December 8). Many of NYC’s coastal neighborhoods may be underwater by 2100.
Retrieved May 23, 2019, from Curbed NY website:
https://ny.curbed.com/2016/12/8/13883544/nyc-climate-change-rockaways-coney-island
Weber, E. U. (2010). What shapes perceptions of climate change?: What shapes perceptions of climate
change? Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1(3), 332–342.
https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.41
88