Sarah Booth: Zoning for Sustainability→

Sustainable City Network:

“In a study of 32 cities of various sizes, University of Wisconsin Professor Anna Haines found that most city zoning ordinances had little support for sustainable development. Large or small, coastal or central, most of the communities studied by Haines and her colleague Edward Jepson didn’t have much in their regulations that was useful for supporting sustainability principles. This isn’t surprising, since most of the ordinances were written long before sustainability became a household word.

“The city that I live in wrote their code in 1979,” Haines said, so it’s not very surprising that it doesn’t address sprawl, peak oil, floodwater control or other contemporary concerns.
“Almost 100 years ago is when the first zoning codes were put in place — New York City was the first,” she said. “And at that time the purpose was to strictly separate uses, to separate industry from housing, which made a lot of sense at the time, but doesn’t so much anymore.”

Haines’ study began by identifying nine principles of sustainability:
1. Encourage higher-density development.
2. Encourage mixed use.
3. Encourage local food production.
4. Protect ecosystems and natural functions.
5. Encourage transportation alternatives.
6. Preserve/create a sense of place.
7. Increase housing diversity and affordability.
8. Reduce the use of fossil fuels/encourage the use of fossil fuel alternatives.
9. Encourage the use of industrial by-products.”

There has been a big lag in revising zoning ordinances for sustainability and walkability.

Selena Hoy: Japanese Kids Walk and They Walk Alone→

Atlantic:

“Even in big cities like Tokyo, small children take the subway and run errands by themselves. The reason has a lot to do with group dynamics.

It’s a common sight on Japanese mass transit: Children troop through train cars, singly or in small groups, looking for seats. They wear knee socks, polished patent-leather shoes, and plaid jumpers, with wide-brimmed hats fastened under the chin and train passes pinned to their backpacks. The kids are as young as 6 or 7, on their way to and from school, and there is nary a guardian in sight.

A popular television show called Hajimete no Otsukai, or My First Errand, features children as young as two or three being sent out to do a task for their family. As they tentatively make their way to the greengrocer or bakery, their progress is secretly filmed by a camera crew. The show has been running for more than 25 years...

Japan has a very low crime rate, which is surely a key reason parents feel confident about sending their kids out alone. But small-scaled urban spaces and a culture of walking and transit use also foster safety and, perhaps just as important, the perception of safety.

“Public space is scaled so much better—old, human-sized spaces that also control flow and speed,” Dixon notes. In Japanese cities, people are accustomed to walking everywhere, and public transportation trumps car culture; in Tokyo, half of all trips are made on rail or bus, and a quarter on foot. Drivers are used to sharing the road and yielding to pedestrians and cyclists.”

I find this fascinating, As a kid growing up in a rural area, Japanese children today have the freedom that as a kid I had. Today, most American kids appear to be motored around by parents. How can we change our cities and our culture to foster more independence for our young? 

Julie M. Johnson: What are the Unintended Consequences of Pesticide Use for Non-Natives?→

ENSIA:

“The U.S. Forest Service provides pesticide use summaries for national forests and grasslands on a region-by-region basis, but notes that the information “should not be interpreted as inclusive of all pesticide applications conducted by the agency, its partners, or collaborators on National Forest System lands and waters.” An unpublished study of herbicide use on public wildlands in the U.S. by University of Montana ecologist Viktoria Wagner and colleagues estimates that more than 1 million hectares (2.4 million acres) of such lands were sprayed with herbicides in the U.S. between 2007 and 2011, and more than 200 metric tons (220 tons) of herbicide active ingredients were used on these lands in 2010 alone.

Various conservation organizations contacted were reluctant to discuss the issue: When asked about chemical use, The Nature Conservancy wouldn’t interview on the record. Wiley Buck, a restoration ecologist with Great River Greening, an urban conservation nonprofit, also declined. The USFWS agreed to public affairs–supervised interviews with staff, but only after vetting questions to be asked.”

With the current fad to control non-native species that are well-adapted to places that they are indiscriminately dropped into, natural management agencies and organizations have forgot about the principle of 'First Do No Harm'. They are managing for their values of what is natural, and it could be counter to the public's interest or in the case of aquatic plants it may be consistent with the public's predisposition to favor ecologically destructive efforts to remove any and all plants from lakes (well-adapted native or non-native, they may not particularly care).

Issues Remain for MN Shoreline Buffers→

AP:

“State officials are moving to implement new requirements for setbacks between cropland and waterways passed by the Legislature this year, but concern and confusion among farmers and lawmakers surrounding the new law makes it clear — the buffer battle in Minnesota isn’t over.

Agricultural groups spent months negotiating with Gov. Mark Dayton on his controversial call to boost water quality by installing buffer strips along Minnesota waterways. They eventually passed a scaled-down compromise. The first of those buffers, on public waterways, are required by November of 2017, with smaller strips along public drainage systems coming the following year.

State officials say they’re still working to provide farmers and property owners clear guidance about where they’ll be required to install the grassland zones to filter harmful runoff. That information vacuum — and what little guidance they’ve received — has some lawmakers and farmers worried the state may grab up more land than they bargained for to get the buffer treatment. “I really want this to be successful, but the only way to be successful is if we get good cooperation,” said Republican Rep. Paul Torkelson, a farmer who played a key role in the bill’s negotiations. “We’re not going to get that cooperation if we break our word.”

The state’s Department of Natural Resources and other regulatory bodies are starting to work their way through the law and the state’s massive network of lakes, rivers, streams and drainage systems. The law generally requires 50-foot buffers along public waterways and 16 1/2-foot strips along public ditches.”

See other 'shoreline buffers' articles by selecting the same tag (bottom of list on the right) or by searching (top right).

Ryan J. Foley: The Midwest Water Crisis Has Begun→

Associated Press:

“Unlike pothole-scarred roads or crumbling bridges, decaying water systems often go unnoticed until they fail. “Buried infrastructure is out of sight, out of mind. We take it for granted. We turn on the faucet and we get good, clean, quality water,” said Will Williams, head of asset management for the engineering firm Black & Veatch and an expert on water infrastructure.

When failures happen, help can be hard to come by. Without big changes in national policy, local governments and their ratepayers will be largely on their own in paying for the upgrades. The amount of federal money available for drinking-water improvements is just a drop in the bucket...

More than a million miles of underground pipes distribute water to American homes, and maintaining that network remains the largest and costliest long-term concern.

Some pipes date back to the 1800s. As they get older, they fail in different ways. Some split and rupture, with an estimated 700 main breaks occurring around the U.S. every day. The most devastating failures damage roadways, close businesses and shut off service for hours or days. If pipes are particularly bad, they can contaminate water.

Utilities have long struggled to predict when to replace pipes, which have vastly different life cycles depending on the materials they are made from and where they are buried. Some might last 30 years, others more than 100. Sophisticated computer programs are helping some water systems prioritize the order in which pipes should be replaced, but tight budgets often mean the fixes don’t come until it’s too late.

Replacing a single mile of water main can cost from $500,000 to more than $1 million, but doing so is far more disruptive to customers if it fails first. Experts say a peak of up to 20,000 miles of pipe will need to be replaced annually beginning around 2035, up from roughly 5,000 miles currently. Des Moines Water Works alone has 1,600 miles of distribution pipes.”

Also see this  AP article on the federal aid program for improving the nation's drinking water systems, and another Foley article on the water crisis.

Lee Bergquist: WI DNR to Sell Lake Frontage to Scott Walker Donor→

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

“Elizabeth Uihlein, a major donor to Gov. Scott Walker, has reached an agreement with the Department of Natural Resources to buy 1.75 acres of prime lakefront property in Vilas County — a deal that gives her direct lake access to another property she now owns.

The agreement calls for the DNR to sell Uihlein 765 feet of frontage on Rest Lake in the Town of Manitowish Waters for $275,000. She currently owns an adjacent 11-unit condominium complex without lake access.

Uihlein and her husband, Richard, have donated nearly $3 million to Walker in recent years.

The businesswoman is a significant property owner in Manitowish Waters, is active in local affairs and is noted for her philanthropy, including paying for much of the cost of a pavilion in the community’s Rest Lake Park. A town official said that project will cost more than $1 million.

But also she has faced criticism for some of her activities and currently is under orders from Vilas County to replant trees at her condo complex after a worker she hired clear-cut foliage this summer on a portion of the property closest to the DNR land.”

Sarah Goodyear: Be a Chairbomber!→

CityLab:

“Making a decent place for people to sit shouldn’t be very hard. As the great observer of urban street life, William H. Whyte, once said: “It is difficult to design a space that will not attract people. What is remarkable is how often this has been accomplished.”

Why do cities get it wrong so much? Why are so many otherwise lovely public places barren of a decent bench? And why are so many benches plopped down in places where no actual human would want to linger?

Gracen Johnson, a young urban strategist and communications professional, has been thinking about these things a lot. Not only thinking, also doing.”

StrongTowns Blog: to Sit (Part 1) (Part 2)

Megan Garber: A Wish for the End of Lawns→

The Atlantic:

“As that country developed, its landscape architects would sharpen lawns’ symbolism: of collectivity, of interlocking destinies, of democracy itself. “It is unchristian,” the landscaper Frank J. Scott wrote in The Art of Beautifying Suburban Home Grounds, “to hedge from the sight of others the beauties of nature which it has been our good fortune to create or secure.” He added, magnanimously, that “the beauty obtained by throwing front grounds open together, is of that excellent quality which enriches all who take part in the exchange, and makes no man poorer.” Lawns became aesthetic extensions of Manifest Destiny, symbols of American entitlement and triumph, of the soft and verdant rewards that result when man’s ongoing battles against nature are finally won. A well-maintained lawn—luxurious in its lushness, implying leisure even as its upkeep had a stubborn way of preventing it—came, too, to represent a triumph of another kind: the order of suburbia over the squalor of the city. A neat expanse of green, blades clipped to uniform length and flowing from home to home, became, as Roman Mars notes, the “anti-broken window.””

Change is hard... but when will we redefine wise landscaping in America? Some places are beginning to make progress.

Linda Poon: Putting Citizens at the Center of Urban Design→

CityLab:

“Creating a lively public space isn’t as easy as building it and waiting for the crowds to come. There’s a lot that city planners have to consider: How much space is available? What’s the target demographic? How can a public space be made energy efficient?

A group of researchers at MIT thinks that there’s an important piece of the puzzle that’s too often overlooked: the human experience. Studying how people interact with cars, buildings, and sidewalks within an urban space says a lot about its quality, says Elizabeth Christoforetti, an urban and architectural designer at MIT Media Lab.

With a $35,000 grant from the Knight Prototype Fund, she and her team are working on a project called Placelet, which will track how pedestrians move through a particular space. They’re developing a network of sensors that will track the scale and speed of pedestrians, as well as vehicles, over long periods of time. The sensors, which they are currently testing in downtown Boston, will also track the “sensory experience” by recording the noise level and air quality of that space.”

In the tradition of observations of William Whyte.

Michel Martin: From Fishing with Mom to Top Fisheries Official→

NPR:

“Mamie Parker, a former assistant director of fisheries and habitat conservation at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, was the first African-American to head a regional office for that agency. But when she started out in the field, she says, she “did not see anyone that looked like me doing this type of work.”

When she was in ninth grade, Parker says, “I heard the song by Marvin Gaye, ‘Mercy, mercy me. Things are not like they used to be.’ He talked about the pollution in the air, and the wind that was blowing poison and radiation and all of that.” She decided she wanted to do something about it.”

A workplace pioneer!

Doug Smith: Governor Dayton signs bill to mandate buffers→

Star Tribune:

“The governor said the ­buffer bill will be one of his most important legacies.

“I think we’ll see in the next couple of years a very significant expansion in the number and quality of buffers to make our water cleaner and increase wildlife habitat,” he said. “Given the predictions that were made at the beginning of the session, that nothing would happen, I think this is a very significant accomplishment.”
...
Said Dayton: “We put the deterioration of Minnesota’s water quality and wildlife habitat on the front burner. It directs attention to the fact that we need to be doing a lot more. “It’s a very important first step, but it’s not the last step.””

Well done Governor Dayton! You tackled a difficult issue, informed people along the way, found reasonable compromises to move it forward, and acknowledged that more work still needs to be done. Good governance and great progress on an important environmental issue. 

Ben Mylius: Ecological Indifference in the Face of Ecological Crisis→

Minding Nature:

“A growing literature from many disciplines now views our ecological crisis not just as an “environmental issue,” but as a symptom of deep failures in our ways of thinking and being.[2] The philosopher Timothy Morton calls it “a crisis for our philosophical habits of thought, [which confronts] us with a problem that seems to defy not only our control but also our understanding.”[3]

This failure of thought, and the crisis it has caused, poses grave risks to our capacity to continue in negotiated co-existence with each other and with other species. How grave? Kevin Anderson, of the United Kingdom’s Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, asserts that the levels of global warming predicted are “incompatible with any reasonable characterization of an organized, equitable and civilized global community.” The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—an organization not known for its sensationalist language—is now warning us about climate change’s “severe and irreversible effects.” Graham Alexander and Cathy Turner, tracking the Club of Rome’s predictions in 1972’s Limits to Growth, advise us to “expect the early stages of global collapse to start appearing soon.”[4]

These claims are undeniably significant. Many people and communities are already responding to their implications. Given the stakes of the game, we should expect nothing less. Continued indifference, from any quarter, is deeply problematic.

In this article, I propose that the majority of jurisprudence—the academic discipline that gives us our theory of what law is, of where it’s from, and how it works—is currently crippled by exactly such “ecological indifference.” Our dominant doctrine, legal positivism, claims that ecological crisis makes no difference to how we understand the content and validity of laws. It assumes that there is a sharp division between matters that are internal to our law (as a system of rules) and matters that are external to it. As a consequence, when the time comes to ask what makes our laws valid and what determines their content, ecological crisis can simply be dismissed.”

I've not thought about environmental problems in this light. But the author makes a convincing case that the social construct of our laws is fundamentally flawed. Since there is not a Lorax in our court system, our system of laws generally fails to protect that what we all depend on - Nature.

Anna Maria Barry-Jester: Baltimore’s Toxic Legacy Of Lead Paint→

FiveThirtyEight:

“State tests found more than 65,000 children in the city with dangerously high blood-lead levels from 1993 to 2013. Across the United States, more than half a million kids are poisoned by lead each year, and the majority come from cities like Baltimore: rust belt towns built up during the first half of the 20th century when leaded paint was dominant. As populations and employment opportunities shrank in recent decades, poverty and neglect combined with older housing allowed lead paint poisoning to plague the city.

Despite sharp declines, the city of Baltimore still has nearly three times the national rate of lead poisoning among children, and a look at the data reveals that, like other health disparities, just a handful of neighborhoods are responsible for almost all of the city’s cases over the last five years. Sandtown is one of them.

But even these relatively stark statistics hide much of the problem. The data here represents children with blood-lead levels of 10 micrograms per deciliter (ug/dL), while the acceptable limit was halved to 5ug/dL by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 2012 after decades of research showed there is no safe threshold for lead exposure. More than a thousand children tested for blood-lead levels between 5 and 9 ug/dL in 2013 in Baltimore, according to the Maryland Department of the Environment.

Lead paint can be absorbed through the skin, and even a small amount of dust from frequently used doors and windows is a risk without professional abatement. Exposure to larger, lethal doses of lead is mostly non-existent in the U.S. today, but ingesting even tiny amounts can have lifelong effects, and is particularly dangerous for children under age six. Speech delays, lack of impulse control, aggressive tendencies, ADHD and other learning disabilities have been associated with exposure to lead. While it’s impossible to draw relationships between lead paint and an individual’s behavior, what happens when a population is exposed to lead is pretty clear, and it’s not pretty.”

A polluted environment has social consequences, as noted in the following:

1. The urban rise and fall of air lead (Pb) and the latent surge and retreat of societal violence.
Howard W. Mielke, Sammy Zahran

2. Intellectual Impairment in Children with Blood Lead Concentrations below 10 µg per Deciliter.
Richard L. Canfield, Ph.D., Charles R. Henderson, Jr., M.A., Deborah A. Cory-Slechta, Ph.D., Christopher Cox, Ph.D., Todd A. Jusko, B.S., and Bruce P. Lanphear, M.D., M.P.H.

3. Lead Exposure and Behavior: Effects on Antisocial and Risky Behavior among Children and Adolescents. Jessica Wolpaw Reyes

Dennis Anderson: Some Farmers for Buffer Bill→

Star Tribune:

““What happens to water as it goes through my farm is my responsibility,” Kanne said, noting that in his part of the state, the amount of drain tile laid by farmers has doubled every two years for the past 10 years, significantly altering the region’s hydrology.

“We need to get [buffer requirements] in place because, as a farmer, I’m not the problem,’’ Kanne said. “But I’m part of the problem. And I will be part of the solution.’’

Not so fast, say lobbyists who have plied the Capitol’s hallways in St. Paul this session representing Minnesota farm and commodity groups. Their objective since Gov. Mark Dayton announced his buffer initiative in January has been to weaken, stall and/or kill the proposal. Keep the dirty water flowing, they seem to say.”

Darrel Mosel: Farmers will Find Production Benefits with Buffers→

SC Times:

“As a farmer who has a drainage ditch, a small creek and larger creek flowing through my land, I know that when there isn’t a buffer between the crop field and the streambank, runoff takes soil and any chemicals along for the ride right over the edge. I have buffers that range from 50 to 120 feet wide. That leaves me plenty of room to raise crops on the rest of my land. And it makes a difference — the stream banks are stable, and I know my soil and inputs are staying where they belong.

But upstream and downstream, people are still trying to farm to the edge, and when heavy rains come, it’s a disaster. Creeks turn chocolate, and the banks cave in. This type of farm run-off is a major contributor to our state’s water pollution problems. It’s also an incredible waste of seed, fertilizer and chemicals.”

The intended benefits of shoreline buffers that is well described by a practicing farmer.

Charles Marohn: Environmentalism and Density on Minnesota's Lakes→

Strong Towns:

“A small town in Minnesota just gave an extended middle finger to one of the state’s most impotent bureaucracies. What is setting up is a school yard brawl between two underweight, skinny greasers with switchblades. Could be a lot of slapping and name calling, but if things go horribly wrong there is the potential that someone gets their throat slit.

Detroit Lakes is a town very similar to my hometown of Brainerd, with the primary distinction being that their auto-based, Ponzi-scheme development blowout happened within the city limits where here in Brainerd that mess was absorbed in the neighboring (competing) city of Baxter. In a grass is greener kind of way, I’ve always perceived them to be doing a little better than we are here. I’m probably wrong.

The current dispute between Detroit Lakes and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is over an $11.8 million hotel and restaurant very near Detroit Lake.”

Charles Marohn is right to be infuriated with Minnesota's shoreland density requirements for cities -- all Minnesota citizens should be disappointed. The State's shoreland development standards are old. These standards are outdated with regard to lake protection, and they're inconsistent with good land use development principles and practices. When the Minnesota DNR attempted to revise the 1970-80s era standards several years ago, Governor Pawlenty dismissed them because, perhaps rightly, the public and local governments might not have accepted the shoreline buffer provisions that were proposed to protect water quality. Those proposed standards would have also allowed cities to use their own density standards provided that the area was served by sewer and proper stormwater controls. In Lakeshore Living, we speak to the changes that are necessary and how we could use sound place-making principles and good bottom-up community design. Charles Marohn helped me, a lake ecologist, better understand Strong Town principles. Thanks Charles! 

James Fallows: Nice Downtowns→

The Atlantic:

“It’s tempting, if you haven’t seen the varied stages of this process, to imagine that some cities just “naturally” have attractive and successful downtowns, and others just don’t happen to. It’s like happening to be located on a river, or not.

But in every city we’ve visited with a good downtown, we’ve heard accounts of the long, deliberate process that led to today’s result. The standard discussion will go: “See this restaurant [bar / theater / condo / Apple store with surrounding retail outlets]? Ten years ago, you wouldn’t have [dreamed of coming here at night / seen anyone but crack addicts / been able to rent a condo, or wanted to].” We’ve heard variations of this account so often we now feel a little let down if we don’t get the “this used to be a crack house” speech when visiting a nice hotel or downtown tech-company headquarters...

In every place we’ve been, every one we’ve talked with about downtown recovery stresses the crucial importance of getting people to live there.”

How do you get people to live there? It often requires investing or restoring amenities.

Kyle Potter: Dayton Proposes More Money to Reimburse Farmers for Buffers →

Associated Press:

“In an effort to ease concerns about his plan to create 50-foot buffer zones along Minnesota waterways, Gov. Mark Dayton started lining up more money this week to reimburse farmers.

The governor set aside $20 million in his proposed bonding bill unveiled Tuesday to buy up swaths of cropland from farmers. The state had also previously applied for hundreds of millions of dollars through a federal program that pays farmers in 10- to 15-year contracts for environmentally friendly practices that could include buffers, his office said.”

The current paradigm is that we have to pay farmers to do the right thing. Why as a farmer can I pollute my neighbor's place or a public resource? Why does my neighbor have to pay me to stop me from sending my pollution downstream to him? Is it my right to pollute? What would Aldo say?

Josephine Marcotty: Buffer are a Rallying Cry for Cleaner Water→

Star Tribune:

“Buffers are a remarkably simple solution for a lot of pollution. “Mother Nature has an awesome filter,” said Richard Schultz, a professor at Iowa State University who has studied the effects of buffer strips on one stream near Ames, Iowa, for two decades. “Let her do her thing, and she will do it.”

Buffer strips have been a common feature in farming for centuries. Barriers of grass, bushes and trees can block the rush of water from increasingly large rainstorms, slowing erosion on the land and in river beds. More important, they also stop most of the soil, phosphorus and nitrogen that the water carries off. Tall, stiff, prairie grasses on the edge of a field act as a wall to hold soil. And phosphorus, a nutrient that produces massive and sometimes toxic algae blooms in water, sticks to the soil and stops at the barrier. Plants also capture nitrogen through their roots, absorbing it and releasing it into the air before it reaches the stream.”

Yeah but, a uniform regulation consisting of 50 feet of perennial vegetation is a great start -- compared to many places without a buffer.

Scott K. Johnson: WI Cutting and Censoring Science→

Ars Technica:

“Since taking office in 2010, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has reshaped the state’s Department of Natural Resources (DNR). He appointed a former state senator and critic of the agency to be its secretary and hired an outside “deer czar” in response to hunters’ complaints about the state’s management of the deer herd. Gov. Walker also re-wrote state mining regulations to clear the way for an ill-fated iron mine proposal that was finally abandoned last month. Several days ago, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that the mining company’s lobbyist and spokesman had been considered for appointment as the DNR’s deputy secretary—until officials realized there was a federal law specifically preventing that kind of thing. (He was, instead, hired for a job in another agency.)

Now, the DNR has come under the budget knife. Among other changes and position cuts, the agency’s science bureau faces a 30 percent reduction in staff. Now, Wisconsin Watch reports that the DNR is considering eliminating the science bureau altogether, shuffling remaining staff into other divisions.”

I don't like to post on politics, but it is sad to see natural resource management agencies, like the WI DNR, discounted and their valuable work reduced.