SUCCESSFUL ADAPTATION IMPLEMENTATION:
A REPORT DOCUMENTING STEPS FOR SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION IN LIGHT OF THE
DISTRICT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTS’ FORTHCOMING ADAPTATION AND RESILIENCY
PLAN
By: Jonathan Cybulski and Aaron Dorman
American University, May 2015
SUCCESSFUL ADAPTATION IMPLEMENTATION:
A Report Documenting Steps for Successful Implementation in
Light of the District Department of Environments’ Forthcoming
Adaptation and Resiliency Plan
Jonathan Cybulski and Aaron Dorman
M.S. Students in the Environmental Science Program
American University
Report written for:
The Washington D.C. District Department of the Environment
Cover Photos, From Right to Left: http://americasfutureworkforce.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/08/photodune-1069244-washington-dc-skyline-panorama-l2.jpg,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2013/11/dc-king-tide.jpg,
http://wamu.org/sites/wamu.org/files/styles/headline_landscape/public/images/attach/49892
75874_ac34dedc73_z.jpg?itok=FbJv0gqB, http://www.sustainabledc.org/about/.
This report was written on behalf of the DDOE for a Masters research project through American
University for the class SIS-620: Post Carbon World. We would like to personally thank
Katherine Johnson of the DDOE and Professor Simon Nicholson of American University for their
project support and guidance.
REPORT CONTENTS
DDOE Adaptation Implementation ................................................................................................. 2
Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... 2
Introduction................................................................................................................................. 6
Environment and Implementation Challenges of Washington DC ............................................. 8
Making an Effective, Implementable Policy .............................................................................. 11
Case Studies............................................................................................................................... 16
Case Study Analysis Table...................................................................................................... 17
Two Models for Vulnerability Asessments Transitiong to Concrete Goals: Massachusetts
and San Francisco .................................................................................................................. 19
Massachusetts – Development Approach............................................................................. 19
San Francisco – Risk Analysis Approach ................................................................................ 22
Two models for authority identification: New york and Southeast Florida .......................... 24
New York – New Agency........................................................................................................ 24
Southeast Florida - Regional Climate Change Compact ........................................................ 26
Maryland – Law and Governance Approach ......................................................................... 29
Portland and Multnomah – County Action plan ................................................................... 32
Major Case Study FIndings ........................................................................................................ 34
Concrete goals ....................................................................................................................... 34
Timeline Identified ................................................................................................................ 35
Authority Identification ......................................................................................................... 36
Regular Progress Reports ...................................................................................................... 37
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 39
Literature Cited.......................................................................................................................... 43
Appendix I – Boston Resiliency Checklist .................................................................................. 47
1
DDOE ADAPTATION IMPLEMENTATION
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Cities around the world are preparing for a changing climate. There is no shortage of ideas
concerning how cities might reduce the production of greenhouse gases or adapt to a warming
planet. There are, though, significant challenges associated with making such ideas actionable.
What does it take to move from good and robust policymaking to successful implementation?
This report focuses on the challenge of implementing city-level climate change adaptation
policies. We were tasked with researching strategies that could guide Washington DC’s District
Department of the Environment (DDOE) as they prepare their Climate Resiliency and Adaptation
Plan for the District. The report looks specifically at what it means to design and position policies
for maximum impact, so that adaptation plans do not simply languish on government websites,
but actually drive successful climate responses.
The report development process began with an initial meeting on January 26th, 2015 at DDOE
headquarters where the department laid out their broad goals for the city of Washington in light
of the recently released DC Sustainability Plan. The Climate Resiliency and Adaptation Plan
(“Adaptation Plan”) will be a result of a three-step process to prepare DC for future
environmental challenges related to climate change. Step one will be a technical report that
focuses on localizing current climate projections for the DC area, and step two will be a Climate
Vulnerability and Risk Assessment aimed to identify the infrastructure, systems, or areas of DC
that are at the greatest risk for the projected climate changes.
Identified during the initial meeting with DDOE was the current lack of implementation success
other cities and states were having with their released adaptation plans, and how beneficial it
would be to incorporate successful implementation strategies from the beginning of the DC
climate change preparation process. This report helps to investigate the implementation issues
of other areas in the form of a case study analysis, and highlights key themes to help guide
DDOE towards better adaptation implementation success. The report is the result of a broad
culmination of research including ongoing consultation with the DDOE and other policy experts,
policy literature reviews, and analysis of adaptation plan case studies archived in the
Georgetown Climate Clearinghouse.
2
The analysis completed for the report identified 4 key strategic themes that should be
incorporated effectively by DDOE in their planning documents to help better lead them in the
correct direction for policy implementation success during their three step adaptation process.
Each theme was analyzed for how it could be specifically applicable to the DC report. These 4
themes are:
Concrete Goals
Positive DC
Applicability
Cautionary
Notes
Through the proposed vulnerability analysis, not only identify sectors that
are most threatened, but identify ways in which adaptation could benefit
them. A creative solution like implementing a redevelopment checklist,
which ties into the DC zoning commission, is productive and easily
streamlined. Also, getting support for adaptation funding is easier when
goals and vulnerabilities have been identified.
Make sure the goals are for the entire implementation process. Like the
sustainability report, goals can be lofty and are subject to change, but
should be identified from the beginning. Ambiguity will lead to inaction.
Timeline Identification
Positive DC
Applicability
Cautionary
Notes
Identifying a timeline upfront is important for all implementation goals.
This is related to concrete goals; the goal should be feasible, effective, and
have a timeline laid out for implementation. That way, the proper
authorities are held accountable for action, assessments can me made to
judge successes and therefore create new timelines or adapt old ones.
Timelines can be changed, but they have to exist first. Setting interim
timelines or first steps is fine, as long as a bigger picture timeline for that
goal is also noted. Like creating goals just for the sake of checking them
done, make sure the timeline is meaningful.
Authority Identification
Positive DC
Applicability
Cautionary
Notes
Identification of the needed authorities or stakeholders up front, and how
they can assist with identified goals is extremely useful to streamline
implementation. If possible, allowing them to supply their opinions and
technical expertise could be beneficial.
It is not always possible to make a new formal government body, and may
not be completely necessary. It worked for NYC, but with limited funding
and resources such as DC may face, it is not advised to create this group
formally. However, authority identification and acknowledgement is still
beneficial.
3
Regular Progress Reports
Positive DC
Applicability
Cautionary
Notes
Even with the lack of proper timelines, regular progress reports themselves
can keep the plan or group in charge of the plan on task. Ideally, all four
themes will be combined, but progress reports are essential for assessing
successes, or identifying problem areas.
Make sure collaboration is done up front. Identifying major gaps or
problems (such as different scientific data) is important to deal with at the
beginning, so collaboration down the line can be successful.
The themes were derived from communication with policy professionals, case study research,
and a general policy implementation literature review, in order to determine the relationship
between the content of the Adaptation Planning document and its ability to engender readily
realized action and implementable results. Although there has been extensive research into
what makes a successful environmental policy plan, it is clear from reviewing a wide variety of
regional plans for adaptation measures that some documents work better than others at
offering strategic solutions, and that there common pitfalls and successes. The themes identified
above are not meant to be monumental shifts in policy, but proven implementation successes
that were not uniformly utilized in other plans, but were identified as necessary.
Case studies were chosen based on their regional or demographic similarities to the DC Metro
area or were specifically referred to us by the DDOE. The case studies analyzed the public
adaptation planning documents that have been released from New York, Massachusetts and
Boston, Maryland, San Francisco, Southeast Florida, and Portland and Multnomah County.
At the conclusion of this document, we have synthesized our research into several key findings,
identifying which case studies were most successful in each of the four themes, and therefore
which can be utilized best as references when the DDOE is ready to prepare and finalize their
Adaptation Plan document(s) (See figure below). The authors believe that this document
provides a readily usable roadmap towards producing a plan that will best prepare the DC metro
region for climate adaptive city measures.
4
5
INTRODUCTION
The District Department of the Environment (DDOE) is set to release their Climate Resiliency and
Adaptation Plan later in 2015. This plan will be a result of a three-step process to better prepare
Washington, District of Columbia (DC) for future environmental challenges related to climate
change. The first step in this planning process will include a technical report that focuses on
localizing current climate projections for the DC area. That report will be the basis for step two,
a Climate Vulnerability and Risk Assessment, which aims to identify the infrastructure, systems,
or areas of DC that are at the greatest risk for the projected climate changes. The final step of
the Climate Adaptation Process will be the creation of the Resiliency and Adaptation Plan (“The
Adaptation Plan”), which will focus on the specific policies and projects DC should implement to
help better prepare the city for climate impacts.
Localized
Projections
Vulnerability
and Risk I.D.
Adaptation
Plan
This report was created to help aid the DDOE in their efforts to analyze the vulnerabilities of DC,
with a specific mission to help with implementation of the policies and projects that are
identified in The Adaptation Plan. We hope the case studies in this plan will help the DDOE make
choices that will lead to more successful implementation.
This report is separated into four main sections. The first is the general introduction as well as
the overview of the DC area impacts that were identified. This will help to give context to the
area and resulting challenges. Section two describes policy implementation in general,
summarizing the results of research on literature and past scenarios to see what has historically
made a successfully implemented policy, and what has failed. The general trends witnessed
throughout the research for successful policy implementation were captured as a guide for
further analysis. Section three analyses various cities and states as case studies for what they
have done after the creation of their adoption plans and how much progress they have
6
made. Finally, section four will analyze these other states’ strategies, and highlight the benefits
and shortcomings for use in the DC context, based on identified implementation themes.
It is not the goal of this report to recommend one silver bullet idea for DDOE to use that will
solve all their implementation problems. It is wrong and even dangerous to rely on a single
answer to solve policy implementation problems. The best strategy is to recognize the strengths
and weaknesses of all possibilities, and choose the one that makes the most sense for the task
at hand, giving you the best potential for success 1. This report should be viewed in that light; a
guideline to help analyze and choose what strategy will be the most successful for adaptation
implementation, based on similar cases throughout the country.
1
John, Peter. 2011. “Making Policy Work.” Routledge, New York.
7
ENVIRONMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES OF WASHINGTON DC
Part of the difficulty of this report was identifying what relevant challenges DC and the
surrounding metro area face from climate change or sea level rise, and if there are comparable
examples from other literature on cities/regions who have already conducted adaptation plans.
This section outlines a short profile of DC we created by working backwards and developing a
‘diagnosis’ of the most important challenges the capital faces.
CITY SIZE
Washington DC has the 23rd largest population in the country as of the most recent census,
with approximately 646,000 residents. However, this number underrepresents the number of
people The Adaptation Plan must recognize by a significant margin because the impacts of
climate change and the subsequent decisions made to combat these impacts will be felt by a
larger population then just the immediate city dwellers. The metro area (approx. 6 million) is
sizably larger than the urban core and well over one million people are in DC during the workday
week. Additionally, DC’s plan is to increase city resident’s levels to approach previous population
high point of 800-850,000, last seen in the 1950s 2.
Where people live and work in the city will have a great impact on goals and targets in The
Adaptation Plan, regardless of the method of risk assessment chosen to evaluate the greatest
climate change related threats to the city. New adaptation measures and even outreach will
have to account for the differing levels of population density in the city as well as current and
changing demographics.
FLOOD ZONE
DC does not lie on the coast, but it is considered to be part of a ‘coastal plain’ 3 and is very
vulnerable to storm surge. Small changes in sea-level rise will lead to stronger storms and
increase the chance of flooding in the area. In the past, large-scale dredge-and-fill operations
created the land that forms the ring around the Tidal Basin, including the present-day locations
2
http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/22549/by-2040-dcs-population-could-be-close-to-900000/
https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/geologic-map-of-the-coastal-plain-and-upland-deposits-washington-west-quadranglewashington-d-c
3
8
of the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials 4. In part because of the artificial land reclamation, there
is a ring of high-vulnerability low-lying land which runs from West border of the National Mall
across towards 1rst St. NW and down South Capitol St, an area which also includes part of the
White House property 5. Although many cities have undergone some kind of land reclamation
project along a shoreline, coastal cities that have land fill face unusual challenges to addressing
flood concerns related to climate change, as the flood zone may intersect many different
‘assets’ including infrastructure development. Increased seasonal flooding also increases the risk
of erosion and land-sinking in areas that are in the flood zone. Two coastal cities whose
adaptation plans have had to address the issue of land fill and extensive flood zones are Boston
and San Francisco. Even for parts of those metro areas that aren’t directly on the coast but lie at
or near sea level, along drainage systems that make them especially vulnerable to large-scale
flood damage from hurricane storm surges and extensive river runoff 6.
INFRASTRUCTURE
A map of the flood zone in DC shows that sea-level rise will create more floods and storm surge
that will impact both residential and commercial buildings, the National Mall, Ronald Reagan
airport, roads, bridges, and the metro line, among other assets. Currently, DC is developing
extensive waterfront projects including the mixed-use redevelopment plan labeled ‘The Wharf’
in Southwest, as well as continued redevelopment and expansion around the ballpark/Navy
Yard area. Nearly all of DC’s potential for substantial redevelopment lies in some of the most
vulnerable areas of the District, including along the Washington Channel (east of Potomac Park)
and on either side of the lower Anacostia River. That area also happens to be where many of the
river crossings are including the 14th street and Rochambeau road bridges and also the
metro/rail bridge into Arlington. What kinds of risk-assessment models are most effective at
engendering action to protect infrastructure in flood zones? What measures can be taken to
determine the best policy for a particular building or property?
4
http://www.papers.risingsea.net/federal_reports/shore-protection-retreat-sea-level-rise-Washington-DC-2005.pdf
http://ddoe.dc.gov/floodplainmap
6
http://sealevel.climatecentral.org/uploads/ssrf/DC-Report.pdf
5
9
INTERREGIONAL AREA
As its own independent District, the DC metro area expands out into the two surrounding states
of Maryland and Virginia. As a result, not only does DC have to coordinate action on climate
change/flooding between different inter-city departments but also inter-state government
bodies as well. In fact, as noted above, a good deal of the weekday working population of DC
comes from the surrounding suburbs. No other city as large as Washington directly borders two
different states. However, there are other regions such as Southeast Florida that have tried to
tackle the problem of coordinating among municipalities/counties with varying success.
10
MAKING AN EFFECTIVE, IMPLEMENTABLE POLICY
Policy implementation is an inherent problem that plagues not only the local, city, or state level,
but is constantly discussed in an international and worldwide forum as well. Despite, or perhaps
because, of this difficulty, there is a body of literature that has attempted to analyze and identify
the means and methods of effective planning processes. Although much of this meta-analysis
can seem straightforward, the fact that there are adaptation plans which vary in effectiveness or
implementation capability means that it is still necessary to understand what underpins these
efforts.
Although this report is focused on climate adaptation policy implementation specifically, which
is a relatively new topic in the scope of politics, successful policy implementation in general is
not a new challenge. Scholars and policy planners have developed models to help outline the
broader steps and methods that make for good policy.
MODELS FOR POLICY/ IMPLEMENTATION- There are several steps involved in the policy process
that vary by name depending on the source referenced. The University of Texas identifies policy
as a 6-step process:
1. Problem Identification
2. Agenda Setting,
3. Policy Making
4. Budgeting
5. Implementation
6. Evaluation 7.
American Government and Politics online simplifies it into 5 steps 8, and Hofstra University
condenses it even more into 4 steps 9. Regardless of how many steps it takes you to get there,
implementation is consistently recognized among all models and usually proves to be the most
7
8
9
University of Texas. The Public Policy Process. http://www.laits.utexas.edu/gov310/PEP/policy/
http://www.thisnation.com/textbook/processes-policyprocess.html
Hofstra University. The Policy Process. https://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/methods/ch9c2en.html
11
difficult to achieve. It is one thing to be able to identify the problem, and another to propose a
viable solution that can be achieved without an excess of backroom political maneuvers.
Hofstra goes into detail about the many problems that arise during policy implementation that
can cause major setbacks, even going so far as to identify a Ten Step Model of Policy
Implementation. Though these are all insightful, this report simplifies this list to highlight three
main issues that tend to arise around policy implementation: policy agreement, viability and
compliance, and socioeconomic considerations. In other words, the politicians who are
implementing it must agree upon a policy, and the goals that are being put forward. These goals
must be direct, and with a measureable purpose. If there is not support coming from the top,
there will likely be dissention later on. The correct agencies and players need to be identified
and involved in the process, allowing their feedback to be integrated into the policy. The policy
must be something that is feasible to implement in a timely fashion and sequence, ideally with a
proposed budget to fund it, the correct agency identified to staff it, and practitioners properly
notified to comply with it. Finally, the correct stakeholders must have been communicated with
and had their concerns actually considered, so that when the time comes, they will implement
and comply with the new policy. As the policy is being implemented, reviews of the process
should be conducted to allow for necessary changes needed for continuing success. (Adapted
from Hofstra Universities’ Ten Step Model of Policy Implementation9).
COMMUNICATION- How is a plan communicated? There are two aspects of this: lateral
communication between relevant government departments (and coordination efforts), and
then top-down communication from the planners to the public 10. This is very important since a
large part of adaptation plans require some kind of educational component to better inform
citizens on how to both understand the plan and take appropriate action themselves.
It is also important to communicate effectively any action within the plan that involves changes
to the existing norm, be it amending tax law or public spending. Individual departments need to
know how to deal with a particular issue and who to coordinate with. When it comes to
10
Hill, Michael and Hupe, Peter. 2002 “Implementing Public Policy” London: SAGE Publications
12
environmental policy and the plans evaluated, it appears that communication is especially
important. When implementing plans that are confusing, imprecise or overly complex, policy
action targets need to be amended or they will be tossed out in subsequent drafts or stages of
environmental planning.
In order to incorporate policy agreement, viability and compliance, and stakeholder
considerations, four main themes have been identified and should be incorporated into The
Adaptation Plan to make is successful. The four themes are identifying Concrete Goals,
Authority Identification, Timeline Identified, and Regular Progress Reports. These themes were
included and verified in discussions with on the ground practitioners 11 who have been part of
this policy process, who have implemented adaptation plans of their own, and have seen areas
of success and failure.
Later in the report, the four themes identified here will be used to analyze the different case
studies, and highlight which studies have done what theme successfully.
These themes may seem trivial or obvious at first, but many of the plans we evaluated could
have been stronger and some of our case studies will demonstrate the pitfalls directly outlined
in the above ten-step model. It was surprising to see how other plans neglected certain themes,
and what that meant for their implementation successes; it is possible that earlier rounds of
adaptation plans (from 2005-2010) represented the ‘frontier’ of current plans, but subsequent
plans should learn from other regions’ or cities’ policy mistakes. It is therefore the
recommendation of this paper that The Plan for DC include all themes to the best of its ability.
CONCRETE GOALS
The necessity of clear, precise, and desirable goals seems obvious, but needs to be included
within the policy. An example of a concrete goal would be to look at current standard
Greenhouse Gas emissions reductions goals. Instead of saying “We will decrease our GHG
emissions,” a specific target must be identified, such as “As a city we will decrease our GHG
emissions by 25% of 1990 levels.” For top-down policy, there needs to be a direct and clear
11
Discussions with Aaron Rey of the Georgetown Climate Center, John Dalzell of US Green Building Council.
13
target so that the policy has a direction to go towards, and a black and white way to assess
success (Van Meter and Van Horn 1975; Mazmanian and Sabatier 1983, 1989; Bhuyan 2010;
John 2011).
However, goals should not be created just for precision purposes, such as actions that are easy
to implement but low-impact. Goals need to be specific but also meaningful. This struggle can
be defined as “street level bureaucracy,” as the front-line staff in policy delivery agencies12,
meaning the DDOE authors of the Climate Adaptation Plan. The challenge for these “street level
bureaucrats” is estimable as they must find the ‘sweet spot’ between goals that are too vague,
ambitious or complex to implement and policy that is easy to implement yet so simple that it
can be rendered meaningless. Citing the challenge of environmental concerns, “Large classes or
huge caseloads and inadequate resources combine with the uncertainties of method...to defeat
their aspirations as service workers...they develop conceptions of their work and of their clients
that narrow the gap between their personal and work imitations and the service ideal. 12”
TIMELINE IDENTIFIED
Related to the concrete goals, setting a specific timeline or time horizon is a crucial element to
implementation success (Mazmanian and Sabatier 1983; Bhuyan 2010; Weaver 2010; Burke
2012). It forces a chronological framework around which action can take place and goals can be
assessed for failure or success. Using the GHG example from above, a full statement should
read “As a city we will decrease our GHG emissions by 25% of 1990 levels by the year 2050.”
Adding a timeframe will help make sure policy goals are actually completed, and hold those
implementing them accountable.
AUTHORITY IDENTIFICATION
Appropriate authority and stakeholder identification accomplishes several things. First, it
incorporates the necessary political players and impacted populations from the beginning of the
policy implementation, so they are not taken by surprise when it is released. This is good both
so that the policy has political support, and only the needed government bodies are involved to
12
Kraft, Michael. 2001 Environmental Policy and Politics New York: Longman Press.
14
help streamline the process (Pressman and Wildavsky 1973). Also, by identifying upfront whom
the authorities involved will be, you can take their concerns into account when creating the
policy goals. Since the political authorities will likely be the ones staffing, funding, and/or
implementing the policy when it occurs, and the population will give public support, it is best to
identify those authorities ahead of time so they can be prepared for the responsibility (Van
Meter and Van Horn 1975; Sabatier 1986; John 2011).
REGULAR PROGRESS REPORTS
It was discovered that one of the most overlooked, but possibly the most important part of
successful implementation is the need to take a step back and analyze how successful the policy
has thus far been implemented (Sabatier 1986; 1988; 1991; Sabatier and Pelkey 1987; Australia
2014). This is important for many reasons, but mainly for two at the forefront; looking back
allows you to adjust a policy that is not working as you had intended, and it holds those
responsible for the goals and timelines identified above accountable. Progress reports and
regular working group meetings force communication to occur about the policy and
implementation, delivers feedback from the practitioners and the impacted population (when
documents are up for public review) which are needed to ensure success (John, 2011).
15
CASE STUDIES
On some level, all states, and respective regions/cities within, are likely doing some level of
climate adaptation. It may be in small-scale projects, or as part of bigger initiatives where
adaptation is only one piece to a bigger picture. However, based on what we thought was
relevant both to Washington DC’s forthcoming Adaptation Plan and what could be evaluated
against some of the above guidelines on effective plans, we have identified several cities and
regions which are particularly instructive. These case studies have a full adaptation plan laid
out, making it easier to determine their level of adaptation success.
These case studies should not be viewed as the ultimate resource for adaptation within the
areas. Our goal was to try and find which states or regions provided the best ‘big picture’
examples and to avoid trying to encompass all the literature put out by various
government/policy agencies in the US, many of whom are trying to string or attach small
initiatives into everyday processes.
The Georgetown Adaptation Clearinghouse 13 provided a database that not only included links to
every state agency that had produced an adaptation plan, but also identified at the state level
what plan goals had either been worked on or completed to date, and on what environmental
arena they impacted. (Note: these goals were self-described in the documents, so as noted
above, some of the goals outlined could have been relatively minor or vague, and were selfreported or publically reported when complete).
From the Adaptation Clearinghouse, we analyzed each state with any relevant adaptation
documentation, but identified only a few relevant cities/regions for in-depth analysis. For these
select few, we read through their adaptation plan documents to try and find which ones are
most applicable to this study or could provide for the best possible recommendations. The
states/regions we tried to focus on provide a specific example, good or bad, for at least one of
the four key areas discussed above, and can be related to DC.
13
"Georgetown Climate Center: State and Local Adaptation Plans." State and Local Adaptation Plans. Georgetown University Climate
Center. Website. http://www.georgetownclimate.org/
16
CASE STUDY ANALYSIS TABLE
In most of the literature created to describe a successful policy implementation, there is
usually some type of ranking system that helps to identify areas strengths and weakness.
This is not necessarily to give strict quantitative scores to the policy, but more as a
useful guide to show general areas may require further investigation, and what the
policy may look like when implemented. One of these ranking systems in particular uses
positive (+) and negative (–) rankings to indicate areas of the policy that are successful
for implementation or detrimental1. This idea was used to create the following table,
where each case study analyzed was ranked on the basis of success for the four themes.
A positive (+) ranking means that this case study incorporated that theme beneficially
into their plan or planning process, which led them to some implementation success. A
negative (-) sign means that either this theme was completely omitted, or that it was
done poorly which did not lead to successes. A positive/negative (+/-) sign means that
maybe part of the theme was done successfully, or that the case study might have
started off on the right track, but did not fully implement the strategy. Reasoning for the
specific ranking given for each theme and each case study should come through in the
Case Study Reviews in the subsequent section.
After the table below, the next section goes into detail about the specific research
conducted and relevant information for each case study.
17
Case Study
Measures of success or Failure for each area
Concrete Goals
Authority
Timeline
Regular
Identification
Identified
Progress
Reports
New York – New Agency
+/-
+
+/-
-
Boston – Development
+
+
-
-
Maryland – Law and Governance
-
+
-
+
Southeast Florida Regional Climate Compact
+
+
+/-
+
+
+/-
+
+/-
+
+/-
-
+
Portland and Multnomah County
Adaptation Plan
San Francisco Vulnerability Assessment Plan
18
TWO MODELS FOR VULNERABILITY ASESSMENTS TRANSITIONG TO CONCRETE GOALS:
MASSACHUSETTS AND SAN FRANCISCO
MASSACHUSETTS – DEVELOPMENT APPROACH
In 2004, Massachusetts released its first ever Climate Action Plan 14 that outlines initial steps to
take action and reduce GHG emissions and improve energy efficiency in the state. More
recently, in 2008 Governor Deval Patrick passed the Global Warming Solutions Act 15, which aims
to reduce GHG emissions as well as creating an advisory committee made up of 12 focus areas 16
tasked with making climate adaptation recommendations for the state. This committee went on
to produce the Massachusetts Climate Change Adaptation Report 17 that provides a climate
impacts overview for the state, specific sector vulnerabilities, and sets up specific climate
adaptation goals.
The Climate Adaptation Report is the most recent report Massachusetts has created dealing
specifically with climate adaptation for the state as a whole. The report offers sector
relevant vulnerability assessments and gives guidance to how communities, businesses and
governments can prepare for the prosed climate changes.
Potential approaches include conducting vulnerability assessments of public health, physical
structures and assets, natural resources and economic sectors, to inform future planning,
development and management of existing and planned resources. The report highlights the
importance of protecting existing infrastructure and development from inundation, especially
structures along coasts and in flood plains, and the importance of including climate change
predictions in future development and design practices. Potential strategies are suggested to
enhance emergency response tools, to protect and preserve natural habitats and the hydrology
14
Massachusetts Climate Action Plan. 2004. http://www.newamerica.net/files/MAClimateProtPlan0504.pdf
Massachusetts Global Warming Solutions Act (S. 2540 MA). https://malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2008/Chapter298
16
The Adaptation Advisory Committee members represented 12 sectors and focus areas: transportation and built infrastructure;
commercial, industrial and manufacturing activities; low-income consumers; energy generation and distribution; land conservation;
water supply and quality; recreation; ecosystem dynamics; coastal zone and ocean; rivers and wetlands; and local government. In
addition, the committee included experts in public health, insurance, forestry, agriculture, and public safety.
17
Massachusetts Climate Change Adaptation Report. 2011. http://www.mass.gov/eea/waste-mgnt-recycling/air-quality/greenhouse-gas-and-climate-change/climate-change-adaptation/climate-change-adaptation-report.html
15
19
of watersheds, to establish redundant supply routes and to incorporate climate change
projections into municipal planning 18.
This report has since been updated in 2014 19, describing the goals achieved to date for GHG
emissions reductions, as well as the areas bolstered for climate preparations. The report keeps
the same focus areas, but adds a specific ‘Climate Preparedness’ section to highlight its
identified adaptation needs. State targets identified through vulnerability analyses generally
organize these sections. The report then lists specific actions required to achieve these action
targets. Though the report does a good job in highlighting specific actions needed (setting
concrete goals) it neglects to discuss timelines or specific steps to implementation. In essence,
it just becomes another report that starts the process, but does not highlight the route to
implementation.
Since the release of this report, Massachusetts has made two major strides towards climate
adaptation. They released their Climate Preparedness Initiative and the Boston Redevelopment
Authority Climate Change Preparedness and Resiliency Guidelines Checklist.
The Climate Preparedness Initiative is a $50 million dollar investment attached to a statewide
plan aimed at adjusting municipalities’ energy systems (a $40 million grant), galvanizing
infrastructures and repairing dams in critical coastal areas ($10 million grant). A smaller portion
of this initiative gave $1 million to start the Green Infrastructure for Coastal Resilience pilot
projects to help with the planning, feasibility assessment, design, permitting, construction, and
monitoring/evaluation of green infrastructure projects that implement natural or living
shoreline approaches. The report also calls for the Mass DOT to do a statewide vulnerability
assessment for all facilities, and the Department of Health will develop additional resources for
areas of special concern due to climate change.
18
Georgetown Climate Center. 2015. http://www.georgetownclimate.org/resources/massachusetts-climate-change-adaptationreport
19
Greenovate Boston: 2014 Climate Action Plan.
Update. http://www.cityofboston.gov/eeos/pdfs/Greenovate%20Boston%202014%20CAP%20Update_Full.pdf
20
This report was a good step towards climate implementation for three major reasons: it
identified specific areas of need, provided appropriate funding, and recognized specific agencies
to create solutions.
The Resiliency Guidelines Checklist (Appendix I – Boston Resiliency Checklist) is a unique
approach to managing climate adaptation goals from the start of new infrastructure building,
specifically for buildings that are near a floodplain and would likely be impacted by sea-level
rise. Due to this checklist, in Boston any new development over 50,000 sq. feet must have its
project reviewed by the Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA). A previous Boston Executive
Order mandated that all new buildings of this size or larger had to be reviewed for LEED
certification; therefore; it was easy for Boston to add on this adaptation checklist to be
completed as well. Furthermore, Boston’s own environmental regulation process,
Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA), requires an environmental evaluation of all
large projects. Within this regulation, a climate checklist was already in place to make
developer’s think about the future impacts to their project. This allowed the BRA to create a
similar checklist, which are now interchangeable with one another for regulation purposes; they
have been vetted by both offices so that the completion and acceptance of one can count for
both requirements. This relationship has streamlined the process and allowed for more
effective implementation of the checklist.
The checklist itself is split into 5 major parts. The first two sections are an introduction that cites
the mandated regulation, and then a resource list for appropriate climate change models and
projections that should be used to analyze the project for impacts. The checklist itself is then
divided into three final sections; general project zoning information, information about the
projects impacts and mitigation strategies for Extreme Weather and Heat Events, and
information about the projects impacts and mitigation strategies for Projected sea-level
rise. The checklist itself is a ‘living’ document that is updated with feedback from projects and
when further climate projections are released. Though the checklist itself is mostly high level,
the main purpose is to trigger any red flags when being reviewed by BRA, in which case they
would then work with the project developers on new strategies. So far, the checklist has been
extremely successful: some strategies employed have been higher ground floor levels and flood
barricades to prepare for raising seas and storm surge, implementing greater energy saving
21
techniques, and preparing for “shelter in place” scenarios when standard energy systems may
not be functioning. The checklist has helped developers understand both the near and long term
adaptation potential, such as thinking about integrating combined heat and power into their
buildings, which could see energy reductions as well as emergency situation
preparedness. Most importantly, the checklist has allowed BRA to have a database of project
strategies allowing them to highlight other projects that adaptation successful to encourage
development consistency 20.
Boston’s three-pronged adaptation approach--updated adaptation plan, state funded
adaptation initiatives, and development adaptation implementation--has led to implementation
success. Although timeline shortcomings were noted above, implementation is occurring in the
city elsewhere through these other avenues. The state funded initiative is a good first step,
however the funds of $50 million may not be enough to adequately prepare for the future; that
said, it is a great step in that direction, giving goals, timelines, and funding for change. The
checklist is beneficial as well, opening up adaptation communication and setting consistency
guidelines for new projects. A checklist like this would also meet the DC Sustainability
Report Goal 2.3, incorporating adaptation assessments with new infrastructure development.
However, smaller-scale projects, or older infrastructure, although analyzed in vulnerability
assessments, have no current regulations mandated to prepare them for climate change, and
may warrant further adaptation consideration.
SAN FRANCISCO – RISK ANALYSIS APPROACH
The department that produced the San Francisco adaptation plan was the Capital Plans
Department along with a working group that was created of over a dozen agencies 21. The guide
they produced provides all departments with important information on what they need to do
and what their responsibilities are related to climate change.
20 From conversation with John Dalzell, Sr Architect for Sustainable Development, Boston Redevelopment Authority; Board of
Directors US Green Building Council
21 http://www.acfloodcontrol.org/SFBayCHARG/pdf/sf_slr_guidance.pdf
22
The San Francisco plan states “collaboration is critical where infrastructure and the adaptation
plans needed to address the vulnerabilities of that infrastructure cross department borders 22.”
However, the plan itself is unfortunately vague on who and when this process would occur. We
recommend that once DC chooses a risk-assessment model for their adaptation plan, they also
included specific guidelines on how departments can collaborate. (For example, when
evaluating the metro line’s robustness against climate-change flooding, what departments need
to be coordinated with?)
Many plans have been developed only over the past few years but we can look to the language
of the documents to see whether or not they have useful targets. San Francisco outlines a 6-step
action plan which calls for continually updated assessments of the risks from flood-related
hazards 23. Scoring systems are one way to create concrete goals or at least quantify the difficult
risk assessment process. San Francisco scores ‘assets’-any building or infrastructure potentially
threatened by coastal flooding-and then if they reach a certain threshold they are further
evaluated. San Francisco also includes examples of this in their report and hypothetical
recommendations. The report details how the city planning process could affect a fire station,
an existing vacant waterfront building and a shoreline park, all of which could be relatable to DC
(even just as examples).
The San Francisco plan calls for “clear accountability and trigger points 24” but fails to go into
detail on this, specifically where the data to monitor this will be derived. It is important to note
that all plans need to make sure departments are all using the same scientific data which clearly
outlines scientific consensus and sources/models that are agreed upon. Mentioned below,
Southeast Florida had to amend their plan and agree upon scientific consensus between
neighboring municipalities.
22
http://www.acfloodcontrol.org/SFBayCHARG/pdf/sf_slr_guidance.pdf
http://www.acfloodcontrol.org/SFBayCHARG/pdf/sf_slr_guidance.pdf
24
http://www.acfloodcontrol.org/SFBayCHARG/pdf/sf_slr_guidance.pdf
23
23
TWO MODELS FOR AUTHORITY IDENTIFICATION: NEW YORK AND SOUTHEAST FLORIDA
NEW YORK – NEW AGENCY
New York’s approach to Authority Identification has taken a unique approach to streamlining
implementation for climate adaptation in their state. In 2009 New York released Executive
Order 24 25 (EO24) that was monumental because it not only established the need to create a
climate adaptation plan for the state, but also created the New York State Climate Action
Council (NYSCAC) to complete it. Besides making aggressive GHG emissions goals of reducing
emissions by 80% below 1990 levels by 2050, EO24 did many other forward thinking moves for
climate preparation. As seen below, EO24 created the NYSCAC, and then orders 5,6,7 and 8
added powers to this body to help with implementation.
1
EO 24 Orders 5-8
5.
Members of the Council may designate an executive staff member to represent them and participate
on the Council on their behalf, subject to the approval of the Chair. A majority of the members of the
Council shall constitute a quorum, and all actions and recommendations of the Council shall require
approval of a majority of the total members or their representatives.
6.
The entities represented on the Council are authorized to provide the primary staff and other
resources that are necessary for the Council to comply with this Order. In addition, every other agency,
department, office, division and public authority of this State shall cooperate with the Council and furnish
such information and assistance as the Council determines is reasonably necessary for it to comply with
this Order.
7.
The Council may convene advisory panels to assist or advise it in areas requiring special expertise or
knowledge.
8.
The Climate Action Plan is not intended to be static, but rather a dynamic and continually evolving
strategy to assess and achieve the goal of sustained reductions of greenhouse gas emissions.
25
New York Executive Order 24. 2009. http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/71394.html
24
The council acted as a democratic body, needing majority votes to move forward by the
appropriate members, as well as providing the necessary staff and resources to the council to
make EO24 compliance successful. This process allowed the party to involve all the necessary
government players, and supplied funds for implementation. In one move, New York enacted all
of the parts necessary to implement a successful policy. Furthermore, the EO24 identified the
need for the adaptation plan to be an evolving document, much like the climate change problem
too is evolving. This order allows for necessary ambiguity with the report, allowing it to be
amended when needed, which is unusual but necessary for this type of document in a word
where policy is usually black or white. In theory, this assessment of the policy would occur
during progress reports.
However, with the right tools in place, how successful has NYC been in implementing their
ideas? In 2010 NYSCAC, which consisted of 15 state agency heads or representatives of the
Executive Chamber 26, completed a draft interim report 27 that went through a public comment
period. However, after the release of its draft report, the NYSCAC has yet to create and publish a
final adaptation report for the state. Furthermore, the state has not officially endorsed the
adaptation recommendations included in the Interim Report.
This failure to create a final plan and endorse the adaptation recommendations limits the
potential of implementation for the NYSCAC. A major reason for this halt in implementation
success is likely due to EO24 only setting a concrete goal and timeline for the draft interim
report, which was due by September 2010. Subsequently, the EO24 only specified “Thereafter
[after interim report creation], the Council shall prepare a final Climate Action Plan which shall
be reviewed and, if warranted, adjusted annually by the Council.” It is unknown why this vague
language was included in EO24, but since the time of the interim report, no final has been
created, and furthermore the state has yet to officially endorse the recommendations. EO24 did
a good job about setting a concrete goal with a timeline for the draft plan, but failed to do so for
the final.
26
“Climate Action Council ("Council") consisting of the Commissioners of Agriculture and Markets, Economic Development,
Environmental Conservation, Housing and Community Renewal, and Transportation; the Chairs of the Public Service Commission, and
Metropolitan Transportation Authority; the Presidents of the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, Long
Island Power Authority, New York Power Authority and Dormitory Authority of the State of New York; the Secretary of State; the
Director of the Budget; the Director of State Operations; and the Counsel to the Governor. The Director of State Operations shall
serve as the Chair of the Council.” – New York EO 24
27
New York State Climate Action Council. Climate Adaptation Interim Report. 2010. http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/80930.html
25
Though the goal of creating a final plan and working towards complete adaptation
implementation has not yet occurred, the interim report has led to major success regardless.
The report includes goals for a number of state sectors such as agriculture, coastal zones,
ecosystems, energy, public health, transportation, telecommunications and information
infrastructure, and water. The plan identifies the climate impacts in each sector and outlines
goals for preparing for these impacts. The plan also assesses the potential costs, timing
considerations, co-benefits, unintended consequences, and environmental justice
considerations related to these goals.
Based on the goals addressed in the interim plan, New York has since created reports aimed at
incorporating adaptation into specific areas identified in the interim adaptation report. One
2013 report 28 looks at transportation and transportation infrastructure specifically, and
identifies ways to build resiliency and incorporate adaptation strategies. In the wake of
Hurricane Sandy, several initiatives and reports have been published to help better prepare New
York for future impacts. Guidance releases in 2013 29 is helping to rebuild communities in better
and safer ways by looking at potential future climate threats.
SOUTHEAST FLORIDA - REGIONAL CLIMATE CHANGE COMPACT
This agreement/model is one example of how a large sprawling metropolitan area/region can
coordinate and work on an adaptation strategy. The Authority Identification in this plan involves
enhancing regional cooperation. As described in the plan itself: “the compact represents a new
form of regional climate governance to set the agenda for adaptation while providing an
efficient means for state and federal agencies to engage with technical assistance and
support 30.”
28
New York Metropolitan Transportation Council’s Plan 2040: A Shared Vision for Sustainable Growth.
http://www.nymtc.org/files/RTP_PLAN_2040_docs/Public%20Review%20Drafts/Plan%202040%20Full%20Document/Plan%202040
%20Main%20Document.pdf
29
Guidance for New York Rising Community Reconstruction Plans.
http://stormrecovery.ny.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Guidance_for_Community_Reconstruction_Plans.pdf
30
http://www.southeastfloridaclimatecompact.org/
26
As this group began working in 2008, it is one of the older adaptation implementation efforts
and has had time to both evaluate and follow-up on implementation goals that were outlined in
the original plan. The relevant counties and cities recognized in law a definition for “Adaptation
Action Areas” that were ‘uniquely’ vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.
The Project Proposal which was set to begin in 2011/2012 included several phases, including an
urban system modeling scenario which analyzed urban drainage/surface water management,
with respect to global climate models. Florida is especially vulnerable to the effects of sea level
rise, including saltwater intrusion and beach erosion. Therefore, any plans they produce are
potentially applicable to any city or region that will have lesser but relatable effects.
The working groups and action plans put forth within the Compact have produced a large body
of resources for Southeast Florida (Miami up to the West Palm Beach area) even in spite of
contention on scientific data and pushback from the state government on climate change issues.
One major accomplishment is that the SFRCC has secured numerous funding in the past 6 years
for some of the projects/proposals in their Action Plan, including a transportation pilot project
and grants to help foster development of solar energy.
Also, the SFRCC can claim to help influence greater state policy and continuing to draw
additional resources into the Southeast Florida region. The approach from the SFRCC also has
helped secure funding for interregional projects instead of competing for various funding among
the partner municipalities.
In 2010, The Regional Climate Compact also created a document that outlined every proposed
policy measure in order to “facilitate the thought process involved in planning and decision
making 31.” The authors call for establishing a clear planning ‘horizon’, either short (1-2 years) or
within a five year timespan.
The plan also lists potential partners and volunteers, potential funding sources, policy/legislation
needed and estimated resources required.
31
http://www.southeastfloridaclimatecompact.org//wp-content/uploads/2014/09/implementation-guide.pdf
27
However, the document includes enough vague language to make it dismissive or its
suggestions/timelines non-binding, which seems unbeneficial. The document says it “is not a
prescriptive guide.” The DC Plan should try to improve upon this.
There are over a hundred such steps outlined (not all related to sea level rise, also detailing
mitigation steps such as bicycle programs). They are broken down into the following categories:
Sustainable Communities and Transportation Planning, Water Management/Infrastructure,
Natural Systems, Agriculture, Energy and Fuel, Risk Reduction and Emergency Management,
Public Outreach, and Public Policy.
For an example of what this looks like, here is a sample table:
32
This is a tremendous resource but DC will face additional challenges of identifying regional
partners as many areas around the city in Maryland and Virginia are unincorporated and thus
don’t have typical city council governments. Also, many projects related to flood prevention and
adaptation will require a timeline greater than 5 years to implement. Many of the proposals that
are outlined in this plan are still rather general (for example, “implementation of methodologies”
sounds a lot like they are giving themselves a year to choose an appropriate risk assessment
model).
The plan also supplied a model for regional strategy communication. As seen in the diagram
below, they were successful in creating a regional body by working from the inside out, starting
at the single agency and growing to incorporate larger systems.
32
http://www.southeastfloridaclimatecompact.org//wp-content/uploads/2014/09/implementation-guide.pdf
28
33
MARYLAND – LAW AND GOVERNANCE APPROACH
In 2007, Maryland Governor O’Malley released Executive Order 01.01.2007.07 which created a
Commission on Climate Change, an tasked the commission to create a climate action plan to
reduce GHG emissions as well as prepare and adapt for coming changes. The Adaptation and
Response working group created out of the EO subsequently published two phased reports
dealing with Mryland preparedness, the first phase dealing with sea-level rise and coastal
storms and their impacts on built environment and infrastructure, and the second phase
focused on societal, economic and ecological resistance in light of changes in precipitation and
temperatures. For each phase and each sector within the reports, the working groups assessed
climate change vulnerabilities and recommended adaptation strategies for the state.
33
https://vimeo.com/122097695
29
Executive Order 01.01.2007.07 has since been rescinded in favor of EO 01.01.2014.14 34. This
new EO builds off of the later, with the missions to strengthen the Commission on Climate
Change, by expanding its membership to include a total of 25 members 35 to improve its reach
and effectiveness. This new executive order sets in place several mandates and tasks for the
commission to complete (See Below).
Commission Tasks. The Commission shall:
(1) Strengthen and maintain existing State action plans to further mitigate the causes and drivers of
climate change, and address (prepare for and adapt to) the consequences of climate change.
(2) Reestablish Scientific and Technical, Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Mitigation, and Adaptation and Response
Working Groups, and create other working groups as needed.
(3) Prioritize working group actions, including:
(a) Developing broader public/private and federal/State/local partnerships to better mitigate the causes
and address the consequences of climate change, and to better communicate with and educate citizens
about the urgency of the challenge and options to address it;
(b) Maintaining an inventory of Maryland’s GHG emission sources and sinks;
(c) Addressing the challenge that low income and otherwise vulnerable communities will likely be
disproportionately impacted by climate change;
(d) Assessing the impacts that climate change will likely have on the State's economy, revenues, and
investment decisions;
34
http://www.dsd.state.md.us/comar/getfile.aspx?file=01.01.2014.14.htm
The Commission’s membership shall consist of no more than 25 members and include: (1) One member
appointed by the Speaker of the House of Delegates; (2) One member appointed by the President of the
Senate; (3) The Treasurer of the State of Maryland; (4) The Secretary of the Maryland Department of the
Environment; (5) The Secretary of the Department of Agriculture; (6) The Secretary of the Department of
Natural Resources; (7) The Secretary of the Department of Planning; (8) The State Superintendent of
Schools; (9) The Secretary of the Department of Transportation; (10) The Secretary of the Department of
General Services; (11) The Director of the Maryland Energy Administration; (12) The President of the
University of Maryland’s Center for Environmental Science; (13) At least two representatives from local
governments; (14) At least two representatives from the business community; (15) At least two
representatives from non-profit organizations; and (16) No more than seven at large members appointed
by the Governor.
35
30
(e) Recommending short and longer-term strategies and initiatives to better mitigate the causes and
address the consequences of climate change;
(f) Delivering tools and assistance to local governments to support community-scale climate vulnerability
assessments and the development and integration of specific strategies for enhancing resilience to the
impacts of climate change into local plans and ordinances;
(g) Establishing comprehensive and accountable, annual working group work plans that set annual goals
and performance benchmarks, and prioritize new and existing climate change mitigation and adaptation
actions and initiatives;
(h) Maintaining a comprehensive action plan, with five year benchmarks, to achieve science-based
reductions in Maryland’s GHG emissions of 80% of 2006 levels by 2050; and
(i) Convening regular working group and full Commission meetings to ensure that sufficient progress is
being made across all sectors and communities in Maryland.
(4) Consider other related matters as the Commission deems necessary.
However, the goals listed tend to neither be concrete (in the sense that they do not have any
actual metrics, aside from GHG reduction) and there is a complete lack of timelines set for task
completion. One thing the EO does manage to successfully do is set up annual Commissions
updates to occur every November, and report to the Governor and the General Assembly about
their EO progress. This is a good step for achieving implementation of the EO tasks. Although no
deadlines were set, the previous EO had a similar regular update, and was subsequently
followed by a string of other Maryland Laws, plans, and regional plans dealing with climate
adaptation. These resources implemented several successful ideas for adaptation in the state.
Highlights of these subsequent orders are a bill that requires the use of nonstructural shoreline
stabilization methods in tidal wetlands 36; implementation guidance for each of seven different
topics: new land investments; facility/infrastructure siting and design; habitat restoration;
government operations; research, monitoring and assessment; resource planning; and advocacy
(none of which has yet to be created) 37; an EO that enacts a number of policy directives,
36
37
http://mlis.state.md.us/2008rs/fnotes/bil_0003/hb0973.pdf
http://www.dnr.state.md.us/dnrnews/pdfs/climate_change.pdf
31
including directing all State agencies to consider the risk of sea level rise, flooding and extreme
weather to be taken into account in the construction or reconstruction of all state buildings and
facilities - and structures to be elevated two or more feet above the 100-year base flood level. In
particular, this legislation mandates that all new and substantially reconstructed or rehabilitated
permanent state structures located in Special Flood Hazard Areas shall be planned with two feet
of freeboard above the 100-year based flood elevation 38; a subsequent bill created a coast
smart council to oversee that all future facilities are planned and built to avoid or minimize
future flood damage 39; a bill to create a task force to evaluate and address the effects of ocean
acidification and the changing chemistry in the Chesapeake Bay and other Maryland
waterways 40.
Maryland’s approach to climate adaptation implementation is being accomplished through
policy implementation itself. Whereas some other case studies have set new guidelines or set
up new governmental bodies, which Maryland has also done, Maryland specifically has strung
together set of Bills and EO stemming from their adaptation plans and recommendations. A key
to this success was the upfront identification of the necessary players for adaptation success,
which was further bolstered in their updated EO, who were part of the subsequent policy
process. Though the lack of concrete goals and timeline is usually a problem, the Climate
Commission seems to have the ability to successfully get tasks completed through regular checkins. This strategy makes implementation assessment more difficult, but in general,
implementation successes are occurring.
Baltimore created a local adaptation plan that did little to build upon the state’s
recommendations. The one chapter on climate change reads much like this section on
Maryland’s adaptation plans, just much older. It lists current adaptation activities in the area
and list the adaptation priorities for Baltimore, but never gives and timelines or goals. The one
thing it adopted was a mitigation target of reducing emissions 15% by 2020.
PORTLAND AND MULTNOMAH – COUNTY ACTION PLAN
38
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/pubs/legislegal/2012-executive-orders.pdf
https://legiscan.com/MD/bill/HB615/2014
40
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/frmMain.aspx?pid=billpage&stab=01&id=hb0118&tab=subject3&ys=2014RS
39
32
Portland Oregon claims to be the first city to create a local action plan, at least for reducing
carbon emissions 41. Therefore, they have had the most time to implement action and also
develop subsequent policy plans. That makes the Portland region an ideal model to evaluate
how a plan can or cannot be effectively implemented.
A joint regional action plan was designed by the city of Portland and Multnomah County in in
2009. A new draft of the plan, which is currently out for public comment, will be released or
considered for adoption by the Portland Planning and Sustainability Commission in June of this
year 42.
Although the new draft doesn’t say how the region has done in implemented their emissions
goals, they have established a more ambitious slate of goals and timelines overall, including
reducing GHG emissions by 40 percent in 2030 and by 80 percent in 2050.
The plan tries to identify all the local departments responsible for working on implementing the
plan: The Sustainability Program in both Portland and Multnomah (once again reinforcing the
important concept of Authority Identification), the County Health Department, Development
Services, Parks and Recreation, Environmental Services, and others.
Every year the two relevant Sustainability programs will coordinate and report annually to the
city council of Portland and the other local governments on progress on action-elements in the
plan. Every three years action plans will be revised and new ones are identified. Periodic Review
will determine what actions have not been implemented and how to fix this.
41
42
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/49989
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/268612
33
MAJOR CASE STUDY FINDINGS
Using the case studies described above, below are summaries of examples for each of the four
themes identified at the start of the report. We used the actual case studies to pull out what we
felt were good examples of implementing Concrete Goals, identifying Timelines, Identifying the
Proper Authorities for the project, and instituting regular Progress Reports. The examples listed
below are specific initiatives that are applicable to DC Plan, and are thought to be the most
beneficial and most implementable. Each case study had a unique scenario, unique staffing and
funding availability, and different geological and socioeconomic considerations that went into
their plans success and failures. This section does not highlight the entire plan strategy, but
specific parts that could be culminated together and included in DC Plan to make it
implementable.
CONCRETE GOALS
•
Boston has updated their first adaptation plan with a new one that identifies
vulnerabilities, and identifies concrete goal targets moving forward. Through these
vulnerability identifications, they created tow positive implementation strategies: The
Mayors Climate Preparedness initiative that supplied funding for climate adaptation,
and the Boston Redevelopment Authority Climate Change Preparedness and Resiliency
Guidelines Checklist. These two steps were positive moves for adaptation, and were
implemented because their sectors were highlighted as vulnerable in the original plan.
•
San Francisco completed vulnerability assessment – like step two of DC plan, through
this they identified vulnerable sectors and specific goals to combat this. Created a
scoring system for each assets vulnerability, and concretely stated what to do for each
score 43.
•
NYC EO24 created a goal for the writing the first draft adaptation plan, which was
successfully completed. However, the EO failed to set a goal or timeline for the final
plan to be released. Though other resources have been created off of this interim plan,
no final adaptation plan has been created.
43
http://www.acfloodcontrol.org/SFBayCHARG/pdf/sf_slr_guidance.pdf
34
Positive DC
Applicability
Through the proposed vulnerability analysis, not only identify sectors that
are most threatened, but identify ways in which adaptation could benefit
them. A creative solution like implementing a redevelopment checklist,
which ties into the DC zoning commission, is productive and easily
streamlined. Also, getting support for adaptation funding is easier when
Cautionary
Notes
goals and vulnerabilities have been identified.
Make sure the goals are for the entire implementation process. Like the
sustainability report, goals can be lofty and are subject to change, but
should be identified from the beginning. Ambiguity will lead to inaction.
TIMELINE IDENTIFIED
•
Portland claims to have been one of the first regions to start thinking about climate
adaptation, creating their report in 1993. Even from the first report, they had a visual
timeline identified of major milestones and goals that they wanted to achieve by a
certain date (the majority focused on GHG mitigation). However, this timeline then
gave them a way of assessing progress in their report updates, and in their newest
report they have included timelines for what they have implemented, and new plans
out to 2050. This has allowed them to be able to expand upon achieved goals, such as
meeting solar requirements and now adding in more, and break down future goals for
each sector. The timeline has led to accountability and thus implementation success.
•
NYC initially set a timeline for their draft report with their EU24, but failed to move
forward with a timeline for the final. The EU only specified that “Thereafter, the Council
shall prepare a final Climate Action Plan which shall be reviewed and, if warranted,
adjusted annually by the Council.” Since the time of the interim report, no final has been
created, and furthermore the State has yet to officially endorse the recommendations.
35
Positive DC
Applicability
Identifying a timeline upfront is important for all implementation goals.
This is related to concrete goals; the goal should be feasible, effective, and
have a timeline laid out for implementation. That way, the proper
authorities are held accountable for action, assessments can me made to
Cautionary
Notes
judge successes and therefore create new timelines or adapt old ones.
Timelines can be changed, but they have to exist first. Setting interim
timelines or first steps is fine, as long as a bigger picture timeline for that
goal is also noted. Like creating goals just for the sake of checking them
done, make sure the timeline is meaningful.
AUTHORITY IDENTIFICATION
•
NYC identified the parties needed for the NYSCAC body (the Commissioners of
Agriculture and Markets, Economic Development, Environmental Conservation, Housing
and Community Renewal, and Transportation; the Chairs of the Public Service
Commission, and Metropolitan Transportation Authority; the Presidents of the New York
State Energy Research and Development Authority, Long Island Power Authority, New
York Power Authority and Dormitory Authority of the State of New York; the Secretary of
State; the Director of the Budget; the Director of State Operations; and the Counsel to
the Governor. The Director of State Operations shall serve as the Chair of the Council)
and gave them ultimate power in making climate adaptation recommendations. (Orders
5-8 in EU). These identified parties were whom made up the Climate Commission, and
all have equal say in a democratic way of agreeing on adaptation implementation and
progress. This was made particularly successful since the commissions was created in a
formal manner, and given staffing and funding within the Executive Order.
36
Positive DC
Applicability
Identification of the needed authorities or stakeholders up front, and how
they can assist with identified goals is extremely useful to streamline
implementation. If possible, allowing them to supply their opinions and
Cautionary
Notes
technical expertise could be beneficial.
It is not always possible to make a new formal government body, and may
not be completely necessary. It worked for NYC, but with limited funding
and resources such as DC may face, it is not advised to create this group
formally. However, authority identification and acknowledgement is still
beneficial.
REGULAR PROGRESS REPORTS
•
As part of Maryland’s EO 01.01.2007.07, they wrote in an annual update to occur every
November, where the Climate Commission would have to report to the Governor and
the General Assembly about their progress on meeting the EO goals. This has led to
considerable adaptation implementation success. Since EO 01.01.2007.07
implementation in 2007, Maryland has then released an EO almost every year that
specifically deals with climate change adaptation. They have also produced several
assessments and plan updates, including the newly updated EO 01.01.2014.14 in 2014
that strengthens the previous EO by building capacity and support through other
agencies.
•
Southeast Florida is an extremely unique example of regional collaboration, and how
regional progress check-ins can be extremely beneficial. At the offset, meeting regularly
at the regional level made them realize that each region was using different climate
models and different climate projections. One of the first steps in their meetings was to
all agree on one projection and model, and use that moving forward. Furthermore,
meeting regularly has allowed them to work collaboratively to search for funding, which
likely they would have been competing for beforehand. Now, with the same science
and combined vulnerability and goals identified, they are more marketable to receive
climate funds.
37
Positive DC
Applicability
Even with the lack of proper timelines, regular progress reports themselves
can keep the plan or group in charge of the plan on task. Ideally, all four
themes will be combined, but progress reports are essential for assessing
Cautionary
Notes
successes, or identifying problem areas.
Make sure collaboration is done up front. Identifying major gaps or
problems (such as different scientific data) is important to deal with at the
beginning, so collaboration down the line can be successful.
38
CONCLUSION
The goal of this document is to be used a guideline to help analyze and choose
strategies that will be the most successful for adaptation implementation, based on
relevant case studies. The case studies analyzed were done so because they had
applicability to the DC area for various reasons. NYC and Boston were identified by the
DDOE as typical cities that they often compare themselves to for policy purposes.
Maryland was chosen as it is the closest neighbor to DC that has a successful adaptation
plan in place, so gives a regional looks at implementation. Portland and San Francisco
represented the west coasts, but also are geographically similar to DC in the sense of
population, sprawl, and regional layout. Finally, South East Florida was chosen as an
interesting example of regional players can collaborate together for a higher purpose,
which may be a useful tactic for a unique setting such that DC finds itself in. Since DC is
neither a city nor a state, or sometimes both, it may be beneficial to reach out to its
surrounding neighbors to collaborate on a regional scale.
The ranking system above in the Case Study section is useful to give the reader a feel for
what the case study was good and bad at achieving as it pertains to the four themes of
successful policy. Another way to look at this is to identify one theme that a case study
did particularly well, and use that as an example or a model when creating the plan for
DC. The table below is exactly that. Of all of the different tactics employed by the
studies to implement their plans, there were some that were better at themes then
others, and have been acknowledged in the following table. A green square means this
case study was a premiere example of the theme listed, and should be investigated
closer as an example when creating the DC plan. Grey squares do not mean the case
study did that theme badly necessarily, but were not considered to be the best example
at this time.
39
Case Study
Major Themes
Concrete Goals
Timeline
Authority
Regular Progress
Identified
Identification
Reports
Boston
And
San Francisco
Portland and Multnomah County
New York
Maryland
And
S.E. Florida Regional Climate Compact
40
This table should help DDOE to better prepare for their future Adaptation Plan and
guide them to more successful implementation. Each case study is unique in it’s own
right, and cannot be used as a perfect model for DC. This is particularly true because no
case study employed all four themes. However, specific areas of each can be combined
into one major recommendation.
DC should look to Boston’s and San Francisco’s ability to create meaningful concrete
goals for specific vulnerabilities identified in their vulnerability plans. This will be helpful
for the vulnerability assessment that DC has slated to be drafted later this year.
Identifying these specific goals for vulnerabilities in each sector makes the problem
more approachable and gives a basis for how to create solutions. That way, ideas such
as adaptation checklists in the infrastructure sector or coastal hardening have a specific
purpose.
Although New York ambitiously created a new government agency to deal with climate
change that is likely out of scope for a smaller area with less funding such as DC, their
structure of identifying key agencies for adaptation, and including them in the decision
process should be utilized. It is beneficial to start inter-government collaboration early,
that way, proper agencies can be identified of coming changes, and give their support,
or even identify their issues. Although not ideal, understanding the issues up front
different agencies will voice can save time down the road.
Identifying a timeline, even if is subject to change in the future, will help implementing
concrete goals, and give a baseline for assessment of success. Without a timeline, goals
can be pushed off, and even if agencies have been identified they will not be held
accountable. Timelines are a simple and effective way to stay on task, or be able to
amend plans if needed.
41
Finally, an extremely beneficial theme is that of regular progress reports. Progress
reports allow for concrete goals to be assessed against their given timelines by the
agencies responsible for goal implementation. In areas like Maryland, even in the
absence of concrete goals and identified timelines in the original plan, regular progress
check-ins allowed them to stay on task, and continuously implement adaptation
executive orders. In Southeast Florida, collaboration was essential for getting the region
on the same page, to make them more organized and marketable for future funding
opportunities.
These themes should not be looked at as separate entities, but hopefully can be seen
here as working symbiotically towards successful implementation. The incorporation of
all of these themes benefits each other individually, giving DC the best opportunity for
plan implementation. Simply put, this analysis points to the establishment of concrete
goals, Identification of responsible authorities, identification of goal timelines, and the
need for regular plan progress reports as essential themes that should be incorporated
into any future planning endeavor, to allow for the best possible implementation
success.
42
LITERATURE CITED
"A Region Responds to a Changing Climate." Regional Climate Action Plan. Southeast Florida
Regional Climate Change Compact Counties, 1 Oct. 2012. Web. 1 May 2015. .
Adams, Steve. "Taking a Regional Approach to Climate Action: Lessons from the Southeast
Florida Regional Climate Change Compact." Webinar;
http://www.southeastfloridaclimatecompact.org/2015/03/taking-a-regional-approach-toclimate-action-lessons-from-the-southeast-florida-regional-climate-change-compact/. Institute
for Sustainable Communities
Bhuyan, A., A. Jorgensen, and S. Sharma. 2010. Taking the Pulse of Policy: The Policy
Implementation Assessment Tool. Washington, DC: Futures Group, Health Policy Initiative, Task
Order 1.
Burke, Katie, Morris, Kate & McGarrigle, Leona. 2012. Implementation Terms, Concepts and
Frameworks. Centre for Effective Services.
"City of Portland and Multnomah County: Climate Action Plan 2009."
Https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/268612. City of Portland Bureau of Planning and
Sustainability, 2009. Web. 1 May 2015.; Southeast Florida Climate Compact. , . 11 Mar. 2015.
Lecture.
Commonwealth of Australia. 2014. Successful Implementation of Policy Initiatives. Australian
Government, Department of the Prime Minster and Cabinet.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Greenovate Boston: 2014 Climate Action Plan. Update.
http://www.cityofboston.gov/eeos/pdfs/Greenovate%20Boston%202014%20CAP%20Update_F
ull.pdf
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Massachusetts Climate Action Plan. 2004.
http://www.newamerica.net/files/MAClimateProtPlan0504.pdf
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Massachusetts Climate Change Adaptation Report. 2011.
http://www.mass.gov/eea/waste-mgnt-recycling/air-quality/green-house-gas-and-climatechange/climate-change-adaptation/climate-change-adaptation-report.html
43
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Massachusetts Global Warming Solutions Act (S. 2540 MA).
https://malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2008/Chapter298
"Guidance for Incorporating Sea Level Rise Into Capital Planning in San Francisco: Assessing
Vulnerability, Risk and Adaptation."
http://www.acfloodcontrol.org/SFBayCHARG/pdf/sf_slr_guidance.pdf. Sea Level Rise
Committee of SF Adapt for the San Francisco Capital Planning Committee, 11 July 2014. Web. 1
May 2015.
"Geologic Map of the Coastal Plain and Upland Deposits ..." Data.gov, 17 May 2013. Web. 1 May
2015. .
"Georgetown Climate Center: State and Local Adaptation Plans." State and Local Adaptation
Plans. Georgetown University Climate Center. Web. 1 May 2015.
Hill, Michael and Hupe, Peter. 2002 Implementing Public Policy London: SAGE Publications
John, Peter. 2011. Making Policy Work. Routledge, New York. Book.
Kraft, Michael. 2001 Environmental Policy and Politics New York: Longman Press.
Malouff, David. "By 2040, DC's Population Could Be Close to 900,000." Greater Washington.
Greater Washington, 17 Apr. 2014. Web. 1 May 2015.
Maryland Department of Legislative Services. House Bill 973. Water Management
Administration: Living Shoreline Protection Act of 2008. 2008.
http://mlis.state.md.us/2008rs/fnotes/bil_0003/hb0973.pdf
The Maryland Department of Natural Resources. Building Resilience to Climate Change. 2010.
http://www.dnr.state.md.us/dnrnews/pdfs/climate_change.pdf
Maryland Executive Order 01.01.2014.14.
http://www.dsd.state.md.us/comar/getfile.aspx?file=01.01.2014.14.htm
Mazmanian, Daniel, and Sabatier, Paul A., eds. 1981 Effective Policy Implementation. Lexington,
Mass.: Lexington Books.
44
Mazmanian, Daniel, and Sabatier, Paul A. 1989 Implementation and Public Policy, rev. ed.
Latham, Md.: University Press of America.
New York. Guidance for New York Rising Community Reconstruction Plans.
http://stormrecovery.ny.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Guidance_for_Community_Reconst
ruction_Plans.pdf
New York Executive Order 24. 2009. http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/71394.html
New York Metropolitan Transportation Council. New York Metropolitan Transportation Council’s
Plan 2040: A Shared Vision for Sustainable Growth. 2013.
http://www.nymtc.org/files/RTP_PLAN_2040_docs/Public%20Review%20Drafts/Plan%202040%
20Full%20Document/Plan%202040%20Main%20Document.pdf
New York State Climate Action Council. Climate Adaptation Interim Report. 2010.
http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/80930.html
Pressman, Jeffrey, and Wildavsky, Aaron. 1973 Implementation. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
"Regional Climate Action Framework: Implementation Guide."
Http://www.southeastfloridaclimatecompact.org//wpcontent/uploads/2014/09/implementation-guide.pdf. Southeast Florida Climate Compact, 2010.
Web. 1 May 2015.
Sabatier, Paul A. 1986 "Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Implementation Research: A
Critical Analysis and Suggested Synthesis." Journal of Public Policy 6:1:21-48.
Sabatier, Paul A. 1986 "Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Implementation Research: A
Critical Analysis and Suggested Synthesis." Journal of Public Policy 6:1:21-48.
Sabatier, Paul A. 1988 "An Advocacy Coalition Framework of Policy Change and the Role of
Policy-Oriented Learning Therein." Policy Sciences 21:3:129-68.
Sabatier, Paul A. 1991 "Towards Better Theories of the Policy Process." PS: Political Science and
Politics 24:2: 147-56.
45
Sabatier, Paul A., and Pelkey, Neil. 1987 "Incorporating Multiple Actors and Guidance
Instruments into Models of Regulatory Policymaking: An Advocacy Coalition Framework."
Administration and Society 19:2:236-63.
Van Meter, Donald S., and Van Horn, Carl E. 1975 "The Policy Implementation Process: A
Conceptual Framework." Administration and Society 6:4:445-88.
Weaver, R. Kent. 2010. But Will It Work?: Implementation Analysis to Improve Government
Performance. Governance studies at Brookings. Number 32.
46
APPENDIX I – BOSTON RESILIENCY CHECKLIST
Climate Change Preparedness and Resiliency Checklist for New
Construction
In November 2013, in conformance with the Mayor's 2011 Climate Action Leadership
Committee's recommendations, the Boston Redevelopment Authority adopted policy for all
development projects subject to Boston Zoning Article 80 Small and Large Project Review,
including all Institutional Master Plan modifications and updates, are to complete the
following checklist and provide any necessary responses regarding project resiliency,
preparedness, and to mitigate any identified adverse impacts that might arise under future
climate conditions.
For more information about the City of Boston's climate policies and practices, and the 2011
update of the climate action plan, A Climate of Progress, please see the City's climate action
web pages at http://www.cityofboston.gov/climate.
In advance we thank you for your time and assistance in advancing best practices in Boston.
Climate Change Analysis and Information Sources:
1. Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment (www.climatechoices.org/ne/)
2. USGCRP 2009 (http://www.globalchange.gov/publications/reports/scientificassessments/us-impacts/)
3. Army Corps of Engineers guidance on sea level rise
(http://planning.usace.army.mil/toolbox/library/ECs/EC11652212Nov2011.pdf)
4. Proceeding of the National Academy of Science, “Global sea level rise linked to global
temperature”, Vermeer and Rahmstorf, 2009
(http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/12/04/0907765106.full.pdf)
5. “Hotspot of accelerated sea-level rise on the Atlantic coast of North America”, Asbury
H. Sallenger Jr*, Kara S. Doran and Peter A. Howd, 2012
(http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/ planning/Hotspot of Accelerated
Sea-level Rise 2012.pdf)
6. “Building Resilience in Boston”: Best Practices for Climate Change Adaptation and
Resilience for Existing Buildings, Linnean Solutions, The Built Environment Coalition,
The Resilient Design Institute, 2103
47
(http://www.greenribboncommission.org/downloads/Building_Resilience_in_Boston
_SML.pdf)
Checklist
Please respond to all of the checklist questions to the fullest extent possible. For projects
that respond “Yes” to any of the D.1 – Sea-Level Rise and Storms, Location Description and
Classification questions, please respond to all of the remaining Section D questions.
Checklist responses are due at the time of initial project filing or Notice of Project Change
and final filings just prior seeking Final BRA Approval. A PDF of your response to the
Checklist should be submitted to the Boston Redevelopment Authority via your project
manager.
Please Note: When initiating a new project, please visit the BRA web site for the most current
Climate Change Preparedness & Resiliency Checklist.
48
Climate Change Resiliency and Preparedness Checklist
A.1 - Project Information
Project Name:
Project Address Primary:
Project Address Additional:
Project Contact (name / Title /
Company / email / phone):
A.2 - Team Description
Owner / Developer:
Architect:
Engineer (building systems):
Sustainability / LEED:
49
Permitting:
Construction Management:
Climate Change Expert:
A.3 - Project Permitting and Phase
At what phase is the project – most recent completed submission at the time of this response?
PNF / Expanded
Draft / Final Project Impact Report
BRA Board
Notice of Project
PNF Submission
Submission
Approved
Change
Planned
BRA Final Design Approved
Under
Construction just
Construction
completed:
Development Area
A.4 - Building Classification and Description
List the principal Building Uses:
List the First Floor Uses:
50
What is the principal Construction Type – select most appropriate type?
Wood Frame
Masonry
Steel Frame
Concrete
Describe the building?
Site Area:
SF
Building Area:
Building Height:
Ft.
Number of Stories:
Flrs.
Are there below grade
No /
First Floor Elevation (reference
Elev.
Boston City Base):
SF
spaces/levels, if yes how many:
Number of Levels
A.5 - Green Building
Which LEED Rating System(s) and version has or will your project use (by area for multiple rating systems)?
Select by Primary Use:
New Construction
Core & Shell
Healthcare
Schools
51
Select LEED Outcome:
Retail
Homes Midrise
Homes
Other
Certified
Silver
Gold
Platinum
Will the project be USGBC Registered and / or USGBC Certified?
Yes / No
Registered:
Yes / No
Certified:
A.6 - Building Energy
What are the base and peak operating energy loads for the building?
(kW)
Heating – base / peak:
/
(MMBtu/hr)
What is the planned building
(kbut/SF or
Cooling – base / peak:
/
(Tons/hr)
Energy Use Intensity:
kWh/SF)
Electric - base / peak:
/
What are the peak energy demands of your critical systems in the event of a service interruption?
Electric:
(kW)
Heating:
(MMBtu/hr)
Cooling:
(Tons/hr)
52
What is nature and source of your back-up / emergency generators?
Electrical Generation:
(kW)
System Type and Number of Units:
Combustion
Fuel Source:
Gas Turbine
Engine
Combine Heat
(Units)
and Power
B - Extreme Weather and Heat Events
Climate change will result in more extreme weather events including higher year round average temperatures, higher peak
temperatures, and more periods of extended peak temperatures. The section explores how a project responds to higher
temperatures and heat waves.
B.1 - Analysis
What is the full expected life of the project?
Select most appropriate:
10 Years
25 Years
50 Years
75 Years
53
What is the full expected operational life of key building systems (e.g. heating, cooling, ventilation)?
Select most appropriate:
10 Years
25 Years
50 Years
75 Years
50 Years
75 Years
What time span of future Climate Conditions was considered?
Select most appropriate:
10 Years
25 Years
Analysis Conditions - What range of temperatures will be used for project planning – Low/High?
/
Deg.
What Extreme Heat Event characteristics will be used for project planning – Peak High, Duration, and Frequency?
Deg.
Days
Events / yr.
What Drought characteristics will be used for project planning – Duration and Frequency?
Days
Events / yr.
What Extreme Rain Event characteristics will be used for project planning – Seasonal Rain Fall, Peak Rain Fall, and
Frequency of Events per year?
Inches / yr.
Inches
Events / yr.
54
What Extreme Wind Storm Event characteristics will be used for project planning – Peak Wind Speed, Duration of
Storm Event, and Frequency of Events per year?
Peak Wind
Hours
Events / yr.
B.2 - Mitigation Strategies
What will be the overall energy performance, based on use, of the project and how will performance be determined?
%
Building energy use below code:
How is performance determined:
What specific measures will the project employ to reduce building energy consumption?
Select all appropriate:
High performance
High performance
Building day
EnergyStar equip.
building envelop
lighting & controls
lighting
/ appliances
High performance
Energy recovery
No active cooling
No active heating
HVAC equipment
ventilation
Describe any added measures:
What are the insulation (R) values for building envelop elements?
55
Roof:
Walls / Curtain
R=
R=
Wall Assembly:
Foundation:
R=
Windows:
R=
/U=
Basement / Slab:
R=
Doors:
R=
/U=
What specific measures will the project employ to reduce building energy demands on the utilities and infrastructure?
On-site clean
Building-wide
Thermal energy
Ground source
energy / CHP
power dimming
storage systems
heat pump
On-site Solar
Wind power
None
system(s)
On-site Solar PV
Thermal
Describe any added measures:
Will the project employ Distributed Energy / Smart Grid Infrastructure and /or Systems?
Select all appropriate:
Connected to local
Building will be
Connected to
Distributed
distributed
Smart Grid ready
distributed steam,
thermal energy
hot, chilled water
ready
electrical
Will the building remain operable without utility power for an extended period?
56
Yes / No
Days
If yes, for how long:
If Yes, is building “Islandable?
If Yes, describe strategies:
Describe any non-mechanical strategies that will support building functionality and use during an extended
interruption(s) of utility services and infrastructure:
Select all appropriate:
Solar oriented –
Prevailing winds
External shading
longer south walls
oriented
devices
Building cool
Operable windows
Natural ventilation
Building shading
Potable water for
Potable water for
Waste water
High Performance
drinking / food
sinks / sanitary
storage capacity
Building Envelop
preparation
systems
Vegetated roofs
Tuned glazing,
zones
Describe any added measures:
What measures will the project employ to reduce urban heat-island effect?
Select all appropriate:
High reflective
Shade trees &
High reflective
paving materials
shrubs
roof materials
57
Describe other strategies:
What measures will the project employ to accommodate rain events and more rain fall?
Select all appropriate:
On-site retention
Infiltration
vegetated water
systems & ponds
galleries & areas
capture systems
Vegetated roofs
Describe other strategies:
What measures will the project employ to accommodate extreme storm events and high winds?
Select all appropriate:
Hardened building
Buried utilities &
Hazard removal &
Soft & permeable
structure &
hardened
protective
surfaces (water
elements
infrastructure
landscapes
infiltration)
Describe other strategies:
C - Sea-Level Rise and Storms
Rising Sea-Levels and more frequent Extreme Storms increase the probability of coastal and river flooding and enlarging
58
the extent of the 100 Year Flood Plain. This section explores if a project is or might be subject to Sea-Level Rise and Storm
impacts.
C.1 - Location Description and Classification:
Do you believe the building to susceptible to flooding now or during the full expected life of the building?
Yes / No
Describe site conditions?
Site Elevation – Low/High Points:
Boston City Base
Elev.( Ft.)
Ft.
Building Proximity to Water:
Is the site or building located in any of the following?
Coastal Zone:
Yes / No
Velocity Zone:
Yes / No
Flood Zone:
Yes / No
Area Prone to Flooding:
Yes / No
Will the 2013 Preliminary FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps or future floodplain delineation updates due to Climate
Change result in a change of the classification of the site or building location?
59
2013 FEMA
Yes / No
Future floodplain delineation updates:
Yes / No
Prelim. FIRMs:
What is the project or building proximity to nearest Coastal, Velocity or Flood Zone or Area Prone to Flooding?
Ft.
If you answered YES to any of the above Location Description and Classification questions, please complete the
following questions. Otherwise you have completed the questionnaire; thank you!
C - Sea-Level Rise and Storms
This section explores how a project responds to Sea-Level Rise and / or increase in storm frequency or severity.
C.2 - Analysis
How were impacts from higher sea levels and more frequent and extreme storm events analyzed:
Sea Level Rise:
Ft.
Frequency of storms:
per year
60
C.3 - Building Flood Proofing
Describe any strategies to limit storm and flood damage and to maintain functionality during an extended periods of
disruption.
What will be the Building Flood Proof Elevation and First Floor Elevation:
Flood Proof Elevation:
Boston City Base
Boston City Base
First Floor Elevation:
Elev.( Ft.)
Elev. ( Ft.)
Will the project employ temporary measures to prevent building flooding (e.g. barricades, flood gates):
Yes / No
If Yes, to what elevation
Boston City Base
Elev. ( Ft.)
If Yes, describe:
What measures will be taken to ensure the integrity of critical building systems during a flood or severe storm event:
Systems located
Water tight utility
Waste water back
Storm water back
above 1st Floor.
conduits
flow prevention
flow prevention
61
Were the differing effects of fresh water and salt water flooding considered:
Yes / No
Will the project site / building(s) be accessible during periods of inundation or limited access to transportation:
Yes / No
If yes, to what height above 100
Boston City Base
Year Floodplain:
Elev. (Ft.)
Will the project employ hard and / or soft landscape elements as velocity barriers to reduce wind or wave impacts?
Yes / No
If Yes, describe:
Will the building remain occupiable without utility power during an extended period of inundation:
Yes / No
If Yes, for how long:
days
Describe any additional strategies to addressing sea level rise and or sever storm impacts:
C.4 - Building Resilience and Adaptability
62
Describe any strategies that would support rapid recovery after a weather event and accommodate future building changes
that respond to climate change:
Will the building be able to withstand severe storm impacts and endure temporary inundation?
Select appropriate:
Yes / No
Hardened /
Temporary
Resilient site
Resilient Ground
shutters and or
design, materials
Floor Construction
barricades
and construction
Can the site and building be reasonably modified to increase Building Flood Proof Elevation?
Select appropriate:
Yes / No
Surrounding site
Building ground
Construction been
elevation can be
floor can be
engineered
raised
raised
Describe additional strategies:
Has the building been planned and designed to accommodate future resiliency enhancements?
Select appropriate:
Yes / No
Solar PV
Solar Thermal
Clean Energy /
CHP System(s)
63
Potable water
Wastewater
Back up energy
storage
storage
systems & fuel
Describe any specific or
additional strategies:
Thank you for completing the Boston Climate Change Resilience and Preparedness Checklist!
For questions or comments about this checklist or Climate Change Resiliency and Preparedness best practices, please contact:
John.Dalzell.BRA@cityofboston.gov
64
SUCCESSFUL ADAPTATION IMPLEMENTATION:
A Report Documenting Steps for Successful Implementation in Light of the District Department of Environments’
Forthcoming Adaptation and Resiliency Plan
65