climateadaptation:

“Every tree in urban Tennessee provides an estimated $2.25 worth of measurable economic benefits every year. Might not seem like a lot, but with 284 million urban trees in the state, the payoff’s pretty big.

Through energy savings, air and water filtering and carbon storage, the urban trees of Tennessee account for more than $638 million in benefits, according to a report [PDF] conducted by the Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and released earlier this year.”

theatlantic, 09.04.12.

The push comes as Oakland Chinatown, like Chinatowns around the country, is undergoing a prolonged recession. There are vacant storefronts, a historical anomaly. The district’s most prominent restaurant, the three-story Silver Dragon that was a destination for weddings and banquets, closed in February. Business is down sharply for many others.

The salvation many see comes foremost in the form of a 25-year plan to develop the area within a half-mile of the Lake Merritt BART Station, on the southeastern edge of the Chinatown district. BART wants to develop some of its properties around the station, and buildings of up to 38 stories are being discussed — an unprecedented height for Oakland.

The new development is being envisioned as a mix of commercial and residential uses..

sfgate, 15.04.12.

HMMM… so much upscaling/”gentrification” in the works..

maintain street cred by moving to west or east oakland??

a photo I took in 2006, across from Lincoln Park & Elementary School (which got remodeled/renovated a couple years ago) on 10th st, nearing the south edge of Chinatown.

In Oakland, after all, the Webster Tube to Alameda, Interstate 880, the Oakland Museum, Laney College and the Lake Merritt BART Station all exist due to land taken from Chinatown, they say. All were installed at the price of forcing out Chinatown residents and businesses who helped give the area its tradition and flavor, critics say.

didn’t know that!

On Atlantic Cities, Nate Berg reports that an analysis by Wendell Cox and Hugh Pavletich for Demographia on affordable housing is incomplete. I would go further and say that the analysis is flat-out wrong…

That connection between appeal and higher costs can be mitigated in at least two ways, aside from direct subsidies for affordable housing. One idea is to recognize that the most important barrier to new development is not regulations per se, but the speed at which the regulatory process moves. That crucial distinction is completely missed by Demographia. Most US municipalities rely on the same regulatory tools — but move through the process at greatly varied speeds. Some cities and towns allow endless delays and appeals — raising costs for development and keeping a lid on supply.

One strategy a city or town can employ to promote affordable, sustainable development is to align land use regulations with what citizens want, and then speed up the process for developers who meet those criteria.

A second strategy is to tie land-use with transportation, particularly public transit. Walkable, mixed-use development with access to public transit lowers household transportation costs, which are nearly as large a line item as mortgage payments or rent. Some development — sprawl in particular — tends to raise family transportation expenditures substantially. Other development — the mixed-use, transit-oriented kind — lowers these costs…

bettercities, 24.01.12.

SF listed as the second most expensive city for housing, by house-price-to-income ratio.

For decades, SANDAG has favored funding more roads and freeway widening to serve sprawl development as the City has grown. Despite a transit emphasis promoted by stakeholders throughout the drafting of the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2050 RTP/SCS), SANDAG leaders are poised to approve this sprawl-first model of ‘sustainability’ that will set a precedent for the nation and commit the region to 40 more years of the same misguided planning principles. For most of us, that’s a lifetime. We have a chance to seize this opportunity to achieve sustainability goals, but the current Plan will only serve to promote further sprawl and greenhouse gas emissions, perpetuating poor land use and traffic congestion.

Although the very goal of SB 375 is to reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and by extension emissions, San Diego’s 2050 RTP/SCS would actually increase VMT in the region by 50 percent over the next 40 years. By 2050 it will only achieve a 9 percent GHG reduction per capita — if it even reaches the levels mandated by SB 375 at all.

The state attorney general has even sharply criticized the RTP.

The failure of SANDAG to contemplate a plan that will achieve a meaningful shift in realistic sustainability planning runs contrary to the results of multiple public polls and community outcry for an effective integrated light rail/multimodal solution. In response, the Cleveland National Forest Foundation (CNFF), through its Transit San Diego campaign, has submitted an alternate planning model for SANDAG’s consideration. This “50-10 Transit Plan“ commits funding 50 years’ worth of transit infrastructure into the first 10 years of implementation. CNFF has also submitted multiple comment letters promoting transit first and opposing SANDAG’s sprawl-development-friendly plan throughout the planning process.

Prioritizing transit as in the CNFF proposal would finally address the fundamental transportation challenges instead of just doubling down on more cars for another generation. We know that SANDAG’s choices will be felt throughout the region and across the country. Indeed, we’ve already seen the chair of SANDAG lobbying for the rollback of EPA standards in order to accelerate highways throughout Southern California. Before this accelerates further, we have a chance to demand responsible transportation development this Friday — but we need all the help we can get.

calitics, 24.10.11.

Occupy San Diego will definitely be helping out. Come out and join the fight for a better future!—and not a compromised one that has been proven to be unsustainable. 

Occupy San Diego will be marching early in the morning from Civic Center to very closeby SANDAG offices in the Wells Fargo building at 401 B St., suite 800, to attend the 9am Board of Directors meeting and protest against the 2050 Final Regional Transport Plan.

Here is the alternative San Diego transit plan to have 50 years of transportation changes done in 10 years: The 50-10 Transit Plan.

F— YEAH PDX!!! 

Portland is nationally recognized as a leader in the movement to create bicycle-friendly cities. About 7 percent of commuters here travel by bike (the national average is under 1 percent) and the city has an ambitious plan, adopted last year, to increase that proportion to 25 percent by 2030.

Until recently, Portland’s bike initiatives focused on improving the transportation infrastructure, said Roger Geller, the city’s bicycle coordinator. But as businesses awaken to the purchasing power of cyclists, “bicycle-supported developments” are also beginning to appear around town, Mr. Geller said. These are residential and commercial projects built near popular bikeways and outfitted with cycling-related services and amenities.

“The change is coming from the private sector,” Mr. Geller said. “Cyclists are a great potential market for businesses that want people traveling at human-scale speed and will stop and buy something.”

Some 3,000 riders a day pass by Mr. Ettinger’s new brewpub, which he calls the Hopworks BikeBar. It has racks for 75 bicycles and free locks, to-go entrees that fit in bicycle water bottle cages, and dozens of handmade bicycle frames suspended over the bar areas.

nytimes, 20.09.11.

Hopworks Urban Brewery (HUB) in SE Portland.
cool place! was there a couple weekends ago.
— organic beer + sustainable food! —
didn’t know about the new bike bar place ‘til now.

have also heard about the bike-gentrification of N. Williams.
will see how that deal goes.